www.returnofkings.com

Dawn Pine #fundie #sexist returnofkings.com

(Submitter’s Note: this is only half of the screed, cut for the sake of brevity)

11 TIPS ON RAISING YOUR DAUGHTERS ON THE RED PILL
[…]
Dawn Pine (aka TheMaleBrain) is an Israeli 40+ divorced father of 2, former casualty of the blue-pill. Since he has taken the red pill his hobbies are: working out, writing, mentoring, harem management and self improvement.
[…]
As a divorced father of two daughters, and a RVF active member, I see articles on raising sons (examples 1[http://www.returnofkings.com/93261/5-tips-to-raise-a-strong-son], 2[http://www.returnofkings.com/90283/5-things-i-learned-from-my-brothers-on-how-to-raise-a-son], 3[http://www.returnofkings.com/91029/why-you-must-raise-your-son-to-be-a-warrior] and 4[http://www.returnofkings.com/80115/5-things-i-will-teach-my-future-son], all from this year alone on ROK). Raising a son is an important matter, as most of us here at ROK are boys.

But wait a minute! 50% of the population is females. Those of us who are fathers (writer included) may also have daughters. The discussions here as I mentioned, are more about sons. What about daughters?

I could sit with myself, complain, or take it to the comments section. But that is not the way the manosphere practices. So I decided to write my own list of tips, based on my know-how so far. I have been on the red-pill for three years now, and I wish to share with my fellow readers what I have learned.

[…]
1. Teach her what guys and girls find attractive
We all know the answer to that one. But a child does not. Children are not blank slate, but they are unaware of “how the world works”. It is my responsibility as the patriarch to show them.

In order to starve the hamster in advance, I give my daughters tools and the language to understand. Kids have a very strong hamster, as do females (we all know that).

Since early times, people have used stories and myths to educate. This is truer at a young age, as they are not yet teenagers. I often use stories and examples, as kids sometime struggle with “concepts” or “genralities”.
[…]
NEXT IS THE CONCEPT OF “THE WALL”
Taking CH advice[https://heartiste.wordpress.com/2015/08/04/oneitis-and-the-wall-the-two-most-important-life-lessons-you-can-impart-to-your-sons-and-daughters/]:
“Tell her with uncompromising bluntness that she is pretty now, and all the boys notice her, but her prettiness will disappear faster than she knows (or can possibly know at her tender age), and there will come a time, always much sooner than she had hoped, when none of the boys will notice her.’

My daughters know that they should be married by their mid-20s. I use their mom and other moms of their friends and asking: ”How successful will her boyfriend be, if she was single?”. They look at the fathers of their friends, and at least some of the time it is obvious. My eldest told me that her mom told her that being married at 25 is too young. I replied by stating that her mother has actually no strength running after them, and that they as young moms would have the strength to do things with their children. Message well understood.

2. Show her how guys hit on girls
I day game sometimes. I don’t do it much in front of my girls, because they will cockblock me. It happened a few times before I “stopped”. I recall one time that they ran interference at a wedding, when I was about to number close a young hot girl.

But if we are in a restaurant for example, I tease the waitresses. I use pet names, boss them around a little bit and treat her as a small child. The waitresses usually take it very well, and sometime even blush.

My daughters start to giggle. “Dad, I don’t know why, but I feel good when you do that,” my elder told me. “It is because older girls are like young girls. They love it when a successful man makes fun of them” I explained. “Also, you see that the waitress was responding well. She likes it,” I add. They witnessed it, and now they know how it feels and how it looks when a guy hits on a girl and what an interaction between boys and girls looks like.

Lesson hammered again. As a side benefit, now my daughters feel better knowing that their father is “Successful”. I’ll admit that my game level is intermediate at best, but good enough is good enough.

[…]
4. Work on their femininity
We are man and we practice masculinity. Femininity? Red-pill guys? How exactly? One would assume that this is the mom’s job. So what? We all know that women are not to be trusted with responsibility. So I gladly take some of this burden upon myself.

You can do it too. The funny things is that it is not that hard. It also correspond with the red-pill.
[…]
EXAMPLE: CHORES AROUND THE HOUSE
Not my best one (to say the least), but I try to have them do feminine chores around the house: Cook with me, fold laundry and so on. Just because I live alone and do masculine and feminine chores does not mean that my daughters can’t learn it also from me.
[…]
THIRD EXAMPLE: LOOKS
In this case I have a good deal of help from their mom. She emphasizes looks, dresses well and wears makeup. Kids need to have discipline and getting dressed, even for girls is sometimes tiresome. Trust me, I use to be like that. When they sometime complain, I remind them that looks are important (see tip #1). This is where a cooperation between parents really kicks it in, and a lot of people mentioned how well they dress.

Whenever they form an opinion on someone (based on their looks), I hammer it home again. Looks are women’s top and dominant SMV component.

FORTH(sic) EXAMPLE – FUTURE CAREER
Kids do a lot of thinking on what they want to do when they grow up. That may change on an hourly, daily or monthly basis. I had my daughters move from teachers to waitresses to babysitters and to doctors – all in the course of one day.

When they come to me with the new career, I remind them that they will need to also be there for their kids when they are young. Then you see them spin the wheel to show me how it works great with a child (or more). At that time I also remind them that since they will marry a successful man (god, I hope so!) he will be the one providing for them, and they will assist.

5. Reward feminine behavior
[…]
PUNISHMENT THEMES
Taking away their time with me (for example – not getting a bed time story). This is for when they disrespect my time. Time is important to me, as they know I make efforts to be on time.
Tactical anger – my daughters have told me that they fear me. Good. If kids have no fear there will be no discipline. Other dads (or moms) may say that it is not good, and that love is enough. YEH RIGHT! I ignore or take the time to explain that fear is crucial.
Never actually lose your temper. Calm down once the point was made. If you cannot calm yourself, walk away and breathe. Losing one’s temper completely is weakness.
Not paying allowance – if it is disrespect to my money. This happens when they break stuff (on purpose or that it could have been avoided). I use less of this punishment as it correlates poorly from a time perspective.
[…]
REWARDS THEMES
Verbally – most easiest reward. Giving a good word is immediate. One must not abuse it. When you give praise, look into their eyes and mean it. Kids know when you are “half arsing” it.
Treats – you may use this on occasion. Usually amounts to a few dollars. If it is an “all-for-dollar” store even better, It gives them a sense of independence and correlate good behavior with physical reward.
Activity – “You get to pick where will go on Saturday” is one of their favorites. My daughters in particular, and kids in general sometimes like to “steer the wheel”. Giving them that opportunity (not every week!) makes them feel loved and respected, which again is a good correlation between action and reward.

8. Show what happens to “Bad Girls”
There is an appeal for the “dark side”. Even if in movies the bad person gets what’s coming, my daughters (as every other female) have that attraction for “bad behavior”. They see that it is “cool” and has rewards in the form of attention and ability to “do what you want”.

Yes, female behavior should be controlled[http://www.returnofkings.com/73131/women-must-have-their-behavior-and-decisions-controlled-by-men], but that is easier said than done. What can a divorce father do? Spanking is out of the question (legally). I have a problem with blocking the TV and internet completely.

My answer is to inoculate them as much as I can. Introducing the concept of “wrong/bad kind of attention”.

You come across a YouTube clip, say of Katy Perry. “Dad, they are showing the wrong kind of attention,” my daughters come to inform me. “I know. You realize what will happen to girls who do it?” I ask. “They will get use to it, and have a difficult time using their brain or doing stuff because they are use to it,” they answer. “She will do bad things to herself to get attention.”
[…]
11. Pick your battles
My TV fight is a lost cause. I will limit it but not take it out of the house. I will watch with them to provide red-pill guidance. I know that advice on the manosphere is to disengage the MSM, but in this case I choose not to, for my own reasons.

However, I have shown them repeatedly that TV and media should not be trusted. They have witnessed it repeatedly. I sat with them during movies, shows of different kinds and negated the messages (girl power and boys being no good). I had a lot of talks with them about it. But I know that the TV will remain in the house.

I know that some of the fights are not worth fighting. We have a specific amount of energy. You need to pick your battles and not to alienate your kids. Also, sometimes if we win it will be a Pyrrhic victory.

I consider myself stricter than most of the fathers I know, but each year I give them more space and allow them to push the boundaries. It is part of growing up. If you boundary was breached, you can either tactically get angry, or sometimes just say “NO”. But again, know when to lose.

Conclusion
There is a lot of talk about raising red-pill boys. I understand the importance. There is very little discussion on raising girls, at least that I have seen. What I write here is my lesson learned of my last three years of red-pill awakening.

I’m already waiting for the time that they’ll have boyfriends. I may AMOG them, but for sure I’ll have the talk Roosh had with his sister. This is already saved on my hard drive and on my cloud storage. The day will come (in a few years’ time) when it will be relevant. I have practiced it sometimes with girls in my harem, and they all acknowledge that the message is strong and true.

That does not mean I will be successful. I have most of the world against me, including the education system and the media. However I feel comfortable that my daughters will be way less damaged than the rest. Who knows, maybe the change back to patriarchy we are discussing will happen during their generation. In this case they will have an upper hand on other girls.

Roosh V #fundie #sexist #crackpot returnofkings.com

ELLIOT RODGER IS THE FIRST MALE FEMINIST MASS MURDERER


Since originally publishing an article describing how a male-friendly culture encouraging Elliot into self-improvement (game), legal prostitution, and foreign marriage with Southeast Asian women would have prevented his murderous rampage, I did something that most people won’t bother to do: I read his manifesto. Not even halfway through, I began to understand exactly why the media has been pushing the narrative that PUA (game) may have been the cause: Rodger was one of their own.

Here is the PDF of his manifesto (http://abclocal.go.com/three/kabc/kabc/My-Twisted-World.pdf). If you take the time to read it, you will likely come to the same conclusion I have that Elliot Rodger is in fact a feminist. In other words, the killings of six individuals stem in part because of his mainstream feminist beliefs that, after intersecting with his dark traits of narcissism, entitlement, loserdom, and hopelessness, led him to kill. The fantastical mainstream media articles you have come across trying to pin Rodger upon us is nothing more than a defensive measure to distance themselves from a killer that was a card-carrying member of their own progressive club.

1. He put pussy on the pedestal, just like feminists do
Feminist theory speaks a whole lot about equality, but it’s actually an ideology that seeks to absolve all women from their amusing but sometimes dangerous stream of mistakes. Feminism (and progressivism in general—they might as well be interchangeable terms) treat women as flawless snowflakes that must be coddled and spoon-fed happiness and validation. Any act by a woman, even if it results in failure or bodily harm (like an abortion), is an “empowering” statement of independence and strength, while any failure by men is seen upon as proof that they are out-of-touch doofuses, a fact that is readily displayed on television, movies, and advertising.

Rodger’s manifesto exactly matches this feminist belief. He shows little genuine hate towards the object of his affections—women—and their poor choices, instead lashing out against the men who were successful with those women. Feminists do the same, always ready to blame men for their failures in life, even going so far as saying that society would be better without men, who are mocked as mere “sperm donors.” In spite of the bad choices that women make by dating bad boys at the schools he attended, Rodger gave them a pussy pass and continued to believe that they were flawless angels who should be cherished, especially the blonde ones.

Rodger’s hate for those men isn’t much different than that hate displayed to me and my colleagues here at ROK. Just take a look at this supposedly professional woman having an embarrassing emotional meltdown on a news show because she didn’t agree with what I said, resorting to blatant distortion and lies about “rape culture” and other such nonsense that was unrelated to the piece she was critiquing:
https://youtu.be/g3w-5-b4mhM

Elevating women as the superior sex, which is what both feminists and Rodger have done, means that discrimination and outright hatred must be then applied to the “inferior” sex—men. It’s no surprise that the most violent killings performed by Rodger were on his three male roommates with a knife, who surely endured more suffering and pain than the cleaner executions he did on his female victims.

2. He was awash in blue pill knowledge

We have an often-used metaphor called the “red pill,” which stands for the pursuit of truth concerning human nature, no matter how painful those truths can be. The opposite of the red pill is the blue pill, of people who choose to be placated by lies describing reality. Both feminists and Rodger were firm adherents to the blue pill world—of believing in a way of nature that doesn’t actually reflect actual human behavior. For example:

Both Rodger and feminists believe that attraction should be automatic and easy instead of being based on sexual market value or other components that can be changed (such as game).
Both Rodger and feminists believe that men should be blamed for problems of society or personal relationships.
Both Rodger and feminists were deluded into having standards way beyond their level of attractiveness (e.g., fat feminist cows actually think they should be able to date a good man).
Both Rodger and feminists believe that all a man has to do to get a girlfriend is to be “nice” and a provider, a strategy that no longer works in today’s America.
Both Rodger and feminists hated players who did well with women
As final proof that Rodger was as blue pill as you can get, simply reverse all the gender references within his manifesto and pretend it was written by a woman. What you would then have before you is a pity party of a self-absorbed feminist who thinks that men are the cause of all her problems. If he lived a couple more years, I have no doubt that Rodger would even be a proud moderator of the Blue Pill subreddit.

3. He didn’t believe in self-improvement, just like feminists
In spite of all the loneliness and pain that Rodger went through, he still couldn’t be bothered to lift one finger to improve his station. Compare that to what we teach here at ROK, where we strongly advise you to start your game training with at least 100 approaches, with the expectation that you’ll probably have to do thousands during your lifetime. In Rodger’s manifesto, all 140 pages of it, he details only saying “Hi” to one girl and practically running away from fear. In other words, he did one aborted approach with zero follow-up. That’s not game anywhere in the game universe, and if he came to us saying that he has yet to get laid after putting such an half-assed attempt, we’d tell him to do 10 solid approaches the following day and stop whining like an entitled child.

