Friday, September 27, 2013

Your Revenge is Through Non-Participation

A dark side of the Manosphere I disagree with is the genuine misogynistic side.

Oh believe me, it exists.  And though my female detractors may not be able to distinguish between me (a guy who treats women as genuine equals by holding them up to male standards) and these men (who genuinely hate women) trust me, there is a chasm of difference.

I first ran into this when I wrote a piece standing up for the kind and sweet women who actually stand up for and like manly men.  Haley's Halo, Grerp, Judgy Bitch, Sunshine Mary, Dr. Helen, etc. I got sick and tired of not just the nitpickyness of the misogynistic side, but also the "purist" aspect of it.  That if you didn't follow along with their purist views that had derived from their discussion forum, you were a traitor, not a real man, not really for the cause, blah blah blah blah.  It also irked me that these girls would get the pettiest of complaints and ridicule from these men, suggesting said men were not only academians (focusing on theory and never deploying their wisdom in the real world), but cultists and purists with no capacity or willingness to tolerate slightly different views.  Any disagreement or (dare you suggest) to back off women was not tolerated and was deemed traitorous, etc.

It not only made me realize that yes, there are genuine misogynists out there who hate women, but it also made me realize there is a key decision or fork in the road men must take when they take the red pill.  Sometimes they take the fork that is healthy and productive, the other fork leads to misogyny.  So let me explain.

For whatever sociological reason you want to claim, most men are lied to in their youth about the realities of the fairer sex.  It isn't fair.  It isn't just.  And it costs them greatly.  They have every right to be angry and I will go so far to claim they have every right to revenge.

But revenge is not going to come through the mere hatred of women, lumping all women, even those that like men, into the same group and punishing them by cumulative proxy.  It isn't even going to come through singling out the individual feminists and leftists and attacking (justifiably) them.  It's going to come through the only way it can - non-participation.

Understand the flaw of modern day feminism - it is erroneously based on the lie that men unfairly benefit in society because they are men.  They then take this false premise and run rampant with it, extrapolating it irrationally to other aspects of life, demanding irrational and unfair concessions from the rest of society.  Their entire ideology is based on a false and self-serving premise.

So to exact your toll of revenge on them will not come through mockery or ridicule.  They are immune to it.  They are so wedded to their ideology, not to mention delusional, any criticism is rendered moot. And even more so, it CERTAINLY won't come from mocking and ridiculing innocent women as you lump them in with the rest of feminists.  The ONLY way you can get your toll of revenge is by taking away the most important thing in their lives.

Yourself.

Now, let's qualify this statement.

When I say, "yourself," I mean, "a reasonably attractive man who has a life and his schtick together."

If you are Mortimer Snerd, living in your mom's basement, Monday Morning Quarter Backing the Manosphere, playing pure academian, never approaching and getting shot down by a girl in your life because you're too scared, and have thus far used the theories and epiphanies of the Manosphere to excuse your own lack of performance,

then no, we're not talking about you.  And the reason why is that you have no value.  Sorry to say that, but the Manosphere is the MANosphere not the OPRAHsphere.  We deal with reality. 

But if you are a reasonably in shape guy with a life and stuff going on, then yes, your best toll of revenge will come from you removing yourself from the situation.

The reason why is very simple, but one feminists will SCREAM is not true - the most important thing in life is a member of the opposite sex you fall in love with.  And if you deny women your (presumed) quality self, that's how you get your revenge.  You go your own way, you only have sex with women, but never date them, or you could even consider marriage, but only to women who are traditional, truly self-supporting, conservative/libertarian, in shape, etc.  In short you deny undeserving women what they want as you have standards and self-respect.

The resulting revenge is not immediate, obvious, or climatic as in the end of a movie, but much much worse.

It is silent.  Subtle.  Cold.  Delayed.  Deferred.  And unnoticeable until it is too late.

It is delivered when a 45 year old recent divorcee realizes it isn't 1992 any more and boys aren't thronging to take her to a "Poison" concert.

It is delivered when a 50 year old executive NOW decides it's time to settle down and all of her male peers are looking at 34 year olds.

It is delivered when the 42 year old comes up to you drunk in a sequin shirt saying "Cutie" and you in your heart of hearts have no desire to talk to the woman.

That is how your revenge is delivered.

Because no matter how much they scream and contest otherwise, the most important thing in life for a woman is another man.  Oh sure, during the day they'll talk loud enough so you can hear how they don't need a man.  And sure, at night they will shoot down scores of advances, as they tally up their "like" score from FB.  But at the wee small hours of the morning they're crying in bed because there isn't a man there.  And if you refuse to be that man, then you have your ultimate revenge.

Of course this is contingent on one key thing - that you are at some minimal level a coveted man and not merely an individual who abuses the "Manosphere philosophy" as an excuse to excuse your non-performance.  Because otherwise you're merely an academian, a Monday morning quarter back plagiarizing the philosophies, observations and laws theoreticians in the Manosphere have come up with to excuse your lack performance.  Again, this is the MANosphere. Not the OPRAHsphere.  I leave it to your own intellectual honesty to admit to yourself which kind of man you are.

