The crisis of masculinity

OrthodoxLaity

 
Banned
Orthodox
My mistake. But it should be just BC. BCE means before common era. It combined with CE replaces the Christian designations of before Christ and Year of our Lord. I would add isn’t the Jews being organized and brought to monotheism in 500 BC an act of God’s Will.

It is an act of Satan's will because their church is Satan's church and being organized around monotheism at that time made it easy for the Jews to coordinate their efforts in infiltrating Asian and European societies in order to corrupt them.

They were wandering tribes in the Sahara before contact with the Egyptian Empire and then upon settling there in 1300 BC they learned about civilized existence and became traders, bankers and moneylenders in order to make money and corrupt Egyptian society to further enrich themselves and gain power.

This pattern of parasitic behavior continued in the 800s when the Jews started migrating into the Persian Empire and learned of the monotheistic Zoroastrian religion that was newly founded which contained the concepts that would be found in Judaism such as God, the Devil, heaven, hell and angels.

This motivated Jewish leaders to create their own religion, Judaism, in 500 BC, to unite the 10 tribes of the Jews and make it easier to coordinate their efforts at infiltrating and corrupting societies.

They then moved on to Europe in that same year and also to other Asian empires like China where they became the Kaifeng Jews.

By this point, the Jews already have an international network of moneylenders, bankers and traders controlling the Eurasian landmass which made it easier for them to corrupt society by promoting faggotry and degeneracy.

Bridal Mysticism has done quite a number in separating Men from the Church in the West:


I recommend those texts.

I read the texts, the Church became feminized during Clairvaux's time because he declared female Catholics to be brides of Christ which turned men away from the Church because this concept is feminine and blasphemous.

Christ in the bible is a celibate so declaring all Catholic women to be his bride is blasphemy because the holy leaders of the Church are forbidden from marriage and romantic relationships.

The bible even forbids people from being romantic because the 1st commandment states that all people, including Jesus Christ, must love God above all else.

Which is why the celibate, who avoid marriage and the modern faggotry that is romance, are closer to God.

In fact, courtly love did not become popular until the 1400s but that was the time the Middle Ages ended and the Rennaissance began.

Because of increased trade with Asian countries such as China, Korea and Japan during the Rennaissance, the Europeans learned of their romantic festivals such as Qixi, Chilseok and Tanabata.

The Chinese and Koreans have been celebrating Qixi and Chilseok since 200 BC, respectively, while the Japanese started celebrating Tanabata in 755.

The Europeans, imitating many aspects of Asian culture during this time because of knowledge brought back by Marco Polo and other explorers, turned what was an originally religious holiday, Valentine's day, into a romantic holiday.

Valentine's Day was originally called the Feast of Saint Valentine's and was originally a religious holiday which was not about romance but was a commemoration of Saint Valentine, a Christian martyr.

Even today, Christian denominations still officially classify Valentine's Day as the Feast of Saint Valentine's and celebrate it as a commemoration of the Saint's Martyrdom as opposed to a romantic holiday.

Interestingly, the 1400s was also the time when religious conservatism started to decline in the West and people started becoming increasingly liberal and romantic, culminating in the publishing of the Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx in 1848.

The word romance originally referred to the Romantic Movement and it was never about love, it was about apprehension, angst, tension, terror, horror, awe, suspense, the sublime, the fear of nature, industrialization, and mad scientists, and this was intellectually sophisticated, but all this changed from the 1850's to the present, when Romanticist art was replaced with Sentimental and Realist art.

Sentimental art, with all its sappy messages about idealized love, relationships and marriages based on intense emotions as opposed to practical and logical concerns, peace, altruism, self-sacrifice, white knighting, placing women on a pedestal, and the stupid delusion of empowering women, making them equal, if not, superior to men, and Realist art which promotes the idea of placing the working class on a pedestal, equality, and the reverence for the mundane, average, mediocre and ordinary both had their roots in leftist ideology and occurred right after the publication of the Communist Manifesto.

This was also the time that the word romantic became associated with love rather than horror and the movement was co-opted by libtards in much the same way that the Feast of Saint Valentine's, originally a religious commemoration holiday, was turned into a romantic holiday by Westerners who picked up the idea of romantic holidays from Asians during the Renaissance.

The Communists deliberately promoted these ideas to reduce people's intelligence and make them emotional and irrational so that they would not question Communist ideology, such propaganda is termed Anti-Intellectualism.