The fact that Rodger was a member of PUAHate, an online community of social retards who despised game and believed only Brad Pitt and millionaires can get laid, further highlights how vehemently anti-game he was. Why wasn’t he open to improving himself? Why wasn’t he ready to expend the labor to make himself more attractive to women? For that answer, we might as well ask some feminists, who share the exact same belief as him in not having to lift a finger in making yourself more attractive to the opposite sex. Look no further than feminist’s cause-du-jour, fat acceptance, a culture of de-improvement—and frankly, de-evolution—where women gain massive amounts of weight and then flaunt their blubber on social media, ready to attack any man who dare finds their display to be unattractive or repulsive.

Fat acceptance has become so pervasive that we had to dedicate one whole week on ROK tearing it to shreds, but in spite of that, not much has changed. America continues to get fatter and feminists continue to attempt to normalize obesity as actually being beautiful, just like how Rodger tried to convince himself of the idea that having a BMW would be attractive to women.

Take a look at this quote by Rodger:

“Everyone treated me like I was invisible. No one reached out to me, no one knew I existed. I was a ghost.”

Does that ring a bell to you? It’s almost identical to the rant we recently witnessed on the Louis CK show when a morbidly obese female went on to whine and bitch about how being a fat ass is not getting her the man she wants. It’s no surprise that fatties rushed to praise Louis CK for his act of sedition against men and acceptable standards of beauty. There is almost no difference between Rodger and a modern American woman who subscribes to feminist thought.

Now take a look at this passage:
“All of the hot, beautiful girls walked around with obnoxious, tough jock-type men who partied all the time and acted crazy. They should be going for intelligent gentlemen such as myself. Women are sexually attracted to the wrong type of man.”

Let’s do a swap on the genders:

“All the handsome men walked around with blonde bimbos who don’t have a good career like me and knowledge of reality television shows. These men should be going for a strong, empowered, independent, fabulous woman such as myself. Men are sexually attracted to the wrong type of woman.”

The overlap in mindset would be comical if it didn’t result in tragedy.

Another question worth asking is this: when today’s American woman can’t find the man of her dreams, does she look in the mirror and blame herself? No, she blames men for not finding her unattractiveness attractive. This is actively promoted by feminist thinkers on the most widely read American blogs like Buzzfeed, Gawker, and Huffington Post. Rodger shared this same viewpoint. His manifesto is dripping with entitlement of why girls don’t find him to be “marvelous” just because he happens to own a fancy pair of sunglasses. Feminists and Rodger, it turns out, are like two peas in a pod.

4. He believed that men should be chivalrous and kind, like feminists do
Please don’t forward us another listicle on a feminist-friendly blog about how men need to be nice, friendly, and awkwardly consensual by applying legalese speak in the bedroom before passionate fornication. Rodger believed much of the same, thinking that you had to be a “supreme gentleman” that catered to the material and emotional whims of women, doing everything possible to please them in exchange for a sexual reward. We can only imagine how nauseatingly “gentlemanly” he would have been if he actually managed to land a date on his terms.

I have no doubt he would have agreed with just about all the mainstream bullshit advice on being a gentleman, particularly the Thought Catalog piece The 20 Rules Of Being A Modern Gentleman. There is also a Buzzfeed quiz titled How Much Of A Gentleman Are You? that Rodger would have gotten an A+ on. The end result of his loneliness (killing six people) was obviously not gentlemanly, but before that rampage he treated girls with a gentlemanly shyness, reverence, and respect that feminists would have applauded him for. Rodger and feminists believed in the exact same demeanor that men should have around women.

5. He hated game, like feminists do

No one hates game more than feminists, who have gone so far as to equate it rape ([1], [2], [3]). They absolutely despise any attempt by men to improve their value in the sexual marketplace because then that would mean fewer men to put up with their obesity, short hair, or bad attitude. Rodger believed the same, going so far as becoming an active member in the PUAHate community which dedicated the bulk of their efforts to criticizing game and its adherents like a woman’s gossip circle. (On PUAhate there had been over 100 threads criticizing me and other ROK staff.)

Would you be surprised if I were to tell you right now that Rodger and a mainstream feminist shared the same views on PUAHate and game? I hope not, because that’s exactly what I found. A popular feminist writer who has worked for Newsweek, Jezebel, Buzzfeed, and Dissident magazine, Katie JM Baker, publicly declared that PUAs (i.e. us) are actually worse than PUA Hate.

“The men that lurk in the PuaHate forums are almost worse than the PUAs themselves…”

Let that soak in for a second. Feminist rage is so deep and emotional against game that they have supported a forum with “hate” in the title that cultivated and gave comfort to a mass murderer. I gave Baker a chance to change her opinion about believing a forum of hate was less worse than men who practice game:

[Image of a Twitter Feed, Transcript:

RoK: @katiejmbaker, for the record, do you still believe that we are worse than PUAHate? Or did the recent murder Rampage change your mind?

Katie Baker: lol, what are you even talking about?]

A feminist refused to reverse her position that game practitioners are not worse than Rodger’s favorite hangout. That tells me that Rodger and Baker would get along very well in their hate for men like us who teach game and try to improve men’s lives.

6. He subscribed to The Young Turks Youtube channel, a feminist darling

This is a minor point but one worth mentioning. We don’t know how knee-deep he was into The Young Turks liberal positions, but it’s a fact that he was not a subscriber to my channel or forum. We can only speculate as to how much TYT molded his pro-feminist view.

7. He hated alpha males, just like feminists do
Whenever a feminist encounters these parts, she immediately bashes our alpha/beta concept of male sexual hierarchy. She instead spouts tired cliches that are supposed to help men in their pursuit of sexual happiness but which actually do nothing of the sort:

“People are people!”
“Just be yourself!”
“Don’t be an asshole/creep/jerk/rando!”
“Having sexual standards is, like, misogynistic!”
Of course these phrases don’t explain human mating behavior and why some men get way more women than others, but that’s no matter since feminist theory does not have the slightest intention to explain the world in an accurate or truthful manner.

Like feminists, Rodger despised alpha males, who he called “obnoxious.” Here’s some relevant quotes from his manifesto:

“I noticed that there were two groups of cool, popular kids. There were the skateboarder kids, such as Vinny Maggio, Ashton Moio, Darrel, Wes, and Alex Dib. And then there were the boys who were popular with girls, including Vincent, Robert Morgan, and [redacted]. They all seemed so confident and aggressive. I felt so intimidated by them, and I hated them for it. I hated them so much, but I had to increase my standing with them. I wanted to be friends with them.

[…]

I thought all of the cool kids were obnoxious jerks, but I tried as best as I could to hide my disgust and appear “cool” to them. They were obnoxious jerks, and yet somehow it was these boys who all of the girls flocked to.”

If Rodger was alive right now, he’d be giving feminists high fives for sharing the exact same viewpoint on sexually superior but “horrible” males who have figured out the dating game and what women actually want.

8. He shared many personality traits with your modern American feminist
Rodger might as well have been a woman, which has raised speculation if he was actually gay. He took selfies like women. He was addicted to Facebook like women. He was obsessed with his appearance. He was narcissistic, vain, and materialistic. I wouldn’t be surprised if he was also addicted to his iPhone like your standard issue American woman. Heartiste does a good job of highlighting the similarities:

“[The effeminate male, like Rodger, is an] indictment of this infantile Millennial generation, which daily provides evidence that their ranks are filled with effeminate males who, like women, expect the world to cater their needs, no questions asked, no demands made. Elliot Rodger couldn’t stand how unfaaaair girls were to date uglier men than himself, how unfair life was that his car and clothes weren’t a magnet for hot white sorority chicks, how unfair the cosmic laws were to require of him a little bit of effort if he wanted to put an end to his virginity.

Egotistic, attention starved, solipsistic, passive aggressive, perpetually aggrieved, and unwilling to change when posing as a martyr feels so damn good… there’s your new American manlet, same as your new American woman.”

Like I already mentioned, a quick find/replace gender swap on his manifesto will pass the Turing test in convincing most spectators that he was actually a 22-year-old empowered feminist who participates in “Take Back The Night” walks and thinks that posting mindless #YesAllWomen tweets on Twitter comprises her good deed of the month. Rodger was effeminate and a negative person overall simply because he possessed beliefs that are undoubtedly shared by feminists.

9. He wanted to be a social justice warrior, just like feminists
He had a victim complex of being held down by invisible forces outside of his control. Feminists also believe that the “patriarchy” is holding them down, and they flock to Tumblr to reblog facile images and memes to spread lies that men make more than women for the same work, for example. These Tumblr crusades have even led to my own family being prank called at late hours, all because my words hurt their feelings, just like Rodger’s was hurt that pretty girls didn’t find him automatically attractive.

It turns out that Rodger was a budding social justice warrior, perhaps not far from establishing his own Tumblr beachhead:

“I formed an ideology in my head of how the world should work. I was fueled both by my desire to destroy all of the injustices of the world, and to exact revenge on everyone I envy and hate. I decided that my destiny in life is to rise to power so I can impose my ideology on the world and set everything right. I was only seventeen, I have plenty of time. I thought to myself. I spent all of my time studying in my room, reading books about history, politics, and sociology, trying to learn as much as I can.

[…]

I seriously started to consider working towards writing an epic story. I was always creating stories in my mind to fuel my fantasies. Usually those stories depicted someone like myself rising to power after a life of being treated unfairly by the world.

[…]

To be angry about the injustices one faces is a sign of strength. It is a sign that one has the will to fight back against those injustices, rather than bowing down and accepting it as fate. Both my friends James and Philip seem to be the weak, accepting type; whereas I am the fighter. I will never stand to be insulted, and I will eventually have my revenge against all those who insult me, no matter how long it takes.”

Both Rodger and feminists feel the only way to get what they want out of life is not self-improvement, but attacking others they disagree with. Their shared ideology is one of destruction. We have to wonder if Rodger would have eventually participated in any feminist event like SlutWalks to right the world of fantasy injustices that prevent them from being seen as beautiful, marvelous, gentlemanly, and so on.

10. He was not far away from being the epitome of a white knight, a man that feminists collect for their friend zones

If you see a feminist in the wild, a white knight won’t be far. He’s the man who enables her false view of the world and provides her with good feels and encouragement for her social justice campaigns. While Rodger wasn’t quite a white knight in this sense, he nailed all three white knight components:

“1. He is the ever-present servant.
2. He pines silently for a single woman.
3. That woman wants little to do with him, and it shows.”

In other words, if you inserted him in feminist company, he would be the glove to their chubby bear claw fingers. His personality is wholly compatible with how feminists believe men should behave: servile and wimpy while never taking real action on their sexual desires.

Conclusion

The only things in common that Rodger had with us is that (1) he wanted sex with attractive women, and (2) he had a functional penis. That’s it. The overlap of thought and belief between Rodger and feminists, however, should convince you beyond a reasonable doubt that Rodger was in fact a feminist, even if he didn’t himself know that his peg fit snugly into the feminist hole. I’ve actually met self-described feminists who were less feminist than Rodger was.

While I stand by my argument that game would have helped Rodger, I am beginning to wonder if being a feminist was the seed that drove him to desperation and delusion, eventually leading to a tragic loss of life. This line of thought is worth pursuing by people who want to understand why a man felt that taking other lives and his own was seen as the best solution. You definitely won’t read about this conclusion in the media, which is too busy trying to toss Rodger to our side like a hot piece of coal, even though Rodger shares absolutely no similarity in thought and behavior to game practitioners.

I have logically come to the conclusion that Rodger was in fact the first male feminist mass murderer that we have seen in America. I’m afraid that if the feminist ideology contained within Rodger’s head is allowed to continue spreading, we are likely to see more violent acts by men who believe in the exact same things that feminists do.

Anton Hagen #fundie #biphobia returnofkings.com

5 REASONS WHY BISEXUALS CANNOT BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY
[…]
Anton Hagen is a multilingual writer from the UK whose joys and woes living in different parts of Europe inspired him to contribute philosophical pieces to the manosphere, with the odd caustic joke.

The topic of bisexuality keeps cropping up time and time again. It’s constantly rammed down our throats: taking the form of either vacuous gossip about the “bi-curious” escapades of an acquaintance or vapid celebrity, or the even more tiresome bilge concerning “biphobia” and bigotry.

In this article, we shall examine how refusing to take bisexuals seriously is a perfectly rational point of view to hold, after having examined certain aspects of this phenomenon in closer detail.

1. The Ludicrous myth of “Biphobia”
[“Dancing with the Stars” Logo]

In the 21st Century, it is becoming increasingly more and more laughable to suggest that homophobia is rampant, when all television, entertainment and culture seem to be catered towards the tastes of gay men: just looking through a TV guide or turning on the radio confirms this assertion.

Yet it is even more ridiculous to suggest that we live in a culture of “biphobia.” There has been extremely little evidence in history which suggests that bisexuals have been more severely treated than homosexuals and heterosexuals.

Despite this fact, “biphobia” has become an accepted term. Furthermore, it is used incorrectly to describe anyone who questions bisexuality in any shape or form, as opposed to denote those who genuinely loathe and despise bisexuals (of whom there are very few).

By classing the opinions of those with whom they disagree as an irrational “phobia,” LGBT activists are able to shun counter-arguments as being inherently flawed and diseased, without having to tackle the assertion with reason and evidence. This tactic is a favorite among leftists (e.g. transphobia, homophobia, etc.)

[Picture of a hippie-looking woman.
Transcript: Your Rights End where my feelings begin.]