19 comments:

krauserpua.com said...

The sanction of the victim. Remove that and they have nothing. The parasite starves if the host shakes it off.

Jennifer said...

"Of course this is contingent on one key thing - that you are at some minimal level a coveted man and not merely an individual who abuses the "Manosphere philosophy" as an excuse to excuse your non-performance."

This. A thousand times this.
The men in the manosphere should have no trouble getting attention from a high quality woman(intelligent, capable of logic, and makes some effort at being attractive to the opposite sex). These men are and should be coveted. Available women reject men for 2 reasons, 1)because they are bitches and don't deem the suitor of high enough value (you don't want these anyway.) or 2) you aren't high enough value and are trying to play above your league. The hard truth is that there are boys playing in the manosphere sandbox with delusions of adequacy. Men make an effort to change their situation; boys play dress up and parade around as victims lashing out at any perceived slight. These boys only serve as ammunition in the feminist armory. They really are childish and inept and misogynistic. Just like a prime time sitcom!
Feminists revel in it. It gives them a false sense of superiority. They use them as examples even though these boys are not men.
The men of the manosphere are fantastic. Out of the league of an unfortunately large number of girls that have bought into the feminist lie.
If you want to land a high quality woman, be a high quality man. Don't demean yourself with the shrews. Cap is right, your best revenge is to deny them your company.

Cam said...

Cappy Cap this was a much needed article.

I am fairly new to the red pill and that fork in the road is a fine line to walk. Some of the content in the manosphere leaves you feeling depressed and cynical. When it's meant to be liberating. I just need to get laid, haha.

I admit I need to approach more, which is hard because of logistics. I literally live up the side of a mountain with no car. It's hard enough approaching women, let alone doing it with no incentive. Convincing a girl to come home with me would be like asking her to jump on a stairmaster for half an hour.

Anonymous said...

Those manoshere guys aren't entirely wrong to worry that women can hijack the movement, either intentionally (solipsism and drama causing), or unintentionally (men white knighting other men can derail a movement fast).

Cap are you white knighting for these women? They are big girls with their own big readership, they might appreciate but certainly don't need the white knighting.

That there exist women who would turn the manoshere into a feminist movement to benefit themselves is no secret. Dr. Laura did such a thing to her onetime male fans ages ago. Susan Walsh more recently. Susan Venker or Christina Hoff Summers would do the same today given the chance. Even the anti male circumcision movement of all things has been turned into a quasi feminist movement about benefitting women.

Radicals, and Cap you are a radical in today's America, don't horse trade their message purity with every sympathetuc interest group that intrudes. Thats what coalitions do. Message discipline is strength.

Black Poison Soul said...

Back in my first six months of the process of taking the Red Pill I was talking with a couple of girls about men and women and dating. One girl was 27, the other 39 (I was 45).

I mentioned the old half age plus 7 years maxim for men looking at women. 39yo and I reversed it and worked out the age of men who would be looking at her: early 60s. She then confessed that on online dating sites, she only got attention from guys around 65yo and older.

I could feel her die a little inside.

Legion said...

Here! Here! Well said.

Archer said...

Building on Jennifer's comment: "[B]oys play dress up and parade around as victims lashing out at any perceived slight. These boys only serve as ammunition in the feminist armory.... Feminists revel in it."

The feminists need attention to survive as feminists, but also need to shun all but the highest-quality mates to retain their "cred." They need the "boys" - as many as can be found - to give them that attention. They feed on it. And the "boys" are happy to give it; they'll fall over themselves in droves in attempts to prove themselves, but will never live up to the feminist's standards. Thus, they get rejected, and that rejection feeds both the false-man's misogyny and the feminist's ego.

The REAL man - rather than trying to prove himself equal to impossible standards and inevitably failing - knows to the core of his being his qualities and shortcomings, and is comfortable in them. He does not play the feminist game, nor waste his attention on it, and seeks to find a mate like himself -similarly disinclined to play the worthless games.

Of course, this singular quality makes him an ideal mate for the feminist, but she has no power over him because he has no time or desire for her.

As the computer JOSHUA said in the movie Wargames: "The only way to win is not to play."

Wilko said...

Yep, I was initially enthusiastic about being a card-carrying member of the manosphere, but it didn't take long before I felt the need to put some distance between myself and some stalwarts of the movement. There was/is too much ugliness, too much intellectual dishonesty, and they were always the loudest, most revered voices on the forum(s).

Inevitably, any honest criticism is dismissed as "shaming language". Well, that's awfully convenient, isn't it?

I think the more moderate voices tend to heed the "going your own way" message and say, screw it, can't be assed dealing with the flame wars and forum thugs - I'm outa here, have fun!

Type 5 said...

"It not only made me realize that yes, there are genuine misogynists out there who hate women..."

Yeah. So?

For my part, there are women that I enjoy... and women that I don't. My evaluation usually stops there.

