Mark Minter is getting married?

[A War You Cannot Win]

Admittedly, I don't have many morals. And of the morals I do have you can argue they're not particularly virtuous to begin with. I believe there's a firm dichotomy between reorganization your beliefs and hypocrisy. This smells more like hypocrisy to me.

 

[worldwidetraveler]

Apparently lying and hypocrisy is simply change now. Sounds more like women who doesn't want to take responsibility for their actions.

:hamster2:

 

[A War You Cannot Win]

Apparently lying and hypocrisy is simply change now.

Is it change when you spew such seething vitriol at a gender, warning people to stay away and only pump and dump as needed then flip script when the first reasonably attractive one flings her e-pussy at you?

 

[xsplat]

If I understand xsplat correctly then if Mark had entered an agreement with the forum to never marry xsplat would agree with us. The issue for him is the lack of a formal declaration of agreement. An interesting distinction to say the least.

That would be a very odd contract to have, and I'd think it a silly contract, but at least then I'd agree that you'd feel entitled to seeing him as breaching a contract.

As it is some are seeing him as breaching a non-existent contract.

 

[LeCorbusier]

Apparently lying and hypocrisy is simply change now. Sounds more like women who don't want to take responsibility for their actions.

Indeed, apparently numerous public declarations of a belief can be revoked in an instant and it is simply called positive change. Wow. I guess if I go on TV and rant against pedophilia and then it's revealed that I fuck 12 year old boys on the weekend, then I've just "changed". This is so stupid it's almost funny talking about it. And according to xsplat, since there isn't a contract, then hey "I haven't breached a contract guys so you have no right to be upset with my "change".

 

[worldwidetraveler]

Apparently lying and hypocrisy is simply change now.

Is it change when you spew such seething vitriol at a gender, warning people to stay away and only pump and dump as needed then flip script when the first reasonably attractive one flings her e-pussy at you?

That depends if there was new age music playing in the background.

 

[xsplat]

Admittedly, I don't have many morals. And of the morals I do have you can argue they're not particularly virtuous to begin with. I believe there's a firm dichotomy between reorganization your beliefs and hypocrisy. This smells more like hypocrisy to me.

Sure it's hypocricy. I agree.

Maybe he'll be better off for it.

There are worse things in life than being a hypocrite. Being a lonely broke ass old guy living your sisters spare room is one.

 

[xsplat]

I guess if I go on TV and rant against pedophilia and then it's revealed that I fuck 12 year old boys on the weekend, then I've just "changed".

He he. So far Marks hypocrisy has been likened to switching sides in a war, being against family values, and pedophilia.

You guys sure are serious about never ever ever marrying, aren't you? It's as serious as pedophilia?

 

[A War You Cannot Win]

Admittedly, I don't have many morals. And of the morals I do have you can argue they're not particularly virtuous to begin with. I believe there's a firm dichotomy between reorganization your beliefs and hypocrisy. This smells more like hypocrisy to me.

Sure it's hypocricy. I agree.

Maybe he'll be better off for it.

There are worse things in life than being a hypocrite. Being a lonely broke ass old guy living your sisters spare room is one.

Point well taken. I think we should we use as an example of the male hamster at work.

 

[LeCorbusier]

I guess if I go on TV and rant against pedophilia and then it's revealed that I fuck 12 year old boys on the weekend, then I've just "changed".

He he. So far Marks hypocrisy has been likened to switching sides in a war, being against family values, and pedophilia.

You guys sure are serious about never ever ever marrying, aren't you? It's as serious as pedophilia?

I am just applying your principle of "people change" to more and more cases to see if it holds. It appears that it doesn't judging by your reaction. I am not saying the man is the same as a pedophile or a war traitor, I just want to show you that the idea of hypocrisy and your word means something. And you have admitted that he is a hypocrite so it seems we agree on the fundamental principle.

 

[Celtic]

It's likely his life may end up proving the points he posted about.