[…]
The term “biphobia” has just become a means of suppressing reasoned arguments and healthy skepticism by portraying their opponents as being mentally deranged. It could not be more typical of the totalitarian progressive movement.

There is no such thing as biphobia: there are only those who do not wholeheartedly embrace bisexuals and shower them in praise and compliments for being so open-minded and adventurous; there is absolutely nothing wrong with that.

2. They’re trend-followers
[Picture of 2 female celebrities kissing]
Far from being a minority of poor, oppressed, counter-cultural victims, bisexuals are extolled and exalted in modern culture. From Madonna and Britney Spears’ kiss at that god awful music show all the way up to the Mozart and Beethoven of our age (Lady Gaga and Katy Perry), bisexual behavior is portrayed as “cool” and fashionable.

Impressionable youths therefore gravitate to such behavior because it gives them a sense of identity and excitement. They engage in bisexuality as an expression of faux-individualism, in an attempt to distance themselves from what they believe to be the bigoted, narrow-minded majority.

They are of course, all completely deluded. They think they’re unique, yet all they are doing is following a trend which has been concocted for them by MTV and record companies. Bisexuality has simply become a fashion statement, and very little more.

3. They’re promiscuous
In Tuthmosis’ famous article, he lists claiming to be bisexual as a major slut tell. This could not be more true. Many of the other signs mentioned in that article stem from an adolescent, pseudo-rebellious attitude (e.g. tattoos, piercings, swearing, drugs etc.)

Bisexuality is simply another form of immature revolt: by challenging the supposed “heteronormative” culture, they are trying to affirm themselves as individualistic, exciting people. This childish attitude manifests itself in bisexuality, promiscuity, and self-destructive behavior.

Very often, youths do not have any major achievements or unique personality on which to define themselves; they therefore jump at any opportunity to stand out from the crowd. Unfortunately, the “sex-positive” bisexual culture of today just happens to be the means to that end.

4. Bisexuals cannot form long-term relationships
The rebellious, childish youths described above are not fit for long-term relationships. It is impossible to be bisexual and maintain a monogamous commitment: one half of one’s sexuality must be renounced before entering into a relationship with a single person. Unfortunately the bisexuals will argue that they have the right to “be who they want to be” and claim “I am what I am.”

Monogamous relationships are based on self-restraint, compromise, and mutual understanding. Someone who continues to assert that they wish to sleep with members of both sexes whilst in a long-term relationship simply lacks the above virtues and has no empathy for their partner’s feelings, only caring for themselves and their carnal desires.

Were someone to vow full commitment to a single partner, they would obviously have to abandon any desire for someone of a different sex to their partner. This is a perfectly moral and reasonable expectation. Bisexuality is usually confined to the pre-adult phase of sleeping around and experimentation. It is therefore very difficult to view it something mature and worthy of anything other than condescension.

5. Evidence suggests it doesn’t even exist
Having said all the above, there is still reasonable scientific doubt as to the actual existence of bisexuality. A recent study investigating this naturally attracted a lot of negative attention from the liberal media powerhouse. In this study, it was determined that thirty males who identified themselves as bisexual were indistinguishable from homosexuals in their hormonal responses to pornography. The study can be read online here.

Dr. Michael Bailey, one of the conductors of the study, noted: “I’m not denying that bisexual behavior exists, but I am saying that in men there’s no hint that true bisexual arousal exists, and that for men arousal is orientation.”

Skepticism over the existence of bisexuality continues to this day. We still cannot determine at this stage whether it categorically exists or doesn’t, but it is downright foolish and disrespectful to label those who question it as having a “phobia” or being “bigoted.” The burden of proof remains on those who argue for its existence, rather than those who claim its absence.

Conclusion
It is not irrational or incorrect to hold a healthy, skeptical attitude towards bisexuality. Furthermore, those who doubt it should not be classed as intolerant or bigoted. Upon closer examination of the matter, it appears to be linked to juvenile irresponsibility and typically millennial, liberal attitudes towards sex, relationships, and politics. It is therefore perfectly reasonable to cast doubt upon it.

Undoubtedly, the leftists will jeer, howl and screech their vitriol against such an objective examination of their degenerate habits. Questionable behavior such as bisexuality should be repudiated if we are to gain a deeper understanding of ourselves and the world around us as a whole.

Arson Greyer #fundie #sexist #homophobia #biphobia returnofkings.com

AN IDIOT’S GUIDE TO NEW WESTERN SEXUAL ORIENTATIONS

Arson Greyer
Arson is an anti-SJW crusader and critic of sexual marketplace deregulation who has gotten filthy rich from the non-existent gender pay gap. He enjoys spending as much time as possible outside of America in places where short-haired women are viewed as social outcasts rather than strong and independent.

Up until a couple of years ago, my basic understanding of human sexuality was roughly as follows: there are men, and there are women. A person’s sexual orientation could be defined as one of heterosexual (being sexually attracted to the opposite gender), homosexual (being sexually attracted to others of the same gender) or bisexual (being sexually attracted to both genders).

Recently, however, I’ve been coming across a plethora of new terms in mainstream cultural commentary that purportedly seek to describe other sexual orientations. I quickly found myself coming across such terms as “pan,” “demi,” and even “homoflexible,” wondering what the hell they all mean.

Even the dating app OKCupid has recently broadened the options on gender and sexuality its users can display in their profiles. What was LGBT has now expanded even further, with seemingly new sexual orientations materializing out of thin air on the regular. I’ve written the following “Idiot’s Guide” to help my fellow men avoid the same confusion I’ve suffered in making sense of this new alphabet soup of sexual orientations.

But first, a disclaimer:

You’ll notice that I’ve titled the article as a guide to new “western” sexual orientations. That’s because one would be incredibly hard pressed to find terms like “asexual” or “sapiosexual” being used in any non-western context. In fact, I can’t recall ever even seeing one instance of a woman on a Russian, Ukrainian, Asian or Latin American dating site ever mentioning she identified with one of these new-age, alternate sexual orientations.

Interestingly, the usage of these new sexual orientation terms seems to be primarily restricted to the discourse of two basic areas of the internet:

1. Articles by SJWs and feminists on known manosphere-hating sites (e.g. Jezebel).

2. The social media and dating profiles of young middle and upper-middle class white women.

The definitions and examples I’ll provide below are more relevant to understanding these terms as used in area “b,” but nonetheless will provide clarity in other contexts also. Okay, let’s begin:

1. Pansexual
Definition: sexual attraction to all sexes and gender identities.

Famous Alleged Pansexuals: Madonna, Lady Gaga.

More Accurate Description: Bisexual. Proponents of pansexuality claim that it differs from bisexuality in that it is gender blind, so allegedly pansexuals wouldn’t know a cock from a vagina if it slapped them in the face. The queer “movement,” however, claims both pansexuality and bisexuality can mean attraction to not just the male and female gender, but any gender (whatever those others are). So, they’re essentially the same.


4. Demisexual
Definition: sexual attraction to another person contingent upon deep emotional and romantic connection.

More Accurate Description: Women who are approaching the end of easy riding on the cock carousel and desperately want to lock down a good man before the wall or have the “baby rabies.”

With these in mind, a demisexual woman has resolved to restrict future access to her worn-out pussy to only those who want a deep, romantic connection (read: beta-provider LTR) with her. This is, of course, until she meets the next alpha who suits her fancy and is good for a quick one-nighter.

5. Asexual
Definition: is not sexually attracted to anyone; doesn’t have sexual feelings.

More Accurate Description: A woman who has allegedly never experienced sexual feelings yet signed up for a dating site and posted several extremely slutty, suggestive photos under the guise of “trying this out” or “just to make new friends”.

All indications indicate this woman has had multiple previous sexual encounters (including gangbangs), but is using the “asexual” label to discourage messages from thirsty betas who will pass over her profile because “she’s asexual”.

Conclusion
What’s common among each of these supposed new sexual orientations is that we already have a term that has long-described almost exactly the same kind of sexual attraction. This raises an important question: why are people classifying their sexual orientation under new, buzzword banners when there’s already a well-understood term that describes it precisely?

The answer lies in the attention-whoring tendencies of the two groups – a and b – that use these terms the most. To be merely bisexual isn’t counter-mainstream enough anymore and calling oneself that doesn’t get the same kind of attention it once did, when few people identified as this. Therefore, to feed the egos of members of these two groups, new terms for already-existing sexual orientations had to be conjured up to maintain a fresh supply of new attention and coverage.

They’re new labels for the same sort of old sexual behaviour. The next time you see an American woman who is calling herself sapiosexual, heteroflexible, or whatever new term is invented next month to describe long-standing sexual behavior, the most prudent option is to ignore it completely, as a shit test, and game on as you usually would.

These new sexual orientations are, for the most part, nothing more than a cry for attention. They win if we if give it to them.

Edgar Tru #sexist #fundie #wingnut returnofkings.com

2 SIGNS TO IDENTIFY A LIBERAL IN DISGUISE


What is a liberal? What is a conservative? Many will have different words to describe these terms, and often conflating them with Democrat or Republican.

A conservative does not have to be part of the Republican Party. A conservative does not have to be a wardog. A conservative could be a socialist on a nationalist level. Many have this mainstream idea about what a liberal and conservative are. And many in the political arena fly under the conservative banner when, in reality, they are an adversary to the very foundation of conservatism. Perhaps not today, or next year. But sooner or later, their adherence to liberalism will craft a political and cultural snowball effect which shall be the death of their set society.

So, how does one identify a liberal in disguise, or in denial?

1. They Support Women’s Rights

I hold to the claim that allowing females to vote was a rotten call of judgement by men. And, to this day, there are ‘conservatives’ who support this decision. Personally, I find it anti-conservative and pro-liberal to allow women a vote. That doesn’t equate to hating them but rather recognizing they lack logic which, by their very nature, means they cannot vote in accordance with law and order, safety and security. It isn’t complex; unless, of course, you’re a female in which you may not possess the intellect to grasp the overall societal implications of such a manner.

Women like Ann Coulter or Faith Goldy are rare. A beautiful rarity, I might add. In truth, I’d vote for Faith Goldy for mayor of Toronto. I do not dwell there, but I’d support a female who is anti-immigration and pro-borders. I’d vote for Ann Coulter as US President. They both have more backbone than any contemporary limp-wrist Western man. But, again, they are rarities.

Conservatism has a foundation. It does not stray from tradition. In the Ancient World, men dominated and women submitted, or were put in their place if they were too disobedient. Any man, or woman, who supports women’s right to vote, in terms of political power, is liberal-minded. Beware of those prancing around right-winged circles who still hold to this delusional libertarian-esque mentality. They are not conservative in their hearts of hearts.

2. They Support Libertarianism

I’d be fine living in a libertarian society. How cool would that be? I get to live as I please and, as long as I don’t harm another, I am free to be myself. What a glamorous fantasy!

It is a fantasy. That’s not how the real world operates. If it did, I’d subscribe to that ideology. But human nature shall never allow it. In conveying that, it strikes me liberal as hell the one who dares advocate for such a society. They are not only defying human nature, but they are straying from conservatism by giving far too much freedom, on such an irresponsible level, to the citizens of that set society. Libertarianism, along with communism and anarchy, are all ludicrous because they stand on one similar basis: human beings can get along and play nicely.

Less government is, in my view, not the solution. I do not like it, but my observations direct me this way, in accordance with maintaining law and order. Some claim the solution to the system is… no system? Sorry but that’s childish, stupid and fucking foolish. It’s an immature, irrational worldview based on lunacy.

Imagine this: we’re all standing around and, just to our left, is an open door. Inside are the controls of all of society. The libertarian says we are all going to behave and no one is to enter that door because ‘freedom’ and ‘liberty’ are totally in fashion. Well, human nature will give way and, before the libertarian can finish their line of piffle, someone has already run inside that door, locked it, and is now boss.

Libertarians aren’t really that intelligent.

Beware: Dave Rubin Is A Progressive In Infancy

I personally do not have any qualms with Dave Rubin. He is one of the reasons I’ve found my way to conservatism. He began talking to a variety of different guests which, over time, led me to one character, then another until it networked toward the alternative right (or dissident right), etc. I could most likely get along just fine with the man. But he is liberal. And he is a progressive in infancy.

His ideas, if actually obtained on a societal level, would be fine. Live and let live. It’s a fantasy but, if manifested in reality, would be fine. The conundrum is human nature, along with the political and cultural snowball effect of liberalism and its ideals and political decisions made within a society. After women were allowed to vote, it led, many years later, to females on the frontlines of war weakening what is supposed to be the self-defense tool of a nation. After gay marriage, it shortly thereafter became bigoted to be against children transitioning into the opposite sex. There are political and cultural snowball effects to every decision if it strays from orthodoxy.

So, anyone prancing around as a conservative, and believes women should have the same opportunities as a man, are liberal. And, by extension, a progressive in infancy. They may themselves not turn progressive, but their adherences will trickle down to the latter generations allowing a gateway toward leftism.

People, such as Dave Rubin, are gateways into leftism. Not today, or even next year. But, in time, it will lead toward that direction.

Conclusion

We must have comrades if one desires survival over death. Not everyone who is liberal (in disguise or denial) is your adversary. Not for now, at least. But be aware of their worldview and adherences because, again, there is a very serious thing to understanding human nature and the political and cultural snowball effects of the liberal mindset.

It is not wise to constantly bicker at those who will, if civil unrest breaks out, ultimately land on your side. But, again, understanding the giveaways of the liberal mindset may very well be important in identifying a little problem in the many years to come.