A quote from an article on Romanticism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romanticism

The movement emphasized intense emotion as an authentic source of aesthetic experience, placing new emphasis on such emotions as fear, horror and terror, and awe — especially that experienced in confronting the new aesthetic categories of the sublime.

The Soviet NKVD deputy Yakov Agranov even introduced sexpionage in the 1920s for their spies to use romance as a tool to manipulate their enemies into disclosing state secrets crucial to national security.

Agranov later created a school named the Lenin Technical School to teach sexpionage and the school was opened in 1931 by Vyacheslav Menzhinsky, who was the head of the Joint State Political Directorate.

Sources:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Day
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tanabata
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qixi_Festival
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chilseok
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexpionage#Soviet_and_Russian
 
Last edited:

John777

 
Banned
Protestant
The conservative values would have to be modesty, abstinence, frugality and stoicism.

I agree.

Let's add self-control/moderation, manliness/bravery/strength, prudence/foresight, and righteousness/discernment/judgment, the 4 classical virtues.

Also, from 2 Peter 1 add:
Knowledge, steadfastness, godliness, and brotherly affection.

And of course, faith, hope, and love.

Also from the definition of virtue itself, which is

ἀρετή

in Greek, and "virtus" in Latin, coming from "vir" = "man":

A wide range of meanings (can be seen in Strong's Lexicon and Wiktionary):
  • goodness/excellence
  • courage/bravery/manhood
  • virtuosity/mastery/prowess
  • character/dignity/reputation

 

Viktor Zeegelaar

Crow
Orthodox Inquirer
Good talk about the importance of tribes among men. Really makes you realize how scattered and isolated we live in modern society, and how important it is to have tribe of men around you so you can strengthen one another and check each other.

 

Viktor Zeegelaar

Crow
Orthodox Inquirer
I can personally attest to that. Even a tribe of two is more than the sum of its parts.
It's unreal if you realize how atomized and isolated we've become as men. We've been disarmed of our greatest asset: eachother. In the past, community and tribe would be your daily go to. Now, with individualism, widespread weakness/cowardice among men and the internet we're either 1. not forming tribes or 2. we can't even communicate properly with one another. I seriously think that the younger generations of men, who grew up with the smartphone, are barely able to have a normal conversation anymore as all they do is online. But that way there are no strong bonds anymore, no true knowledge of who one is when you look one another in the eyes, no real trust. Really important feature of modern society too to keep the slave class in line and any organized resistance out of the realm of possibility.

Now watch how the metaverse will take this to the extremes in the coming 5-10 years and in 10 years we won't even have what we currently have. I foresee young men living in a virtual reality where they can put the cape on and be the hero, being with a virtual girlfriend, virtual friends, being in virtual groups, having virtual adventure, purpose and quests in life. We're seeing this already where young men sort of give up as the juice isn't perceived as being worth the squeeze and bail out into a virtual realm where they can be that man they innately know they are and want to be, someone of honor, who is respected among his tribe, living a purposeful life of integrity and conquering, whether that's conquering information, land, resources, friendships, whatever. Men must have something to strive towards and the virtual reality will increasingly take that place for men will perceive that it cannot be found in reality anymore.
 

rainy

Pelican
Other Christian
I agree a tribe could be quite beneficial.

I also admit I don't have one. The handful of friends I had I left in CA when I moved across the country a few years ago. Haven't made any good friends here and likely to move again within 1-2 years.

But I also don't really look for friends. Always been extremely independent. Is that good or bad. I don't know. I work and spend time with my family.
 

Viktor Zeegelaar

Crow
Orthodox Inquirer
Good chat about something that we lack nowadays as men. I recommend Rich Cooper, he has great stuff about masculine mindset and how to avoid making bad decisions in today's day and age, which is set up to make you step on landmines as much as possible.

 

Philip Dru

Sparrow
Trad Catholic
This motivated Jewish leaders to create their own religion, Judaism, in 500 BC, to unite the 10 tribes of the Jews and make it easier to coordinate their efforts at infiltrating and corrupting societies.

They then moved on to Europe in that same year and also to other Asian empires like China where they became the Kaifeng Jews.

By this point, the Jews already have an international network of moneylenders, bankers and traders controlling the Eurasian landmass which made it easier for them to corrupt society by promoting faggotry and degeneracy.

I have seen little evidence that the Jews were moneylenders or acted to subvert other cultures prior to the adoption of Judaism by the Ashkenazi. I was under the impression that the Jews were more or less a normally behaving semitic people until this point. What are your sources for the moneylending and subversion in Old Testament times?
 