I think he attracted her because he was high status in the manosphere. Now, he is an outcast whos earned the scorn of the manosphere. Woman don't tend to like low status outcasts- so how long is this marriage going to last?

 

[xsplat]

I guess if I go on TV and rant against pedophilia and then it's revealed that I fuck 12 year old boys on the weekend, then I've just "changed".

He he. So far Marks hypocrisy has been likened to switching sides in a war, being against family values, and pedophilia.

You guys sure are serious about never ever ever marrying, aren't you? It's as serious as pedophilia?

I am just applying your principle of "people change" to more and more cases to see if it holds. It appears that it doesn't judging by your reaction. I am not saying the man is the same as a pedophile or a war traitor, I just want to show you that the idea of hypocrisy and your word means something. And you have admitted that he is a hypocrite so it seems we agree on the fundamental principle.

You are jumping back and forth between meta and specific, and not understanding when one approach holds or not.

I keep saying again and again, you can't apply the meta principle of never changing your principles so broadly. It does not work and will only lead to inconsistencies in your world view.

The very idea of immutable principles can NOT be applied so broadly.

The specific principle of not fucking young boys and sticking to that principle can not be used in a different context for a different idea. It would not make sense to therefore conclude that a person should never go from being a manboob to a PUA, for instance.

 

[Samseau]

Who the hell would trust a man who goes back on his own word?

If a man can't keep a promise to himself, why would I trust him to keep a promise to me?

Minter's defenders have about as much sense as any other defender of a hypocrite.

His own word to himself? Obviously you are dead serious, and not kidding. It would not take much effort to point out the logical inconsistency in this to you. As you are a human you've changed your mind about many things that you once believed. We all do.

Actually I really haven't changed my mind on many things. That's because I don't make strong promises or oaths to begin with. I'm not retarded or arrogant enough to believe I know all the answers.

I stay skeptical and choose my words and thoughts carefully, so I haven't had the opportunity to look like a flaming hypocrite yet.

I have a lot of haters on the internet - but most of them are just mad because they do not have anything they can easily latch on to and criticize me for.

And I don't remember Mark ever framing his don't-get-married rants as "I promise to myself I will never get married".

Actually he was giving quite loud moral advice to other men. It was,

"DON'T GET MARRIED. DUH. PUMP AND DUMP. DUH."

You can read his bullshit here to refresh your memory:

http://www.rooshvforum.com/thread-26293-post-499151.html#pid499151

A guy giving advice but not following it himself? Yeah, okay.

And even if he did - listen to me here, if you can - even if he did - how is that any different than a manboob promising to himself to never learn game, and then later seeing the light and being converted to a better way to live?

It totally depends on the conversion. If it was filled with heartfelt apologies perhaps I would consider by otherwise I'd pay him no respects.

 

[xsplat]

It's likely his life may end up proving the points he posted about.

I think he attracted her because he was high status in the manosphere. Now, he is an outcast whos earned the scorn of the manosphere. Woman don't tend to like low status outcasts- so how long is this marriage going to last?

I suspect if his relationship fails it will be because of his undeveloped LTR game. I would not underestimate Marks ability to be alpha in other contexts. He's a gifted writer, and very smart. I wouldn't give the manosphere total credit for his shining above others.

 

[LeCorbusier]

I guess if I go on TV and rant against pedophilia and then it's revealed that I fuck 12 year old boys on the weekend, then I've just "changed".

He he. So far Marks hypocrisy has been likened to switching sides in a war, being against family values, and pedophilia.

You guys sure are serious about never ever ever marrying, aren't you? It's as serious as pedophilia?

I am just applying your principle of "people change" to more and more cases to see if it holds. It appears that it doesn't judging by your reaction. I am not saying the man is the same as a pedophile or a war traitor, I just want to show you that the idea of hypocrisy and your word means something. And you have admitted that he is a hypocrite so it seems we agree on the fundamental principle.