Dawn Pine #fundie #sexist returnofkings.com

(Submitter’s Note: Follow-up to a previous quote:https://fstdt.com/7974GR8RGTKN4)

6 MORE TIPS ON RAISING YOUR DAUGHTERS ON THE RED PILL
(…)
My last article made some noise over at Roosh’s and ROK (with this as the original reference). So I thought, with one of the comments on Roosh’s site encouraging me, that another piece would be a good idea. So, let’s get started with more tips on raising your daughter…

1. Develop Critical Thinking
If you didn’t know it by now, kids are impressionable. Actually, adults are also impressionable and girls are probably the most. This is why game works. We all know that females are herd creatures. So how can one help “save” his daughter from becoming part of the herd?

By adopting critical thinking and embracing praxeology.

When I teach my daughters something about the nature of the world, I sometime tell them the following line: “Look and see if it is true by yourself”.

My favorite example – Debunking “female superiority.” Take this show for example – K.C. Undercover

Yes, a female genius that is also athletic and can play basketball. Oh, and she is 16. Her brother is a nerd, and her parents don’t acknowledge him. Not to mention that they are blacks (and white folks are usually evil). So with all that BS on screen, what can a father do?

Use critical thinking.

“Girls, do you think that a 16 year old can actually be that good in everything?” They tend to agree with me. “She is good at playing basketball on the show” they tell me. I’ve been waiting for that. “I use to play division 1 in high school, and was also pro, for some time. I was a straight-A student also. Do you think I would have time to be an undercover spy?”

They get the point.

Use this tactic as often as possible, and you got yourself a critical thinker in the family. This means that she will not follow the herd that easily and will stick to what she knows. Hopefully, if you have been there and done the right thing, it will be traditional views on gender relations and your view of how the world works.

Which brings me to the almost “opposite”…

2. Encourage traditional gender roles
“Dad, it looks like guys have all the fun” You may sometime hear them say. This is where you need to make your frame their frame. Otherwise you might get a critical thinker who believes that being a tomboy is better than being a girl. Next step may be feminism.

This is where you work on their femininity, give meaning and show.
[Picture of a Nuclear Family
transcript: Traditional Sex Roles Week #BackToTheKitchen]

“Do you like being injured?” I ask. “No!” they are appalled, “Dad, why do you want us to get injured?” “I didn’t say that. I asked if you like being injured. You know that boys get injured more than girls. Also boys go to wars to defend us. Do you want to go to war?”

With this dialog one can see how you make being masculine, for a girl, less appealing.

Make sure to be there and show them the actual hardship of being a man. This is where feminists lack – they envy our rewards but don’t want to share the burden. Also remember to encourage the female experience.
[…]
5. Teach them to regulate their emotions
From my experience, and what the red pill teaches us – women are primarily driven by their emotions. Women of the past, by choice or by necessity, knew how to regulate their emotions better and were not all about her feelings.

Quoting Roosh:
“…what she thinks of as morality is actually built upon her feelings. When faced with any type of stress, she will almost always follow the herd or make the wrong decision”

Part of helping your daughter to grow is explaining and exercising her in recognizing her emotions. When my elder has a “hormone serge” I explain (afterwards) about it. Those episodes still happen, but one can help his daughter to regulate it (to some extent).

Work on it regularly. Teach them to harness their emotions for good, and not to turn it against themselves (I use the TV as examples for it, but one may use books and other people around). A girl who can, to some extent, regulate her emotions will be a great wife and mother.

6. Tell her what you expect from her
So natural, yet so overlooked by, well, most of the people.

I heard moms and dads saying stuff like: “Well, it is up to her.” I almost cringe hearing this. This is being lazy, and not putting the right emphasis on the right things in life. I don’t intend to tell my daughters what occupation to choose, but I am going to tell them how to live their life.

This is done by stories (with morals), and sometimes actually telling them what I expect.

[…]
Conclusions
This is my second article on the subject (here is the first). I assume that this one will be less controversial. This is my lessons learned from my red pill parent journey of so far. The more I look at it, it just seems a lot like daughters were raised a few decades ago, but with a new flavor.

I want to emphasize again – this does mean I get everything right. However, working by those tips will increase the likelihood of my daughters being better suited for the world, and for growing up. This is part of my legacy.

Tuthmosis Sonofra #fundie #sexist returnofkings.com

7 Traits of the Male Feminist


Tuthmosis Sonofra
Tuthmosis is a Columnist-at-Large at Return of Kings. His work has been covered by major media outlets such as The Huffington Post, Cosmopolitan, Vice Magazine, The Daily Mail, and Yahoo Shine. He's also been profiled by BuzzFeed and The New Statesman. You can follow him on Twitter.

The only reason radical feminism has managed to achieve such an influential and mainstream position in Western society is through the vital reinforcements provided by turn-coat gender traitors who willfully cannibalize other men to please their female overlords. This is the male feminist. These are men whose entire personas are predicated on keeping others from offending their female bosses. They shame natural male behavior and spread the intellectualized delusion that are today’s feminist talking-points. They publicly self-castrate, lying to themselves and others about their own sexual impulses and imperatives.

The great irony—and secret—is that they have the same ends as guys who learn game: to get the women into the sack (loath as they may be to admit it), except they do it by trying to curry their favor through obsequious groveling.


1. Lispy, effete voice.
There’s good science that shows that today’s men are being exposed to greater quantities of female hormones. Among the causes is a contaminated water supply with trace amounts of birth-control compounds from women’s urine. The mass consumption of soy products—a natural source of estrogen—is another likely culprit. Whatever the origins, there is an epidemic of ostensibly heterosexual men with “gay voice,” none more clearly than the male feminist, who deliberately takes the bass and manly tone out of his voice so as to not offend.

2. Condescending, snarky girl-tone and eye-rolling.
Added to the character of his voice is a patronizing, dismissive tone (often with “upspeak” and vocal fry) common with obnoxious teenage girls and a certain cross-section of (actual) gay men. Rather than disagree with an argument on its merits, they sigh through it like Al Gore at a presidential debate. To make matters worse, he artificially laces his speech with profanity, which rather than toughness, comes off like a moody girl cussing at her boyfriend.

3. Slovenly appearance, featuring a vegan-style beard.
The uniform of the male feminist is a non-threatening cocktail of emasculating hipster-wear, with an unkempt beard—the badge of today’s weak guy—and anything else that makes it patently obvious he never hits the gym and poses no danger whatsoever to anything.

4. Parrots word salad of incoherent feminist talking points.
The male feminist repeats all of the made-up jargon of the hysterical feminist (science fiction-sounding utterances like “cis-gender” and “sex-positive”). They also participate in the misappropriation and abuse of once-sound, useful English-language words like “consent,” “patriarchy,” and “privilege.”

5. Rape alarmist.
Like any lock-step feminist, the male feminist drops the Rape Card several times in any discussion, irrespective of subject. Like the word “smurf” in the 80s cartoon, the word “rape” is slowly being eroded of meaning by its catch-all use for anything and everything. The goal of this repeated invocation is to further whip up an exaggerated hysteria around rape, make everyone believe there’s a rapist on every corner, and make it sound like everyone’s whispering “rape jokes” when women aren’t looking. I can count on one hand how many rape jokes I’ve heard in my entire life, and still have enough fingers left over to stimulate the clitoris of a pixie cut-wearing, female-bodied individual.

6. Enabling feminist hysteria by providing excuses for bigoted behavior and by demanding that others also walk on egg shells.

According to this guy—and all feminists—it’s okay to be permanently scared of men if you’ve ever been victimized by them, however real or imagined that victimization may have been. By this rationale, I can permanently remain “apprehensive” and “have fear” of black people “as a category” because I was once robbed, at gun point, by a black guy. Furthermore, he excuses feminist hate-speech as simple “making-fun-of-you” not to be taken seriously, while simultaneously labeling anything said by the opposing side as 100-percent-serious hate-speech.

7. False veneer of intellectualism and academic grounding.
To lend some kind of legitimacy to his specious, problematic logic, he cites oblique academic-sounding references in a poorly constructed straw-man argument about what “men’s rights advocates” use to prove the existence of misandry. He engages in the typically feminist mental acrobatics that—when it’s all said and done—have turned night into day, made up into down, and rendered men into women.

Like any outsider-turned-convert to a religion, the male feminist is always more radical—and dangerous—to the non-believer. If, like many men, you have the misfortune to have to be around them, tread carefully. Always looking to prove his loyalty, the male feminist will do everything in his power to cut down a confident, masculine man—fabricating stories, running to the authorities, and anything else to throw you under bus—all to (hopefully) score a few points with his female overlords.

Moshe Kelstein #crackpot #fundie #sexist returnofkings.com

(Submitter’s Note: A lot more quackery is omitted for the sake of brevity.)

A Scientific Review of RoK’s Community Beliefs.

Moshe Kelstein
Moshe is a man on a mission. A mission to defeat degeneracy once and for all!


I discovered Return of Kings on Facebook when an acquaintance shared the community beliefs (http://www.returnofkings.com/about) on her profile. She was mocking them, as if these beliefs had no value. I commented that these beliefs were empirically supported or derived from empirically supported principles.

An army of offended females and betas was unleashed upon me. I wasn’t hoping for much from the girls, but I could only feel sad to see that many guys were naively supporting them.

Going to the research

I realized that most people have no first-hand contact with scientific knowledge. Literature on our community beliefs is not only existent, but extensive. I decided to use my academic knowledge to give support to the ROK community.

Many of the authors you will read about here are some of the most famous academics in behavioral sciences (Google scholar citations: Baron-Cohen[https://scholar.google.nl/citations?user=4GAQ-RUAAAAJ&hl=en]: 96 020, Buss[https://scholar.google.nl/citations?user=wrmnCfsAAAAJ&hl=en]: 39 524, Baumeister[https://scholar.google.nl/citations?user=ShSEUuoAAAAJ&hl=en]: 87 528). I do not claim that these summaries and articles will help you in arguments. We live in some sort of ochlocracy where we risk intimidation by hordes of angry women or betas if we hold beliefs congruent with scientific evidence. I remember a feminist saying something along the lines of: ”Nothing like good old scientific facts to justify your sexism.”

This research is usually not spread too much, especially in undergraduate programs, but really informative. Let us now examine what science has to say about each point in our community beliefs list.

2. Men will opt out of monogamy and reproduction if there are no incentives to engage in them

The psychological literature refers to this concept as Sexual Economics[http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15582858], when referring to the investment that a male is ready to make in order to ”buy” a woman’s sexuality. Women sell sex, and men buy it. This investment varies between cultures and periods.

There was a time when years of courtship and long term financial investment were necessary to obtain sex from a woman. Not anymore. The invention of contraception multiplied the offer of sex tenfold. Women together manage the worth of sexual acts, and it might explain why women despise prostitution and pornography, and slut-shame each other. An average girl who asks a price that is too high for the sexual economy will not find a buyer.

If a woman’s sexuality has been offered a lot, the value of the offer will decrease. This means that a woman’s sexuality is non-renewable. Women will try to protect their sexual reputation and to make others believe that their sexuality is exclusive.

3. Past traditions and rituals that evolved alongside humanity served a clear benefit to the family unit

Until the latest decades, culture was a tool for the genes to be passed on. The maturation of humans is extremely long compared to many other species, which shows the importance of upbringing and learning the norms of a social group. Most traditional sex roles can be seen as a way to assess the best mates among men and women.

Men would benefit the gene pool by passing genes with agentic traits to lead the group to higher goals, whereas women displayed feminine qualities to display nurturing qualities to attractive males. The opposite was inconceivable because men outperform females in literally any sort of competition, and women are better at nurturing children and showing empathy[http://cogsci.bme.hu/~ivady/bscs/read/bc.pdf]. Naturally, the most successful male picked the most attractive female and both offered the finances and care a child needed. It was beneficial to the family unit, which was in turn beneficial to the continuity of the society.

Now, people are mysteriously invested in the mission of destroying gender roles, cheer on parents who crossdress their children and encourage companies to advertise toy trucks with girls. Everyone wants to eliminate gender roles but no one really knows why. Meanwhile, masculine men are still more desirable[http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1087598/] and successful and feminine women more attractive [http://www.robertburriss.com/pdfs/burriss_11_paid.pdf] (although this relationship is a little more complicated). Women’s self-rated attractiveness[http://alittlelab.stir.ac.uk/pubs/Vukovic_08_selfrate_att_voices_PID.pdf] is strongly linked to attraction to masculine faces[http://alittlelab.stir.ac.uk/pubs/DeBruine_10_faceconfounds_JEPHPP.pdf], and prefer vocal masculinity. Denying these preferences will only prevent you from getting laid. Even though we are waging war against gender roles, women still apply them when choosing mates. (Interestingly, there is a negative relationship between physical self-evaluation and the number of sexual partners[http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/016230959390015A] in women.)

4. Testosterone is the biological cause for masculinity. Environmental changes that reduce the hormone’s concentration in men causes them to be weaker and more feminine.

Testosterone masculinizes both behavior and physical appearance, as stated above, and lack thereof feminizes them. However these environmental forces obviously refer to something of which I have no awareness of. Didn’t they fix the problems with plastic feeding bottles already? Or do you call ”environmental change” the emasculation of teenage boys in cathedral choirs until about a hundred years?


6. Elimination of traditional sex roles and the promotion of unlimited mating choice in women unleashes their promiscuity and other negative behaviors that block family formation.

The chances of fertilization are higher in one-night stands, and men’s sperm count is higher when they are away from their long-term partner for a while. The human penis might have been shaped to remove competitor’s sperm [http://www.epjournal.net/wp-content/uploads/ep021223.pdf] out of the vagina. Women experience more orgasms with masculine [http://www.putslab.psu.edu/pdfs/Puts%20et%20al%202012%20Evol%20Hum%20Behav.pdf] and attractive men, who have qualities sought for short term mating. Many benefits exist to short-term matings for women, such as resources, mate switching or manipulation.