OrthodoxLaity

 
Banned
Orthodox
I have seen little evidence that the Jews were moneylenders or acted to subvert other cultures prior to the adoption of Judaism by the Ashkenazi. I was under the impression that the Jews were more or less a normally behaving semitic people until this point. What are your sources for the moneylending and subversion in Old Testament times?

The empires of Europe were already infiltrated by Jews:


But then again, so were the empires of Asia:

 

Zagor

Kingfisher
Good chat about something that we lack nowadays as men. I recommend Rich Cooper, he has great stuff about masculine mindset and how to avoid making bad decisions in today's day and age, which is set up to make you step on landmines as much as possible.


The guys like Rich and other secular dating gurus are in my opinion epitome of crisis of masculinity. Imagine being a guy who tailors his personality and lifestyle for a sole goal of fornicating with low quality women. The approach of ‘mold yourself into a person modern women will find attractive’ is the ultimate simping.
 

Philip Dru

Sparrow
Trad Catholic
The guys like Rich and other secular dating gurus are in my opinion epitome of crisis of masculinity. Imagine being a guy who tailors his personality and lifestyle for a sole goal of fornicating with low quality women. The approach of ‘mold yourself into a person modern women will find attractive’ is the ultimate simping.

And what about molding yourself to God fearing women's tastes? Is that also simping?
 

amor_fati

Pigeon
Orthodox Inquirer
I agree a tribe could be quite beneficial.

I also admit I don't have one. The handful of friends I had I left in CA when I moved across the country a few years ago. Haven't made any good friends here and likely to move again within 1-2 years.

But I also don't really look for friends. Always been extremely independent. Is that good or bad. I don't know. I work and spend time with my family.
I highly recommend getting into martial arts or combat sports. I've met plenty of great people in the past months.
 

Jive Turkey

Kingfisher
Orthodox Catechumen
And what about molding yourself to God fearing women's tastes? Is that also simping?
Pretty much. Become the man God wants you to be, and if He sees fit He will assign you a helper. Obviously practice hygiene and dress appropriately, but you should be doing that either way.

But you have to become the genuine article. You have to actually BECOME masculine to attract a woman who IS feminine. You can't just act it. Although there is a degree of fake it till you make it.

Btw you can pray for God to make you more masculine. I did this and it worked. People have even pointed out certain things which were not there before. In fact I will probably start praying for it again, because I would like some more masculinity haha
 

Blade Runner

Crow
Orthodox
There's not really a crisis of masculinity. There's a crisis of culture. That's been brought on by subversion of the culture and the wealth effect (more people, more low quality people for every reason). Another way to say this is that there are plenty of good men. How many good women are there? Remember, my thesis is that in general there are more low quality people of all backgrounds and in both sexes. But let's be real, did the evil one really go after "men" as much as he went after "women" in terms of making, creating, and forming a family?

We all know the answer. Even if it was a small number of men's "fault" (the "leaders").
 

Philip Dru

Sparrow
Trad Catholic
Pretty much. Become the man God wants you to be, and if He sees fit He will assign you a helper. Obviously practice hygiene and dress appropriately, but you should be doing that either way.

We could do a heck of a lot worse than developing ourselves into the sort of men that are both attractive to and worthy of Godly women. It is not simping. God made us into corresponding shapes.

Pandering to low quality women is sinful and distasteful, but it is not the epitome of a crisis in masculinity as @Zagor says. At least men at that level are setting goals for themselves and exiting their comfort zones.
 

Viktor Zeegelaar

Crow
Orthodox Inquirer
There's not really a crisis of masculinity. There's a crisis of culture. That's been brought on by subversion of the culture and the wealth effect (more people, more low quality people for every reason). Another way to say this is that there are plenty of good men. How many good women are there? Remember, my thesis is that in general there are more low quality people of all backgrounds and in both sexes. But let's be real, did the evil one really go after "men" as much as he went after "women" in terms of making, creating, and forming a family?

We all know the answer. Even if it was a small number of men's "fault" (the "leaders").
What would you say a good man is? A strong man? I seldom see them walking around. What I observe in society is that men become increasingly feminine, and women become increasingly masculine. Maybe women are targeted a bit more by the global regime to put them higher up the totempole and they're the low hanging fruit as a woman is extremely easy to manipulate, but men certainly have been taught for decades to man down, aren't usually taught any key masculine imperatives anymore, such as strength, resilience, leadership. So both genders are being squeezed from both sides, like a nutcracker. Masculine men are as rare as feminine women.
 