You are jumping back and forth between meta and specific, and not understanding when one approach holds or not.

I keep saying again and again, you can't apply the meta principle of never changing your principles so broadly. It does not work and will only lead to inconsistencies in your world view.

The very idea of immutable principles can NOT be applied so broadly.

The specific principle of not fucking young boys and sticking to that principle can not be used in a different context for a different idea. It would not make sense to therefore conclude that a person should never go from being a manboob to a PUA, for instance.

The idea of immutable principles is not what I am discussing. I am just saying that anyone who makes bold declarations about something repeatedly and then renegs on those declarations should be considered a hypocrite. That is all I am saying. I am not discussing the overall principle of never changing your views. Indeed, views do change. For better or worse. I am arguing that regardless of the direction of that change, an individual is a hypocrite. It may indeed be as you mentioned, that it is better overall for that person to be a hypocrite and have changed their beliefs than not. But they are still a hypocrite.

 

[Samseau]

And no one respects hypocrites. Thus, no one respects Minter anymore.

That said, I still do not judge him too harshly for it. He grew up in a different world than most of us, and he was unable to overcome his programming. I understand his faults but I do not respect him for it.

 

[worldwidetraveler]

Flexibility is not the same as changing your underlying views through personal growth and experiences.

 

[xsplat]

It totally depends on the conversion. If it was filled with heartfelt apologies perhaps I would consider by otherwise I'd pay him no respects.

If I were a recently converted manboob, I doubt I'd come crawling to you in apology. I doubt I'd give a fuck what your opinion of my change in strategy was.

 

[xsplat]

The idea of immutable principles is not what I am discussing. I am just saying that anyone who makes bold declarations about something repeatedly and then renegs on those declarations should be considered a hypocrite. That is all I am saying. I am not discussing the overall principle of never changing your views. Indeed, views do change. For better or worse. I am arguing that regardless of the direction of that change, an individual is a hypocrite. It may indeed be as you mentioned, that it is better overall for that person to be a hypocrite and have changed their beliefs than not. But they are still a hypocrite.

I'm fine with calling him a hypocrite.

I don't see why guys take it so personally though. So he espoused one thing and did another?

So what?

What, like he BETRAYED you or something?

No, he did not betray you.

He did not betray himself.

He did not betray anyone.

He didn't steal from you. He didn't didle any young boys. He didn't spit on the flag.

He was just a hypocrite.

Big deal.

Being a hypocrite is not a crime that has automatic equivalences to all other bad crimes. He was hypocritical ABOUT a SPECIFIC thing. Not about some OTHER thing. About a SPECIFIC thing.

Look, what he espoused to begin with was fucked up. So he betrayed fucked up principles.

His fucked up principles were not getting him what he wanted.

His whole schtick was fucked up, and guys want him to remain constant to his original fucked up ness.

Wow. What great friends you were to him.

What a great loss it is to him to lose your respect.

 

[Celtic]

It's likely his life may end up proving the points he posted about.

I think he attracted her because he was high status in the manosphere. Now, he is an outcast whos earned the scorn of the manosphere. Woman don't tend to like low status outcasts- so how long is this marriage going to last?

I suspect if his relationship fails it will be because of his undeveloped LTR game. I would not underestimate Marks ability to be alpha in other contexts. He's a gifted writer, and very smart. I wouldn't give the manosphere total credit for his shining above others.

But in what context is he alpha if all he has is a failed marriage from before and he is broke? Social status is so important to women this is going to be a problem.

You bring up a good point about LTR game. Keeping a woman attracted over the long run is it's own skillset and isn't so easy, and then this guy after a few months? That's begging for disaster.

The only way this makes any sense for him is that he doesn't have anything to lose. I guess if he is 58 and has no money and no other prospects with women, he can't lose anything in a divorce, and this may be the only chance at pussy he gets for the rest of his life.