All of these examples suggest that women did not evolve a preference for monogamous, long-term relationships. Click here [https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/sexual-personalities/201501/women-want-short-term-mates-too] for evidence that women are designed for short-term mating.


7. Socialism, feminism, cultural Marxism, and social justice warriorism aim to destroy the family unit, decrease the fertility rate, and impoverish the state through large welfare entitlements.

Complying with feminist demands is as close as a society can get to cultural and ethnic suicide. Historically, intrasexual (male) competition always benefited the group. The feminist sentiment rose to power when outcomes were not shared with the the whole group, and rich people would get rich at the expense of others without paying taxes.

Women, depending on a single provider, began experiencing the variable outcomes that men have gone through for thousands of generations. That is why they support financial entitlement measures. The benefits they could get out of their sexuality became as variable as men’s outcomes. Now, they can have the best genes by engaging in short-term mating, and their basic needs paid for by millions of anonymous working men.

Later they will fight for their right not to be judged on their sexual past, and when they will realize the hardships of a working life or just get bored and have children, they will get support from the state. Men are backing them up in every step of the way.

Cultural marxism is the greatest ideological battle of the Western world at the moment. We are paying people to fight against manspreading, or funding university research that operationalizes sexism with agreement to items like ”Women, compared to men, tend to have a superior moral sensibility.”[http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Peter_Glick/publication/232586301_Ambivalent_sexism/links/02e7e52e69acf151c8000000.pdf]

Few academic researchers would support prescriptive conclusions based on their research, even though we can use their results to justify our beliefs. Even David Buss, who studies sex differences and evolutionary psychology, calls himself a feminist and does not see sex differences and feminism as incompatible.[http://www.bradley.edu/dotAsset/196924.pdf]

I don’t think anyone who believes in any form of biological determinism is compatible with the blank-slate perspective of SJWism. We don’t have popular support, but we have plenty of scientific evidence backing us up.

Bruno Buscaroli #fundie #homophobia #sexist #racist #wingnut returnofkings.com

TODAY’S CONSERVATIVE HAS BECOME YESTERDAY’S LIBERAL

Bruno is a young man who used to dismiss red pillers as alarmists. Then he spent a semester in a college campus and became one himself. Now he educates himself through the internet and a library card.

With Donald Trump as president of the United States, it would seem as though traditional beliefs are making a comeback in the West. However, one only needs talk to the average ‘’conservative’’ for a while to realize they’re not as conservative as they think they are. Rather, they’ve accepted and integrated many leftist beliefs into their own worldview. They’ve become nothing more than yesterday’s liberals, and now defend ideas against which their predecessors used to fight. Let’s briefly look at a few examples:

Homosexuality
[Picture of Trump Holding the LGBTQ+ Rainbow Flag]
[caption: He’s cool with them]
The very idea of homosexuality used to be socially abhorrent during the early 20th century in the West. If you look at conservative politicians now, however, you’ll find they’re pretty okay with having gays around. We’ve reached a point where modern Western culture has become universally acceptant of homosexuals.

Donald Trump, for instance, ensured he’d do everything in his power to protect LGBTQ citizens from hateful ideologies (might have earned him more voters, but you get the point). Even allowing gays to get married is accepted among conservatives nowadays, and suggesting that it might be a bad idea gets you funny looks at best.

Women in the workplace
[Picture of Women in suits working at a computer]

Encouraging women to study and pursue long term careers damages the family structure by discouraging traditional gender roles. If women are busy working, they can’t focus on being good wives and mothers. Not only that, but it may even cause them to forgo marriage and kids completely.

Despite this, you’ll find almost no one on the mainstream right suggesting women should focus on the home. They believe that doing so would ‘’invite misogyny and sexism’’ or get them compared to ‘’crazy far righters’’. Denial of biological truths does society no favors. The longer the average citizen believes men and women to have the same roles in a family, the more damage will be done.

Sexual marketplace
[Picture of a Half-Naked Man kissing a Half-Naked Woman’s back]

Regulation of the sexual marketplace in the form of marriage and female chastity has long been central to the formation of healthy families in western societies. Without a strong and stable family unit, maintaining civilization becomes impossible. Since promiscuity is the opposite of chastity and monogamy, it naturally runs against family stability.

Characters like James Bond are looked up to as symbols of masculinity and role models for traditional men. While men should aspire to emulate his strong nature and character, emulating his love of casual sex is damaging to society in the long run. Sure, quick and easy sex can be real fun, but let’s not forget sexual liberation is inherently leftist and has done nothing but damage civilization.

Denying the importance of race
[Picture of an Anti-racist Protest]

Often seen as the most taboo of subjects, race gets ignored as much as possible by the mainstream right wing. Science tells us that human ethnic groups have genetic differences, ranging from physical strength to IQ levels. But to even speak about those differences in public is to invite an endless parade of comparisons to Hitler, so conservatives dodge the issue.

Instead, they often preach about civic nationalism, the idea of a nation being more based on its identity than it’s ethnicity. They say that as long as immigrants accept American values of Democracy and hard work, their ethnicity doesn’t matter. Sounds nice in theory, but a nation can’t survive once it’s demographic has been replaced.

You can’t win by defending alone
Conservatives nowadays don’t seem to know what it is they’re conserving. Their claims of standing for a traditional society feel empty when they also advocate for gender and marriage equality. As the culture war against leftists progressed, they slowly lost ground on almost every front. And as their image became demonized by the media, they conceded even further to try and appeal a bit more to the masses. After all, if the general public is okay with two men marrying, it’d make them the bad guys to say there’s something wrong with that.

Fear of being stigmatized makes them unable to push back, so they inevitably become weaker as time goes on. Even worse, the children of conservatives who were born into a watered down version of it don’t even realize it. A cycle forms then, in which the next generation is always more liberal than the next.

Mainstream Conservatives cannot reverse civilization’s decay, only delay it. Movements like Neo-Masculinity, the Alt Right and Alt Christianity lack the presence and member count of Conservatives, but are all better alternatives. Unlike the mainstream right, the dissident right isn’t afraid to push back against leftist narrative. One cannot win by defending alone. No matter how strong a castle’s walls, the stones that form it will crumble if it’s attackers aren’t stopped.

Conservatives are already thinking in the right direction, but haven’t fully taken the red pill. If the West is to survive, it’s imperative that we help these people fully wake up. They’re halfway there already, so hopefully they just need a few more nudges.

Hesse Kassel #fundie #sexist returnofkings.com

10 THINGS YOU MUST TEACH YOUR FUTURE DAUGHTER
[…]
Hesse Kassel is an Australian economist. He stopped chasing money and chased women and made children instead. He blogs right here[http://gametobreed.com/]

Once a man can see and deal with the bad side of modern girls himself, the next question is obvious. How does he prevent or limit the infestation in his own family? How does he produce the better kind of daughters that are now so tragically rare?

The first thing to realize is that remaining silent and hoping things will work out is really just surrender. Perhaps there was a time in the past when most of the messages your daughter received in the outside world would have been positive and things might have worked themselves out. That is certainly not true today.

Your daughter’s information will come from school, external childcare, TV, computer time, time with friends, time with other family members, homework, books and songs. Most likely every one of those channels will be jammed full of negative messages. That’s one of the reasons there are so many girls around who are tattooed, pierced, overweight, childless, slutty office drones.

Luckily there are lots of things a man can do to help steer his daughters in the right direction. One of those is simply to talk about better, clean, and appropriate ambitions for girls. But this is not easy to do. It’s ineffective to simply bring up the topic for a serious talk out of the blue. The best way is to wait for an example or opportunity to present itself, then just hang a comment about it out there for her to hear.

It’s a bullseye if she picks it up, responds, and makes herself receptive to follow up, but don’t try to force it. Here are ten which I find effective at presenting positive, family-oriented ideas to girls and which can be endlessly repeated while retaining their impact.

1. No girl can be happy until she is a mother
[Picture of a woman holding a toddler]
[caption: happier in the office?]
The beauty of this statement is that it’s of wide application and so easy to justify. After all, what girl doesn’t have or observe situations where she or another girl is unhappy with something in her present life? Every time school, or friends, or work are hard for a girl, just imply that her dissatisfaction will be healed when she is a successful, happy mother.

2. Why would a man want to spend his life with a bad woman?
[picture of a teenage girl raising her middle finger, caption: Perfect a good time, not for a lifetime]

Every girl naturally wants to be loved and treasured by a high-value man for her whole life. Even the most dreadful feminists generally conceal that as their secret aim. So every time a disgusting troll heaves herself into view, shows her dreadful personality or displays a horrible bit of decoration, point out the offense. It can be kind of fun to notice and describe what doesn’t make a man want to spend his life with a girl. It’s also very effective for teaching young girls about what is a good idea and what is not.

Occasionally it will even lead to an opportunity to say something about the difference between the short term interest a man might show for the troll and the better, longer term kind he shows for the better girls.

3. Girls are better than boys at looking after families
[picture of a scantily-clad woman wiping the floor. caption: No man could make a kitchen look this good]

Be sparing in trying to tell a girl that she just doesn’t have physical ability, temperament, or time off from being a mother to be a SAS commando, astronaut, or fire fighter. It’s an uphill struggle and may end up encouraging her to trust the legions of people who will tell her she can and should do anything a boy does.

Instead, flip the problem over and spend time praising the things she can do better than boys. She will love to hear all about it.

4. Some things are just for boys
[picture of a young girl (~5) playing with a construction truck toy]

Wait until she is failing or resenting being made to act like a boy. When she really, really wants to hear that she doesn’t have to, just casually mention that it is for boys anyway. She will jump at the chance to do something more feminine and love it.

5. It’s sad to see so many girls wasting their lives on study and work
[Picture of a woman at the computer. Caption: Caution! Wall ahead]

Beating men at the job of being men is now the favored “role model” for our society to present to girls. Never tire of pointing out what a waste of a girl’s life that is.

6. It’s good to have a big family
[Picture of a family photo with dozens of people]

Nearly every message she receives from the outside world, even from other relatives, will state or imply that fewer or no children is better. She will be encouraged over and over again to use contraceptives and even abortion. People will try to scare her into thinking she needs to be impossibly rich before she can afford to be a mother. People will ridicule large families as failures, trailer trash, and welfare queens.

Give her some opportunity to hear a positive word about having children.

7. We don’t do that in our family
[picture of a woman with a shirt saying “all about that cock”. caption: None of that around here, thank you]

Appeals to identity are powerful means for persuasion. Does it make sense? Not really. Does it work? Absolutely. Just keep mentioning the fact that our family and by implication she is too good to fall into whatever form of degeneracy is in view.

8. What we need is ladylike behavior at all times
[picture of the victorian painting “Tristan and Isolde”, depicting an arthurian knight sitting with a regal woman]

Ladylike is a good word to connect to positive femininity. It hasn’t suffered from being redefined by leftists much, everyone seems to understand what it means in a positive way, and a father can be fairly sure he will have the word to himself. The fact that it’s a bit out of fashion and consequently means much the same thing it did in the past is a huge advantage.

9. Being a mother is the most important job for a girl
[Picture of a woman in gym wear holding a baby]

Another good answer to the assumption that the study and areer track is the meaning of life is to simply state that there is another, more important job for each and every girl.

10. A girl needs to start her family as soon as possible
The rest of the world will try to trick your daughter into wasting the best years of her reproductive life on an arts degree followed by a pointless career and endless fiddling with iPhones. At best there might be some vague concession to the idea of forming a family and having children “someday.” Be sure that at least one man tells her how stupid that life plan is and encourages her to take a better path.

Men must not be silent
[picture from the ‘Slutwalk’ event]

As fathers we have great influence over our daughters and sons. Children are desperate to learn how to live and to have their behavior approved of by parents. It’s not an automatic process, though—too many men allow themselves to default into silence and surrender that influence. Don’t.

Your daughter’s future depends on it.

Jon Anthony #sexist #fundie returnofkings.com

HOW THE SEXUAL DYNAMICS OF A COLLAPSING COUNTRY BECOME DEGRADED

Jon Anthony is a world renowned dating coach and the founder of Masculine Development, a blog for masculine men. He enjoys writing about workout supplements like SARMs (such as Ostarine and RAD 140), powerful nootropics (such as Modafinil) and is known for his triggering article on How to Fuck A Girl Properly. You can follow him on Twitter.


In order for a nation to survive, two critical emotions must be controlled. Contrary to popular belief, these emotions are not fear and greed—although these are very important to control, as well. Rather, it’s masculine aggression and feminine vanity that must be controlled…and we are doing a terrible job at this.

Unfortunately, over the past 70 years, we’ve seen sex roles and gender dynamics completely turned on their heads. Rather than men and women working together to create better relationships, more functional families, and more powerful countries, we’ve been pit against one another by toxic ideologies and ruthless demagogues.

It is not enough to simply know what is happening, however—we must know precisely how it’s happening, step by step, and more importantly, WHY it’s happening. In this article, I will explore why our society has gone so downhill so fast, and potential solutions we can integrate to remedy it (if we can save it, at all).

The Two Forces
[Picture of a Woman posing in a Mirror]

As I said previously, there are two very delicate forces which must constantly be counter-balancing one another, and anytime they grow unbalanced, there will be chaos. These two forces are, of course, masculine aggression and feminine vanity. Too much masculine aggression, and a country becomes war-torn, unable to run itself or stay stable long enough to produce any sort of civilization (think the Middle East).