Blade Runner

Crow
Orthodox
What would you say a good man is? A strong man? I seldom see them walking around. What I observe in society is that men become increasingly feminine, and women become increasingly masculine. Maybe women are targeted a bit more by the global regime to put them higher up the totempole and they're the low hanging fruit as a woman is extremely easy to manipulate, but men certainly have been taught for decades to man down, aren't usually taught any key masculine imperatives anymore, such as strength, resilience, leadership. So both genders are being squeezed from both sides, like a nutcracker. Masculine men are as rare as feminine women.
I'm not into the pissing contests, and I know you are asking in good faith, but I know a lot of guys who seek quality relationships, though I will admit it could be that most don't. The problem, as I have stated, is that few women in the age where it matters 20-25, seek quality relationships. Way fewer. There are far more quality men than quality women, in my view. That men have a larger window is not my problem, ultimately, it comes down to pure biology. As you know, I also hold the opinion that there are far too many men in general, and thus, yes far too many men who are not quality - I can hold both positions, since they are both true. Women have to discern who the quality is, like they always have had to. And guess what? They reward bad behavior, just like the government has, for more than most of our entire lifetimes. @MichaelWitcoff stated this long ago, and he is correct: if women rewarded "good men" they would get good men. The fact is, they don't (in the west). The issue is that when they finally do, it's so disingenuous due to age and their clear loss of value/wasted time having fun, no one can take them seriously as far as their approach in their 30s.
 

Viktor Zeegelaar

Crow
Orthodox Inquirer
I'm not into the pissing contests, and I know you are asking in good faith, but I know a lot of guys who seek quality relationships, though I will admit it could be that most don't. The problem, as I have stated, is that few women in the age where it matters 20-25, seek quality relationships. Way fewer. There are far more quality men than quality women, in my view. That men have a larger window is not my problem, ultimately, it comes down to pure biology. As you know, I also hold the opinion that there are far too many men in general, and thus, yes far too many men who are not quality - I can hold both positions, since they are both true. Women have to discern who the quality is, like they always have had to. And guess what? They reward bad behavior, just like the government has, for more than most of our entire lifetimes. @MichaelWitcoff stated this long ago, and he is correct: if women rewarded "good men" they would get good men. The fact is, they don't (in the west). The issue is that when they finally do, it's so disingenuous due to age and their clear loss of value/wasted time having fun, no one can take them seriously as far as their approach in their 30s.
Correct, the alpha seed/beta need equation, where women waste their 20s partying and going after the ''wrong men'', then in their 30s trying to settle down with what I then think you call the ''good men''. In fact, I heard an interview yesterday with a female coach of women in their 30s and very often their world of illusions breaks apart entirely. Imagine you've gotten all you wanted since you were born, no one ever critisized them, no one ever held them accountable, the world was their oyster, the trees grew to to clouds so to speak, and then you find your marketvalue diminish to 0 at age 40. Must be a very disheartening experience, men face similar struggles but we tend to realize in our early 20s that we have to build our value in life, in all respects, as if you're just a normal dude in your 20s no one cares at all about your life, whether it's other people, the gov, society it doesn't matter.

What I think it comes down to is that there are enough, more beta like, good guys out there willing to wife up a woman in her 20s and take care of her, love her etc, more from a noble/idealistic perspective, but they lack the other side of the medal. I think this problem could be solved to a large extent if men were taught the more ''tough'' side of masculinity early on, like was the case in the past, where men would learn the capacity for violence, would enforce boundaries, would learn problem solving, not to cry and instead solve the problem, take leadership. I tend to imagine that in the past, the average man would have the good balance of these beta/alpha traits. Both are necessary in a man to 1. be able to not get wrecked by life, 2. to be attractive to a woman. When someone is only ''alpha'' or only ''beta'', problems tend to arise.

It's very sad to see though as the good guys you're talking about genuinely have the best in mind for a woman, then to be crushed by divorce, bad behavior of a woman, cheating, lack of respect etc, while being wrecked by the kicks in the ass life inevitably gives us all and not being respected by other men, as they live in an idealized version of reality and never had a rite of passage from a strong father and community to transform them from a boy into a man. Nowadays, many men tend to stay boys either until their late 20s/30s, and sometimes their entire life, which is a situation in which everyone loses: the men, the women, the children, the communities, society at large, only the global regime with a monopoly on violence that wants to keep us all weak, distracted and confused wins.
 
Top