But culturally, what does it matter if there are men out there that hate women? They express their opinions, live their lives and that's about it. Our cultural problem is women (and men) who hate men; They express their opinions and are taken seriously in the media and academia and their opinions are made into policy. If everyone blew these misandrists off as cranks, they'd be just as harmless as misogynist men.

Andrew said...

Right on, Cap! Too many of these guys are going full circle.

Unknown said...

Here's one kind of man's take on this: forget revenge and get on with the life you have left.

Chris said...

Hi Cappy.

It's not revenge, it's evolution in action.

Personal example: the engineering Diva is slim, has a daughter (who is sensible and as brighter or brighter than my geeks) and, so, far has been sweet.

We are both cautious because with kids you can cause damage... and we live apart and keeping it gentle.

But she's got a similar MMV to me. I'm 53, she's 46 (but Asian and slender).

I tell the women I know who are a decade younger that they need to look at the 50 ish men -- and in their 40s at the 60 ish men -- because younger will not bite.

(Ladies, dressing like a teenager when you are middle aged is embarrasing. Dress nicely. Lycra belongs in the gym and no where else).

beta_plus said...

For the most part you are right. However, there are a few places, such as Toronto-Occupied-Ontario and Denmark, where even the men you describe as worthy, cannot win. The deck is absurdly stacked against them. In those (very rare and specific cases) they need to move.

Reprobus said...

Well Cappy, I know you don't like the religious stuff, but you've given an excellent if roundabout example of idolatry at work.

Idolatry? Plato's ideas. Hegel's Ideals. The "abstract ideas and generalities" Burke described as the motive for the French Revolution. These are the intellectual foundation upon which Communism, Socialism, Feminism, etc are built. And they don't exist.

Once upon a time, I was very rude to a perfectly kind and undeserving young woman because I was angry at an idea called Women. A phantasm. An idea that had no existence whatsoever except in my own head.

These non-existent ideas are the basis of pagan thought and logic and are featured prominently in their speech. So some men, not knowing any better, will take them up and use them. Especially younger men.

Adam Lawson said...

Amen, Cappy.

Those men tend to be almost as intolerant of dissent as feminist wankers, too.

Of course, now I'll be accused of white knighting even though I'm not interested in coming to anyone's rescue anymore.

MaccAodh said...

I've thought for a long time now that a certain period of misogyny is nearly a requirement for passing through one's red pill phase and emerging on the other side as a happier, healthier man. It used to be I was confused when girls were drawn to jerks, no matter how pretty or homely, smart or stupid. When it finally clicked, and when I was first able to deliberately replicate those results to my own advantage, the result was not a happy one. It's why so much of the manosphere's woman-hate comes from new guys. This is the catalyst for their emotional breaking point, and a safe place to vent, all rolled into one. My handful of real-life redpilled friends all went through the same phase.

The key is to pass through it, like the four stages of grief, and eventually learn to accept women as they are - the same way that women must learn to accept men as they are. The same way we learn to accept the economy as it is and enjoy the decline. No malice, just pragmatism and humor.

At least some of it is projection. In the past five or six years since I discovered Game and passed my woman-hating phase, the only two times I've been truly angry at any woman were immediately after I did a beta-backslide and lost her interest. That's certainly at least partly my own fault, and something I should have known better than to do.

It's going to be the biggest stumbling block to getting mainstream acceptance of our philosophies (assuming that ever happens). Lay people will see guys in the midst of opening their eyes and getting angry, then immediately reject the whole concept because male anger is simply not acceptable in society at large (as evidence of that statement, picture what happens to a divorced dad having his children stolen from him if he so much as raises his voice at opposing counsel).

archerfisher21 said...

Cappy,

1. Too many of us young men have not had any actually good women play a large role in our lives. For me, my own mother is a stereotypical manosphere example of a "devoutely Churchese" woman who will threaten divorce with any excuse, and ignore reason. My 18 year old sister is the stereotypical girl that ran off and shacked up with a loser, only to break up with him when she was tired of getting punched. Most of the girls I've met at school are slight variations on negative cliches, and the churches I've attended were fairly feminized or just idiotic. When young men like me then can't stand women, who should be surprised?

2. Cappy, you're saying our revenge is through non-participation... yet you advise repeatedly that men like us should just become security guards?? Security guards are a crappy job, really, unless you're an armed bodyguard or the like. That hardly makes for men that women will lament they can't persuade into marrying them.

piper said...

Dear Cappy,

how does one achieve non-participation when a family court judge has sentenced me to $2000/month alimony (plus $1500/month CS) for the crime of trying to have a family?

I would love to be a non-participant more than anything.

Anonymous said...

Why is "revenge" the aim? Living your life based on revenge will surely lead to a lot of angst down the track.

Better to live your own life the way that it suits you, doing your own thing, achieving your own goals, than be driven by revenge.

Let them be, unless you come across something unjust and unfair - then would be the time to speak out and protect the vulnerable.