Too much feminine vanity, however, and the opposite occurs. Men become reclusive, because women become far too difficult to deal with. This is why we’ve seen the rise of the sigma male over the past 20 years—men who refuse to attach themselves to any sort of social hierarchy. They’re not alpha, beta, or omega. They just do as they do, without adhering to any sort of social group or workplace hierarchy.

As feminine vanity grows excessive, female hypergamy is given reign to run loose. Rather than men and women developing healthy relationships with one another, women become so conceited that they refuse to “settle” for anyone less than an alpha male Chad Thundercock, and thus we have a surplus of angry, bitter women who hit the wall at 30 and end up childless and alone.

It’s so obvious that it should go without saying, that we are currently in a serious imbalance. For far too long, masculine aggression has been hampered and stomped down by our effeminate school system, our brainwashing devices (aka TV’s), and our mass media control system. All the while, these things have encouraged women to do as they please, without any consequences or thought of their actions on a larger, societal scale.

Restoring the Balance
[Screenshot from 300]

Balance will be restored, one way or another. There are only two ways for this imbalance to possibly be restored, and most men here will acknowledge, at least implicitly, that this is the case:

1. Men in OTHER COUNTRIES restore the balance (by coming here en masse)
2. Men in THIS COUNTRY restore the balance (by not being pussies)
Those are the only two options. There is no third option, where women somehow magically stop giving men 500,000 shit tests a day and step down to become good, faithful girlfriends, wives, and mothers. This will not happen. When a society reaches this critical imbalance, only one of two things can happen.

Of course, we all know what the elites (oy vey!) are pushing for. They want to bring millions of aggressive, young, fighting-age men to this country, to supposedly help combat “population decline.” We all know that this is complete horse shit, and that their true motive is to destroy America.

Even so, with the full force of the elites raining down upon us, there is hope. Over the past two years, we’ve seen more masculine energy emerge and come to the front of our socio-political battlegrounds than arguably any other time in history. For the first time in the past 70 years, men are reclaiming their manhood.

Let me reiterate that this is the only option. There is no magical world where everything just works out great, where we have millions of violent, aggressive 20-something-year-old men come into this country, and we retain our values as an Anglo-Saxon country. No. This will not happen. We either get our acts together, collectively, as men, or we watch our nation burn.

[…]
The Alternative
[Screenshot of the 2-minute hate from the 1984 movie]

If we do not successfully reclaim the balance of masculine aggression and feminine vanity in this country, all will be lost, and we will be forced to either live through hell, or leave our homelands. Here’s what to expect over the next decade or so, if a social justice warrior is elected President in 2020, and we lose the culture wars:

Increasing surveillance over the internet
More thought crime policies instituted into law
The figurative castration of men all across the country
Eventual race wars, or religious wars, spurred on primarily by Islamic migrants
This is non-negotiable. If we lose the culture wars to SJW’s over the next several years, we will begin to see lobbying to shut down any and all manosphere websites dedicated to spreading the truth. We have already seen PayPal, YouTube, Amazon, Facebook, Twitter, and Google begin to censor people like Roosh, Alex Jones, Donald Trump, and other conservative/red pilled speakers. We cannot afford to stand this any longer.

If we lose these mediums to the globalists, they will easily gain the support of the public to institute thought crime policies into our legal system. You have a book by Bronze Age Pervert, that Amazon can track from your order history? NAZI SCUM! You’re going to prison. It doesn’t matter that you didn’t actually hurt anyone in any way shape or form, because you had an opinion that the globalists dislike.

As this begins to happen, men will self-imprison all over the nation. Some will fight, of course, and maybe win (if we’re lucky). Others will leave and attempt to gain citizenship in more male-friendly countries such as Denmark, Austria, and Poland. The rest will be forced to hang their heads in perpetual shame.

Eventually, as the population of third world migrants explodes, and tribalism is exacerbated by the polarizing media, we will begin to see rampant terrorist attacks, which are already happening in Germany, The UK, and other nations around the cucked European Union. Inevitably, this will end in a civil war.

It’s Our Choice

I have presented to you the only two choices that we have, and to me, the decision is quite simple. We can either sit around passively, and squabble amongst ourselves over stupid theories and philosophies, or we can take action to better ourselves and improve the stance of our nation.

The choice is clear to me. We either succumb to globalist propaganda, see the death of masculinity in the West, and see freedom of speech die as it is destined to do, or we fight back and create a better future. Some may say this is melodramatic. I would say that a mere cursory glance at history will prove otherwise.

Roosh V #fundie #wingnut returnofkings.com

CONSERVATIVES ARE LOSERS

The following article was originally published on Roosh V.

For the world to get to how it is today, with the nearly complete elimination of tradition in favor of a globohomo world where diddling little children is becoming normalized, conservatives have had to lose every meaningful cultural war in the history of man. When someone declares themselves a conservative, they’re in fact stating that they are a loser, someone who is meant to take the fall when the left comes attacking.

Conservatives have lost on every battlefront: free speech, the military, the universities, marriage, nuclear family, child education, the media, the government, Boy Scouts, business, law and justice, Christianity, patriarchy, immigration, the welfare state, and capitalism. The right to bear arms is the only battle they’re not losing in a rout, but I’m confident they will lose that too within a decade’s time. Conservative institutions are being infiltrated and subverted, or have disappeared off the face of the earth, and there is no sign of them ever coming back.

Why are conservatives such losers? Because they desire to merely hold the line while their enemy rushes at them full speed. They don’t want to conquer new lands, kill their enemy, or inflict real harm. They want to maintain the status quo while the left froths at the mouth to win, energized with momentum and passion. The left is so dissatisfied at the state of the world because of their deep-seated inner dysfunction that they put their entire being into trying to make it better. They don’t know how to enjoy their lives so they have to attack the lives of others.

Conservatives, on the other hand, have no momentum or passion. They just want to be left alone, which makes them easy pickings for a collective that is hellbent on achieving their nightmare utopia. In the end, conservatives are the Spartans in 300 who have trained their entire lives to lose the battle, even if they are pound-for-pound stronger than their enemy.

Conservatives have also shown to be comically susceptible to leftist ideas when it’s presented as “human rights.” Two decades ago, the vast majority of conservatives would have stood against gay marriage, but a few years of cheesy “love is love” commercials was all it took for them to change their mind. Their motto of “live and let live” is only reasonable to hold if their enemy believed the same. They give the crying baby its bottle and from that milk it gets fat and strong and decides to kill the entire family. Conservatives don’t understand that giving an inch to the left eventually results in absolute defeat. They have to psychotically refuse to give any ground, even if practical logic or fairness is staring them in the face, but we know they won’t do that.

Another problem conservatives face is technology, which is not agnostic but rather liberating. It allows man to rely less on traditions, family, social bonds, and religion, all things that the left hates. The more technology you have, the more you can be an atomized unit in a little urbanized box, reliant only on your service job and digital device to keep you alive and somewhat sane while using Uber and Lyft to travel in and out of your self-imposed quarantine zone. Because of technology, the conservatism of today is merely the liberalism of twenty years ago. I challenge you to find a single attractive “conservative” girl who hasn’t tried Tinder or engaged in abundant pre-marital sex. Look at the life of any self-professed conservative and odds are you’ll find a rather cosmopolitan existence that is far removed from nature and rural living.

The biggest reason why conservatives will continue to lose is that they’re still not ready to kill the left even though the left is ready to kill them. Liberals have been getting conservatives fired on a daily basis while suing their businesses out of existence while the conservative loser merely whines about it on Twitter. You may hate the left, but if you wouldn’t dare even punching them in the face because you fear losing your life of comfort, you will lose. If you’re not prepared to kill your enemy while your enemy is busy killing you, you will lose. It’s that simple. Some think that conservatives have to feel a sense of hopelessness to fight back, but by then there will be nothing left worth fighting for.

You don’t have to be a historian to know that conservatives will continue to lose. Simple take a look back 50, 100, or 500 years to see how much ground they’ve lost, and amplify that by a factor of ten thanks to technology if you want to imagine how much ground they will lose in the next 50, 100, or 500 years. They are such losers that if you see any sort of organized conservative “uprising” in the years to come, it will surely be a carefully managed scheme by the elites to usher in yet another monumental conservative defeat, just like we saw in the last few years with the alt right’s astonishing rise and then disastrous defeat in Charlottesville at the hands of their more capable enemies.

Since I know conservatives will not win, I do not identify as one, because I don’t see myself as a loser. I will stay under the radar and live with no label, and let the communists on the left defeat the losers on the right like they have been doing for centuries.

Wilfred Owen #fundie returnofkings.com

WHY IN YOUR OWN LIFE YOU SHOULD BE VERY OFFENSIVE

Wilfred Owen
Notices the lies told to this generation and writes about them.

The proper response to political correctness could be to go on living life as you see fit. Another option is to cave in, as many in this era do. “Go along to get along,” may simply appear as a necessary expedient when you are told to “pick your battles.”

That may seem innocuous, but the vile act of giving in to what is wrong is at the very heart of the figurative, accurate, and effective pejorative “cuckservative.” If you are a man, you don’t let your vital boundaries get crossed because when you do, you show the world that nothing is sacred to you. In the smallest of behaviors you show the world that when it comes down to it, even your wife is not sacred to you.

In this era, where free speech is aggressively under attack, the superior response to society attempting to silence others is to draw a line that is far beyond legitimate speech that affects you. There are plenty of opportunities in life where you draw a boundary so far from anywhere that matters.

The Mailman Doesn’t Enter the House, Ever

Your mailman or UPS guy drops off packages at the door. Not inside the door. It’s just an extra two feet, it’s not like he’s sitting down at your dinner table or climbing into bed, so what’s the difference? You set that wide boundary at the threshold of your home, no matter how heavy a package is.

You don’t want this guy in your private space because before you know it, this stranger may easily push the boundary a little farther and a little farther. One way to make sure that the mailman is never in bed with your wife is to make sure the mailman is never in the house. The door is the boundary of the home. The home is private. The government worker and the stranger alike are not invited into the home.

[…]
A Smart Man Doesn’t Depend On The Next Paycheck, Ever

You don’t need many years worth of savings and investments to live comfortably. As long as you have marketable skills, you could exist fine with very little saved. But it sure feels good to have a giant buffer protecting you from direly being in need of that next paycheck. One way to make sure you never live paycheck to paycheck is to make sure that you are many paychecks away from that horribly low bar.

The Free Speech Buffer

Free speech should be another boundary where we draw a large buffer.

[Blackface-like drawing of Serena Williams stomping angrily on her tennis racket while a referee asks the other player to let her win.]
[Caption: SERENA WILLIAMS CARICATURES MUST BE PROTECTED]

Because we didn’t successfully protect the rights of the deplorable to draw Muhammad caricatures, we are now fighting over whether any caricature artist will ever again be allowed to caricature any black woman.

How long before all cartoons of anyone on the left becomes forbidden? Before cartoons of any beloved figure adored by many becomes forbidden? Push back. Not only is Serena Williams allowed to be caricatured, so is Muhammad. In fact, the world is better off if artists caricature the two bullies being badly behaved together.

CHALLENGING THE OFFICIAL, THOUGHTLESS NARRATIVE ON THE HOLOCAUST MUST BE PROTECTED

If you don’t fight for that academic freedom, then you end up with a campus environment where even the well-evidenced and relatively tame Charles Murray can’t take a stage in a college. When you stand up for the most out in right field intellectual rigor, you stand up for the concept of intellectual rigor.

It brings greater truth, reason, and honesty. Those all make for a better world. Inviting intellectually rigorous debate makes the world a better place. Yes, that also means inviting intellectually rigorous debate on the Holocaust makes the world a better place.

[…]
“Deplatforming” and “Hate Crime” Push The Overton Window

Deplatforming is a legitimate behavior on the left. It’s currently being celebrated throughout the left as a victory against extremism.

The term “hate speech” is a legitimate distinction on the left. It’s merely an attempt to silence. To overpower a person with an opinion. There is no hate speech. There is only speech.

These are never legitimate distinctions between how you can interact with what adults. There is no hate speech, there are no hate crimes, there are no protected classes of adults. That must be the perspective. True to first principles: a human is a human.

Everyone who comes to an intellectual debate must be ready to take off the gloves and to get deep into the truth of the matter being discussed. In a debate, no one is free to be protected from the truths that arise in an intellectual debate no matter how offended they feel, not even if they cry or throw a tantrum. Laugh at them if they do, for they should be very embarrassed.

Marxist Wars On Freedom Are The True Hate Crime

The true hate crime is the promotion of neo-Marxism by social justice warriors. They seek to win debates by pulling apart the freedoms that the freedom fighters of the West, our intellectual forebearers have struggled for centuries to introduce to humanity.

Marxism turns good cultures into legalistic petty cultures that tend to behave culturewide in adulthood as if they’ve gone through an abusive upbringing. Marxism turns relative paradises on this planet into places of abject squalor. These are hate crimes.

Interestingly, the neo-Marxist social justice warriors overlook this fact and prefer to point to your hurtful words as the real hate crime. Don’t let them. They are the domestic terrorists who would repeat the failed Marxist experiment on this wonderful land.

Be A Free Speech Warrior
I request of you that as you go through life, you take the temperature of the place you are in and always seek to push the boundaries. To do so is alpha and feels good. Sometimes you fail, more often you succeed.

Just like pushing boundaries with a woman and weathering shit tests earns you rewards, pushing the free speech boundaries and passing the shit tests of those who would silence you will earn you rewards.

MAKE THE QUIP THAT MIGHT BE CONSIDERED OVER THE LINE.
Cross the line. Do it fearlessly. Do it boldly.

