Post: #126

(06-25-2017 08:53 AM)Matsufubu Wrote:  ^^^

Alright.

I am really curious to hear what is incorrect/fallacious about that post.

Post: #127

Going to keep it vague, but I myself was raised in an awfully hostile environment. My father was a cucked manchild who unfortunately had a temper that often flared up and horrified me as a toddler/child. My mother, mildly disabled, was able to do little to stop him - and as a result of his constant blowups, I have a lifelong problem with not knowing how to properly handle anxiety.

I was raised poorly, but still stay in contact with my parents out of obligation. It's at arm's length, and let's just say there's a reason I want to live outside of the US for a while. (My extended family is also pretty great...so it looks like my father has always been looked at as the angry loser.)

I have more than enough reason to deFOO according to Molyneux. I think I am just struggling with trying to rationalize just why I stay in contact with him.

Post: #128

(06-25-2017 09:07 AM)Kinder Wrote:  Alright.

I am really curious to hear what is incorrect/fallacious about that post.

Nothing, just posting an amusing "not an argument" meme at a "not an argument" time. No beef with your post.

Post: #129

(06-25-2017 09:18 AM)stugatz Wrote:  Going to keep it vague, but I myself was raised in an awfully hostile environment. My father was a cucked manchild who unfortunately had a temper that often flared up and horrified me as a toddler/child. My mother, mildly disabled, was able to do little to stop him - and as a result of his constant blowups, I have a lifelong problem with not knowing how to properly handle anxiety.

I was raised poorly, but still stay in contact with my parents out of obligation. It's at arm's length, and let's just say there's a reason I want to live outside of the US for a while. (My extended family is also pretty great...so it looks like my father has always been looked at as the angry loser.)

I have more than enough reason to deFOO according to Molyneux. I think I am just struggling with trying to rationalize just why I stay in contact with him.

My mother, mildly disabled, was able to do little to stop him
If your father was abusive to you, your mother was obligated to protect you and do everything she could to get you out of the situation, divorce if everything else fails.
She was the one who probably chose your father (not the other way around) and she continued staying with him at the expense of your well-being. She has a lot to apologize for...

I was raised poorly, but still stay in contact with my parents out of obligation.
Whose/What/Which obligation?

Post: #130

(06-25-2017 09:46 AM)Kinder Wrote:  I was raised poorly, but still stay in contact with my parents out of obligation.
Whose/What/Which obligation?

Well, not obligation to my father - if all of us cut off contact with him, he'd deserve most of it. Obligation to my extended family, mainly, who has always been good to me, as I always got the impression they had an idea my father was a supremely fucked-up individual, and would have tried to get involved if they knew the nitty-gritty details.

I also want my future children to have a family to see and relate to - I'm hardcore into genealogy and plan on passing my family tree down to my sons. Just because my father is a failure that needs to answer for his mistakes, that doesn't mean I subject my children to an insular existence where they're in contact with almost none of their stateside relatives.

One thing I notice about the SJW crowd is that they all hate their families and almost take pride in being estranged from them. I want to work with what little I have here, and actually try to raise my kids right in connection with their blood relatives. The boomer generation really screwed us up and tried to do it all on autopilot.

(06-25-2017 09:46 AM)Kinder Wrote:  My mother, mildly disabled, was able to do little to stop him
If your father was abusive to you, your mother was obligated to protect you and do everything she could to get you out of the situation, divorce if everything else fails.
She was the one who probably chose your father (not the other way around) and she continued staying with him at the expense of your well-being. She has a lot to apologize for...

Yeah, you're dead on. She had her full faculties throughout the 1990s and well into the mid-2000s, and mostly stayed with him because the Catholic church is anti-divorce - she had to know that it pretty freely grants annulments, though, if children are growing up in a traumatic environment. (She also thought he'd fall apart without her and end up committing suicide when he failed to remarry.)

I wouldn't call my upbringing abusive, as abuse is intentional. My father would just fly off the handle whenever he felt like it about whatever happened to set him off at the time (politics, the lawnmower not working, traffic) and didn't care what damage he was doing. I'd call it profound neglect that was borderline abuse. Not sure what a court of law would call it.