USE THE WORDS THAT MIGHT BE CONSIDERED OVER THE LINE.
You know what they are. Use them. All the words that you are told you can’t use. Use them. Use them with skill, for maximum effect. But use them. Don’t let anyone tell you otherwise.

SHARE THE OPINION THAT MIGHT BE CONSIDERED OVER THE LINE.
The best researched most effective thing you know how to present, present it. Present it in a way that no one can dispute it. If you’re not great at anything, present what you’re best at. Do it enough and you’ll get good at it.

Lawful Evil Award

If you want a picture of André du Pôle's vision of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face - forever.

André du Pôle #elitist #wingnut #psycho #sexist #fundie returnofkings.com

5 Essential Life Lessons From The Hindu Law Code Of Manu

Most ROK readers should find the idea of vocation intuitive. Women have purposes specific to their sex and should not attempt to steal or destroy manly places. However, the caste hierarchy and relative leveling of vocations may seem extraneous to American readers: the US were founded over the idea that neither a centralized Church nor a nobility should exist. Did not the Founding Fathers reject the caste system from the start? Indeed—but I am neither American nor conservative enough to put them on the same footing as sacred texts.

...

A hierarchy where manly men have authority over feminine women works well. Each one has a role fit to its nature and can realize one’s own purposes with the help of the other. An inverted, matriarchal hierarchy where women would rule, on the other hand, is dissatisfying: women would look like caricatures of men by being bossy, let their defects such as conformism and group-thinking tendency express, and turn men into slaves or short-term driven pleasure-seekers. None of the parts would be able to realize its better tendencies, such as loving and caring for women, or meeting with challenges for men.

Likewise, the four-caste hierarchy is the good or fairer one. A society following it and having proper individuals at each level would be the most harmonious one, even in poverty. When the regular order gets messed up, so does the whole society: Kshatriya pretending to spiritual authority start subordinating it to political interests, just as the Protestant princes of Europe did in the sixteenth century; Vaishya pretending to power end up commercializing everything, turning politics into a marketplace where lobbyists and sellouts abound. “Inferior” castes cannot help but bring their essential ethos with them no matter where they go or what they pretend to be.

The lesson, here, could be that modernity has been mostly synonymous with a “vaishya-ization” of society: universities have turned into an academic niche market, politics have become a market as well, and the process have been aggravated by women trying to play men—especially upper bourgeois women pretending to political power. Each “inferior” caste denythe “superior” ones their rights and prerogative have made the world poorer.

As for myself, I have no problem with the idea that some, even men, should not have the right to financial independence: libertarianism may work well among men of Mensa, but a 70-IQ people clearly need some paternalist management not to drown into their own stupidity.

“Even a capable Shudra must not accumulate wealth, for when a Shudra becomes wealthy, he harasses Brahmins.” (10.129) Some wealthy people fund seditious, divisive groups such as BLM, some who enjoy a small authority act like power-tripping small chiefs, some women get beta orbiters and management power— A fair hierarchy is not one with equal chances or opportunities to get promoted, but one where each one can reach his rightful place.
Conclusion

Alt-Right blogger Lawrence Murray contrasted Buddhism, which enjoys some cultural status and association with the upper classes in the West, with an “intensely alien Hinduism.” Practicing yoga, reciting a handful of mantra and mingling with other bourgeois bohemian while sipping fair trade green tea seems indeed easier than vindicating such a frankly non-modern order.

Modernity in general and the so-called American Dream in particular entertain a deep trend of anti-traditional, anti-dharmic thinking which promotes an abstract and formally autonomous individual able to do has he wants. “Gender” or the negation of biological sex in the name of a chosen or psychological sex is but the last product of the trend.

If you could choose between a society where Hillary Clinton had won the election and a society with castes and sacred fires, would you have the guts to choose the second option—knowing that women would be women but also that you may be, say, a Vaishya and thus not entitled to (for example) give a scholarly opinion about what the Bible says?

Whatever your answer, remember that modern ethical theories come and go with the Zeitgeist, whereas dharmic cultures still exist today side by side with modern technology. I could bet anything that in a hundred years the Law Code of Manu will still be studied while Anita Sarkeesian’s name will be forgotten.

Michael Witcoff #fundie returnofkings.com

3 Reasons To Join The Eastern Orthodox Church

Michael is a Christian, a copywriter, an author, and a marketing consultant. He believes the West is experiencing divine wrath for turning our backs on God, and that the only hope for salvation is to unite under one faithful banner as our enemies have under theirs.

Friends and brothers, it’s been quite a while since I last wrote to you. Between my consulting business and my growing interest in the world of blockchain technology, I’ve had a lot on my plate lately.

But the time seems right for me to come back to Return Of Kings and share a bit more of my journey with you. The rhythm I aim for in life is to learn and grow, then share and teach.

Today’s topic, Eastern Orthodoxy, is something I’d never even heard of when my last article here was published. But since discovering what it is and delving deeper into its mysteries, it’s consumed an enormous amount of my time and attention.

So much of it, in fact, that I recently decided to leave my Wesleyan ways behind and become a full-fledged member of the Orthodox Church. Today, I’d like to share with you my top three reasons for doing so.

1. It’s The Church That Jesus Planted

During my time as a Protestant, it never even occurred to me that a denomination existed reaching all the way back to the time of the apostles.

Once I realized there was an unbroken chain of tradition reaching back nearly 2,000 years, I began to ask an entirely new kind of question. What did they teach? How did they worship? What did they believe? How did it get transmitted through time like that?

I’ve always believed that, whatever you’re trying to do in life, it’s usually better to go straight to the earliest sources than to adhere to newer interpretations. It’s as true with Christianity as it is for copywriting, and I still consider the old Schwartz and Hopkins advertising books to surpass almost everything that’s come out since.

I discovered that the students of the Biblical apostles had written down a fair amount of material regarding ancient Christian practice and belief. From that point on, I could never really look at Protestantism in the same light.

After all, why would I follow the doctrines of the 16th century when I could follow the doctrines of the 1st century instead? It simply made no sense to me that someone who didn’t personally know Christ or the apostles could have more understanding and insight than the men who did.

Christ gave the apostles pretty specific directions, and Paul taught those traditions to all the churches he planted and visited during his ministry. The students of the apostles upheld the traditions and taught them to their own students, and so on and so forth right up until the present day.

Best of all, Orthodox services feel like being transplanted directly into the ancient Christian world. That sense of reverence, holiness, and solemnity can inspire the soul in a way that electric guitar music simply cannot.

Being surrounded by the Saints is a very humbling experience.

2. It’s Untainted By Cultural Marxism

It is not unusual, among Protestant churches, to hear preaching that’s fully aligned with Social Justice ideology and the Cultural Marxism that spawned it. This takes on different forms and manifests to different degrees, but it can reach levels that—at its worst—makes the preaching of a church utterly indistinguishable from what you’d hear at a typical liberal arts college.

This is not only revolting to most normal and healthy men, but also tends to result in lower church attendance. It is well-documented that “the more liberal the church, the emptier the pews.”

Between the ordination of unrepentant sinners and the preaching of the “prosperity gospel,” it is not surprising that Protestantism is losing its core male audience. This is more than a statistic; it is a tragedy.

Scripture tells us, in no uncertain terms, that men are to lead both church and home. With a lack of masculine leadership forming a new generation of young boys into developed and effective leaders, all of society suffers.

However, you will find nothing like these problems in Eastern Orthodoxy. 100% of the clergy are men, and they follow an ancient tradition of hierarchy and rank.

This tradition—for thousands of years—has naturally taught younger men the healthy dynamics of both obedience and command. The fruit of this effort is an endless chain of men who are prepared for their role as leaders in society.

Equally important, there is little to no trace of the Evangelical Zionism which I was already frustrated with before I’d discovered Orthodoxy. Unlike most Protestant denominations, Orthodoxy follows the proper Scriptural understanding that believers in Christ are the true “people of Israel.”

In Matthew 16:18, Jesus tells the apostle Peter that “the gates of Hell will not overcome” His Church.

You can decide for yourself whether lesbian Zionists or alpha male patriarchs better represent the Church that Jesus had in mind.

3. It Offers Deeper Theology And A Richer Experience

I am not trying to attack all of Protestantism with this article. I am still friends with the people I met there, and maintain a deep love for my pastors and their passion for God.

I’m profoundly grateful for my experience in the Wesleyan denomination, and I would never be where I am today unless I had learned the basics of Christianity there.

But that’s just it— it stops at the basics. Jesus died for your sins, now you’re saved, and that’s where it ends.

Orthodoxy, drawing on monastic wisdom going back to at least the 4th century, invites the seeker into a deep mystical understanding of God that far surpasses the typical experience.

“Hillsong? Never heard of her.”

I’m not going to sit here and tell you that I have any real understanding of the Orthodox mystery, because I have barely even knocked at the door. However, I can feel the power coming from the other side and greatly look forward to exploring it further.

Each day of my studies draws me in deeper and deeper, as new levels of both God’s glory—and my own sinfulness by comparison—are revealed to me. It is humbling, it is powerful, and it’s a fuller experience than I knew existed just a few short months ago.

Protestants have the appetizer; the Orthodox serve the meal.

If you are ready to deepen your relationship with Jesus Christ or even to start one—the way that all the apostles and their students did—I highly recommend you check out an Orthodox service sometime and examine it for yourself.

The priests are incredibly helpful to inquirers, and several of them have taken the time to guide me towards various resources or respond to my questions via e-mail.

Even if your nearest Orthodox Church is 20 or 30 minutes away, I think it will be worth your time and effort to make it to a Vespers (on Saturday night) or a Divine Liturgy (on Sunday morning) to see if what it offers matches what you’re looking for.

God bless and Merry Christmas.

Corey Savage #sexist returnofkings.com

8 Factors That Are Destroying Healthy Relationships Between Men And Women

Corey is an iconoclast and the author of 'Man's Fight for Existence'. He believes that the key to life is for men to honour their primal nature. Visit his new website at primalexistence.com

Most men, even if they’re still swimming in ocean of blue pills, have some awareness that something has gone awry with the relationship between men and women. Statistics prove this as well as divorce has been epidemic for a while now with record-number of children growing up with single parent around the world while young people are having less sex than before. And whether you be a feminist or part of the manosphere, I think both sides can agree on one thing: that a war between the sexes have been heating up in the recent years.

Why is all this happening? While men and women tend to play the blame game to avoid taking any responsibility, there are greater forces at play. The fact is, the continuing transformation of our society is making the antagonism between the sexes inevitable. Feminism is just a symptom, not the cause of our problems.

Before we look at why today’s sex relations are in a dismal state, consider the single factor that makes relationships prosper: Mutuality based on different but compatible roles.

All relationships work best when two parties have something different to share for their mutual benefit. For example, humans and horses have enjoyed a close relationship together throughout history (unlike, say, humans and bears). The relationship works because in exchange for food, protection, and care that humans provide, the horses offer themselves as transportation.

The relationship between men and women was also mutually beneficial for the entirety of human existence with men offering their services in exchange for having the women bear their children. But now, with the advent of modern society and its conditions, things have changed drastically.

1. “Equality”
image
At least these men had their male privilege.

“Equality” for women is the most abominable lie to have ever perpetuated on mankind.

Men have always provided for women. Men hunted for food, labored to build everything, and fought battles to defend their tribe. To say that men oppressed women throughout history is an insult to all those who sacrificed themselves in the factories, the coal mines, and the trenches. If women didn’t have certain rights that feminists like to cherry-pick, it’s because women weren’t drafted to fight wars. In exchange for their toil, the only thing men asked of women was to be supportive in their roles as wives and mothers.

But fast-forward to today, now that women have “achieved” social and political “equality” and even various advantages just for being born a female, many women today no longer feel that it’s necessary to exchange values with men for mutuality. It’s like when humans developed automobiles and didn’t need horses anymore. The difference is, humans and horses don’t need to be together; men and women do.

However, men’s sexual desire—which is greater than that of females—is still alive and kicking. So what we have today is a situation where women have gotten their social equality while sexual inequality persists for men (which is why many men choose to give up sex entirely to level the playing field). This is what happens when you standardize human beings into economic units.

2. Education and career over family

Stressed out from balancing between work and family? Yup, it’s the men’s fault that you tried to do both.

To maintain their advantage over men, women today are dedicating themselves to their education and career. Western women, in particular, have been so thoroughly sold on the idea of status and consumerist orgy that they are no longer interested in relationships. More and more women today are delaying marriage (if not outright rejecting it). And when they do get married, they are using it as a means to trap men into donating their sperm and cash, only to bail out when they want to.

3. Slut culture
image
Wow, what an achievement! I’m sure your failed parents are just as proud.

The advent of contraception and the decimation of whatever feminine decency that was left has turned the vast majority of young Western women into drunken sluts. The increasing number of sluts is diminishing the availability of quality women that men want to start a family with and has social implications for the society as a whole.

4. Government supplanting men
image

The only way women were able to “liberate” themselves from their supposed oppressors was by latching themselves on to a new alpha provider: the government. As said before, men form relationships with women by exchanging values, with his strength to provide and protect being his greatest asset. But now, the government (along with corporations and education system) fulfills those roles that men previously occupied. And not only that, but the government is deeply involved in the affairs of marriage, sending professional white-knights to extort and arrest men who’ve been used up and thrown away by women.

It also doesn’t help that the government is increasingly monopolizing violence, one of the most important value that a man possesses. And that leads to my next point.

5. Too few wars, too many men
image
I doubt these men had to think of ways to entertain women like a monkey to get their attention.