Post: #131

Post: #132

(05-31-2017 06:49 AM)theoneandonly Wrote:  I followed some of his in-depth videos about Communism, Joseph McCarthy and other topics with interest.
However in other videos he started saying stuff that made my BullShit detector go off, ("different races have different number of vertebrae").

Looking back it is hard to know what to trust. I found Prager University very interesting for a while, until I tried finding sources for some of their claims (We didn't lose the Vietnam War!).

Yeah Stephan, while he has some interesting points and can be right many times, there are other times when he either a)spouts bullshit as real, or b) just drones on WAAAAY too long and uses the excuse of "well maybe you should have a better attention span." Yeah, no when you have 2 hours of talking and only about 10% of that time is neccessary, you've got problems. It's not like He's Jordan Peterson who also talks for hours BUT HAS A PhD IN PSYCHOLOGY AND WAS A HARVARD PROFESSOR.

Peterson ACTUALLY HAS two hours of substance whenever he speaks, and usually talks about the results of his, and other colleagues research(spanning over 30 years). Between the two there's a BIG DIFFERENCE.

It's obvious Stephan thinks that the MORE he talks the better. This is backwards, especially for him. and even contradicts himself (in comparison to some of his other videos) but of course no one is going to call him on it because really, WHO has the time to look through hundreds of videos of 2-3 hours to call him out on his B.S.?

I just skip his vids most of the time to be honest. A lot of them are blatant clickbait anyway ("EVERYONE NEEDS to Hear THIS!" or "World WAR III???") <---and the like x50.

In any case, he's still a LOT better than Jow Rogan, at least Stephan can listen, Rogan refuses to listen 99% of the time.

Post: #133

Did you guys already checked his new book?

Post: #134

What finally made me quit watching this guy was his call-ins and interviews. The difference in how he treats people based on whether or not they're someone important is pretty stark. If he's interviewing an author or professor then he's completely obsequious and sycophantic even when the interviewee is directly contradicting ideas Stephan had previously made hours of video promoting. Then in contrast when it's one of his viewer call-ins he turns into a complete prick, constantly interrupting the caller to keep them from ever actually finishing what they're trying to say. Then if the caller interrupts Stephan, he gets his panties in a twist and demands an apology. The best part is that if the caller is coming close to beating him in a debate, he scrambles to find an excuse to terminate the conversation so he can maintain his self-proclaimed track record of being unbeatable in debate. Oh, and anyone who comments on his videos gets attacked by a horde of spergs screeching "Not an argument!"

It reminds me of a medieval courtier who asskisses anyone with a greater title than he, while abusing anyone of lower standing.

Post: #135

One of the best.

Post: #136

(09-02-2017 04:50 PM)joecolombia Wrote:  Did you guys already checked his new book?

Yeah. It's great. Between The Art of The Argument & also How To Win Every Argument (The Use & Abuse Of Logic) - Madsen Pirie (a bit more Machiavellian than Molyneax, shall we say)- you can't go wrong. Study up on both.

Post: #137

Molyneux is ok. I listen to the good stuff he puts out, and skip over the looney bits.

The good:

o His videos can be entertaining.

o He has a good grasp on SMV and gender politics.

o He's a pro-gun guy.

o He understands the damage the female centric welfare state does to heterosexual relationships.

o He understands the damage single motherhood does to innocent children born out of wedlock; or who are a victim of divorce.

o He admits that men avoiding marriage and children is a rational decision rather then just mindlessly blaming men for not wanting to get married like most tradcons.

o He has a good understanding of immigration.

The bad:

o He pushes wacky economic theories that have no basis in empirical evidence just because of his political beliefs.

o He always attempts to blame everything on the government no matter what. I'm not saying that he's never right; but not everything is a giant government conspiracy.

o He tries to lecture other men about masculinity. I don't know about you; but I'm not interested in being lectured to about being a "real man" by a 110 lb theater major who can't even discuss violence without crying in public.

o He has a fragile ego. He will only talk to sycophants. If someone calls in who doesn't agree with something Molyneax says he will loudly repeat his points, and then quickly hang up if the caller doesn't agree with him.

The Evil

o He encourages his readers to "man up" and jump into the quagmire that is modern marriage. He literally told one of his listeners that he should marry a single mother, who ignored him while she was childless during high school; because it would be the best thing for the woman's bastard daughter. When directly questioned on the benefits of marriage for the man he gives some vague answer about it being better for society.

Post: #138

That video is good, but his over-arching explanation i.e that the state is what undermined traditional gender relations, is nonsense. Single mothers are a minority.

The real explanation is very simple. As technological and managerial work grew in the West, corresponding to the decline in physical labour, women got more jobs.

So the free market, which Molyneux believes is miraculous and efficient, is precisely what gave women their jobs. And now he wants to remove those jobs? Sounds like COMMUNISM

Post: #139

I remember him stating that he's a stay at home dad. That's a bit too progressive for me.

Post: #140

(11-20-2017 06:35 PM)Roosh Wrote:  I remember him stating that he's a stay at home dad. That's a bit too progressive for me.

To be fair with Stefan, doesn't he run all his business from home and live near the Racoon City of liberalism, the Toronto area?

Post: #141

^^ Also, it doesn't mean that his wife works outside the house. They could both stay at home. I don't know his exact situation though.

Post: #142

He's a bandwagon jumper. A couple years ago, everything he said was about how wonderful and rational libertarian atheism was. Now with the alt-right being a source of youtube views for him, he's dumped a lot of the libertarian and secular points in favor of talking up Christianity and shitting on atheists every chance he gets while deriding the right-wing atheists who balk at his characterizations as making a NAWALT argument. Though he does make a good point that faced between having a fully secular society that gets taken over by muzzies and a Christian society that keeps muzzies at bay, the Christian society is preferable.

Ultimately he's just a narcissist that depends on his podcast for ego gratification, and his high verbal IQ lets him talk his way around his inconsistencies and flip-flopping as well as avoid having them outed in debate. I wouldn't be surprised if his increasingly haggard appearance is the result of his wife poisoning him as a passive-aggressive revenge for what must be an endless series of marital arguments she's been forced to concede to him.

Post: #143

(11-20-2017 06:35 PM)Roosh Wrote:  I remember him stating that he's a stay at home dad. That's a bit too progressive for me.

He successfully runs his show from his home so I do not see why this would be that big of a deal.

Btw, do you still plan on settling in a LTR? I have not heard any updates on this for a while.

Post: #144

He's just virtue signaling, with 700k subscribers, he is bringing home the bacon.

Post: #145

I like listening to him and have done so for 3-4 years, but this parody is hilarious (ignore the communistic bullshit at the end). An untapped goldmine to be honest. The mannerisms and the call in show in particular.





Its weird to see him to head to toe in this one, I understand people's problem with him just rambling on for 30 minutes and not actually conversing with the other one on the end of the line unless its an "expert" (he often makes an example of some eejits that call in just to make a point, that is painful to listen too), but here Rubin does a good job of just giving enough pushback in this very recent video and it's one of the best things he ever did.

Post: #146

Quote:Btw, do you still plan on settling in a LTR? I have not heard any updates on this for a while.

NOT AN ARGUMENT

Post: #147

This is hard to watch.

Post: #148

I enjoy him talking about things when he doesn't feel the gatekeep, if you know that going in and focus with what he talks about in relation to people and their personal choices/stories effecting societies at large and you're golden. Few do it better. And he and his guests articulate some philosophical and life ideas/experiences in such distinctive intuitive ways he's hard to not listen to and not recommend.

His recent interview with a professor on Tolkiens works were fantastic. He's great at getting the best of those that come on even if he doesn't interrupt which see as a negative but I see as a godsend. Douglas Murray was visibly shocked and delighted/relaxed midway during his conversation with Molyneux about the invasion of Europe, he couldn't believe getting an interview were he wasn't being harassed of his oxygen every 20 seconds like by the MSM.

But for a man who proclaims he has all about the search for truth and following the truth doggedly where it may lead, no matter where it may lead regardless of what feels good........he sure does some have rather arbitrary roadblocks/borders in his mind.

9/11...important big government state terror
Stef gets big....9/11 not so important doesn't matter, we can't do shit about about it, why bother talk?

Sweet sonny jesus!

Post: #149

I enjoyed this recent one he did. Very energised.

Post: #150

He's about as anti war as it gets, but if I recall correctly he's never taken a single shot at Israel and their effect on American foreign policy.

It's odd.