The recurring theme across patriarchal societies of the past and present are violence and warfare. And the most commonly associated traits of masculinity are also traits of warriors such as strength, bravery, aggression, discipline, and so on. It’s quite simple: the more violent the environment is, the more masculine men become. And the more conflicts and wars there are, the more the women depend on men—thus keeping the collective value of male population high.

It’s no coincidence that Western societies have started to feminize as they endured decades of relative peace since the end of WWII. The lack of warfare also means that there are now more young men per woman (practically 1 to 1) than there normally would have been under a warring society. Excess of men—who are also emasculated and feminized—means that the collective value of average men has dropped to a historical low, upsetting the balance of sexual marketplace in the process. Only the top 5-10% of men with the warrior traits and wealth are able to enjoy a semblance of a balanced relationship with women—and even they have to play the game.

6. The decimation of Western women

Declining marriage rates? Don’t worry, some simps will try to put a ring on their fingers.

Many Western women have been corrupted by our toxic materialist society. They are fatter, uglier, more narcissistic, more entitled, hedonistic, superficial, less faithful, and seem to think that having bitch attitude makes them hip. Women can afford to stoop low because their sex drive isn’t the same as men’s, while they couldn’t care less for love and companionship when they’re too busy with their travels and careers.

And because of all the thirsty men, women’s collective sexual market value hardly suffers while the value of those who are merely average becomes inflated beyond their real value. You only need to check out the gross discrepancies between the sexes in dating sites and apps to see how bad things are.

7. Anti-male culture

Men are all rapists waiting to be hatched out of their facade, men merely uttering a word to a woman is a harassment, men are always “mansplaining” to women, men are insecure cry-babies, men open their legs too much when they sit, men and their toxic masculinity need to be controlled, men have to do more for women, men are dominating in tech fields because of sexism, men shouldn’t say this, men shouldn’t do that, etc, etc— And of course, if men push back, they’re “misogynists.”

And we’re we still wondering why relationships are getting harder to form these days?

8. Lack of shared values

As social beings, we humans need more than economic incentives and passions to form a relationship for a family to prosper. There must be shared values.

With traditional family values under constant attack from all directions, the bonding between males and females have been reduced to mere hook-ups and economic unions. To make matters worse, many from both sides are resorting to predatory behaviors to exploit one another for either money (for women) or sex (for men), augmenting the distrust between the two sexes. Others, who either don’t want to play games or have become overtly hostile to the opposite sex, have given up on relationships entirely. This is the end result of atomization and extreme individualism under a system that destroys all values for the sake of economic advancement.

Conclusion

The destruction of sex relationship is having a negative effect on society as a whole and is transforming the demographic landscape of many Western nations. Unlike what the aesthetically-challenged feminists and the man-children crying their own way believe, men and women are not adversaries. You don’t have to be a traditionalist to see that the sex relations have gone awry due to the development of modern society and its destructive cultures.

Many Western men have already checked out or gone out to find traditional women elsewhere. But that is merely adapting to the situation; it doesn’t solve the problem at a societal level. The continuing antagonism of the sexes will eventually spread around the world. Unless the current course is somehow reversed, we can only wait and see how far the damage will run its course.

Matt Forney #fundie returnofkings.com

It looks like the Southern Poverty Law Center, one of America’s premier ethnic shakedown organizations, is running low on donations again. This week, they announced the new edition of their “hate group” list, a record of supposed white supremacist, far-right terrorist organizations operating in the United States. Most notably, Return Of Kings has been added to the list as a “male supremacy” organization, alongside men’s rights’ group A Voice For Men:

Also, for the first time, the SPLC added two male supremacy groups to the hate group list: A Voice for Men, based in Houston, and Return of Kings, based in Washington, D.C. The vilification of women by these groups makes them no different than other groups that demean entire populations, such as the LGBT community, Muslims or Jews, based on their inherent characteristics.

This isn’t the first time that ROK publisher Roosh has been targeted by the SPLC: in 2012, he was named in one of the organization’s “Intelligence Reports,” alongside A Voice for Men and my old site In Mala Fide. Roosh later cited the experience as the final push that moved him to the dissident right.

It’s clear that the SPLC is going after AVFM and ROK in an attempt to scare liberal old biddies into giving them more money, because their attack was sloppy and poorly-handled. For example, the SPLC claims that ROK is headquartered in Washington D.C., even though it’s a website with no physical address or full-time employees.

Most hilariously, the SPLC’s dossier on alt right figure Richard Spencer confused him with Robert Spencer, the founder of Jihad Watch, suggesting they outsourced the research to a stupid intern.

Having said this, the SPLC’s attack can’t be handwaved away. Much like the Anti-Defamation League, the SPLC’s purpose in naming organizations as “hate groups” or individuals as “extremists” is designed to incite violence against them. Ever since the election of Donald Trump, the left in America has become increasingly violent, and the SPLC’s list is a dog whistle to antifa and other groups with the intent of hurting or possibly killing Roosh and other targeted individuals.

How The Southern Poverty Law Center Fuels Leftist Violence

The SPLC, ADL, and other related organizations like to masquerade as legitimate news organizations who are merely calling attention to violent, anti-government extremists, but this is as far from the truth as possible. In actuality, the SPLC functions as an intelligence-gathering operation for antifa and other violent leftists, compiling dossiers on chosen targets with the implicit message of, “It’s okay to hurt, maim, or kill these people: they’re Nazis/misogynists/homophobes, after all.”

“Hate group” lists compiled by the SPLC have been used by leftist criminals in the past to identify targets for assassination. For example, in 2013, a left-winger committed a mass shooting against the Family Research Council after seeing them named by the SPLC as an “anti-gay” group. More recently, we’ve seen leftists openly going after Republican politicians and public figures, such as the attempted assassination of House Majority Leader Steve Scalise by Bernie Sanders supporter James Hodgkinson.

This is not the first time that figures in the dissident right have been targeted in such a way. Last summer, the ADL released a hit list of alt right and alt lite figures such as Mike Cernovich, Richard Spencer, and myself, with the purpose of inciting violence against us. In response, Cernovich and several other alt lite figures launched the #ADLTerror hashtag on Twitter with the intent of bringing attention to the fact that their lives were now in danger.
Lies, Damned Lies, And Lists

Moreover, the SPLC can’t even be consistent with the criteria it uses to evaluate “hate groups.” In response to their attack on A Voice For Men, ex-feminist filmmaker Cassie Jaye (creator of the documentary The Red Pill) revealed that in 2016, the SPLC told her that AVFM didn’t fit their criteria for a group since they lacked an “official group policy,” due to the fact that AVFM was just a website and a forum. The SPLC has not yet revealed to Jaye why they changed their policy.

Regardless, it is clear that the international left is ramping up for a broader attack on the dissident right. While the alt right was the focus of much of the left’s ire last year, the movement has been weakened due to systematic deplatforming, failed stunts such as Charlottesville, and personality conflicts between its major leaders. As a result, the left now feels confident in going after sites like Return Of Kings that had previously been out of the line of fire.

Dissident right and alternative media figures should prepare themselves for an onslaught from the globalists in the coming months. With the 2018 midterm elections coming up and the Russia investigation in the U.S. unraveling, the left is looking to strike out at anyone who challenges their power or narrative. As the SPLC’s actions show, they are not above physically hurting or killing their enemies to achieve their goals.

Kyle Trouble #fundie returnofkings.com

5 Ways Our Modern World Is A Pale Simulation Of The Past

Kyle is an entrepreneur and nomad who has been living abroad since 2016. He blogs at This Is Trouble. Follow him on Facebook.

When I was living in Kiev, Ukraine, I was spending a lot of time at business lunch. Essentially, it was a 3-5 course lunch time meal that restaurants in Kiev would do to entice people to come in and eat. Those 3-5 courses would usually cost about $3-$7 when it was all said in done. The most expensive restaurant in the city offered it for $6. Juice, bread, salad or soup, and a main course. It was a killer deal. My friends and I would go to one of these restaurants Monday through Friday, every day.

One of the major topics that always came up was the way that so many things in our modern world are simulated. Things that used to be typical in older times are now existent in our current culture, in a sort of fantasy. To me, there were five things that now exist in the world that basically simulate what people in the past used to do.

When we weren’t talking about how to handle Ukrainian women and the state of our dating lives, we had a lot of time to talk about life, how things have evolved in the last few years, and to bring these points into a more concise view of the world and how they have directly impacted modern day men. They deserve as much credit as I do for this post.

In short, these things all result in lower testosterone, depression, and a multitude of other symptoms that all can be traced back to what we’d consider to be the problems of modern society. These problems aren’t just pertinent to men, however.

1. Sports Replacing War

Gladiators used to fight in the Roman Coliseum for sport. These days, it’s simulated with things like football. “Violence and blood,” so to speak. Now, don’t get me wrong–if you’re active and participating in sports, it’s great. But it’s a substitute for literally going to war and killing off other tribes. Perhaps this is the one simulation on the list that isn’t a bad thing, on paper. Everybody should lead active and healthy lives. But then you look around and realize that many men are simply being spectators to sport.

Spending twelve hours on Sunday watching the NFL as a fan. It’s scary that the games kick off at 1pm EST and end at nearly midnight, if you watch the late game. Major League Baseball has 162 games in their season. I know that quite a few guys out there watch all 162 games of their respective teams.

It’s a simulation of replacing the long lost battles fought against other tribes. Instead, your “tribe” paints colors and logos on your face and goes to “war” with the other team’s fans. I don’t think you need to cut out sports (watching), and definitely don’t think they are 100% poison. Everybody needs a way to unplug once in a while. It’s not the worst vice you could have.

However, you must cut it down to manageable bits each week. Watch your favorite team’s football game. And when it’s done, it’s done. Don’t let it affect your mood for the rest of the week (or even day).

2. Porn, Dolls, and Virtual Reality, Replacing Sex

Everybody by now knows that porn is really, really bad for you. But people aren’t stopping their use of it.

Many men in Asian countries have all but thrown in the towel on having any sort of love life. They would rather use porn and blow-up dolls that simulate sex—pretty damn close to the real thing, I hear. Western men would rather stay home and jerk off to increasingly-disturbing levels of porn rather than travel abroad to remote places to meet Serbian women or Colombian girls. Hell, with the advancement of technology, blow-up dolls may be far more skilled at giving head than real girls in the not-so-distant future. Looking at the doll in the photo above is scary. You can tell she’s fake if you look closely, but from afar, I could be fooled.

With men, it’s all about the end release when it comes to sex. Women use porn (or at least say they do) at a less drastic rate. They also don’t seem to have quite the addiction to it. That’s because for women, the sex is all about the journey through it. It doesn’t matter if they have an orgasm. When you can simulate sex and still get the end release, it’s an effective simulation as opposed to the real thing—which isn’t that hard to get.

3. Pets Replacing Children

Dogs are a man’s best friend, but the way some people treat their pets is utterly pathetic. In a world where people are repeatedly being told now to have children (or to put it off in the case of women), they are finding other way’s to simulate raising children.

The entire biological point of our existence is to pass on our genetics. And yet people are being told that they really shouldn’t. Instead, they get dogs that fit into purses. And the sad part is that then those people become so reliant on the dogs that it’s the humans that need the dogs just so they can muster the courage to get on an airplane.

It’s disturbingly easy to get an emotional support animal these days.

4. Video Games Replacing Achievement

I’ve suffered from video game addiction myself. It’s a real thing. And I know exactly what achievement porn is. Video games suck you in now and don’t let you out. As men, we do work to achieve stuff. We get good feelings and a sense of accomplishment from it.

Video games take it up a level by adding fantasy to those achievements. Even though you’re pouring hours and hours into something pointless, you feel good because it’s accomplishment. It’s a false sense of working hard. The sad thing is, if you took those ten hours playing video games (a day) for achievement porn, and spent just three of them on building a business–you’d have a hell of a lot to show.

5. Food Replacing Pleasure

Food is a way to numb the pain for a lot of people. It’s a distraction from the day to day life of the office grind. You could throw alcohol into this discussion, too.

People are so disconnected from each other on a personal level, that’s it’s more comfortable to eat food instead of confiding in your friends and peers. Combine this with the sedentary lifestyle of the 9-5 grind, television (see #1), and it’s a recipe for disaster. It all goes full circle.

You’re now addicted and dependent on food for numbing pain. You have a “tribe” which just makes you sit on the couch more and more. You have a pet that replaces offspring, and a doll that replaces a lover.

That’s the life of simulation. And the worst thing? Most will never even realize what they’re doing. It’s time to wake up.

David G. Brown #sexist returnofkings.com

Do Not Try To Help A Woman Who Is A Victim Of “Domestic Violence”

David is a lifelong dissident and intellectual rebel. He despises political correctness, which replaces real, needy victims with narcissistic leftists out for a free meal. Though still a young man, he has watched society descend into its present morass with great sadness, combined with a determination to help make things better. He tweets when there's something worth tweeting here.

Helping women who claim to be victims of “domestic violence” is one of the best ways to suck up your own time, not to mention inject unnecessary emotions and drama into your life. Most of the time, your attempts to help will not be met with gratitude and, in fact, will frequently garner hostility from the person you are trying to “save.” Moreover, the target of your rescue mission generally doesn’t want to be saved anyway.

There is no need for anger or bitterness when you wash yourself of a woman claiming domestic violence, as hard as suppressing those emotions may be. Like someone dependent on drugs, an obese person, or another kind of addict, plenty of women are addicted to the rush of either a violent man (who is part of a small minority of men) or the thrill and attention of claiming to be the victim of a violent man who isn’t actually violent. Any logical, rational advice you give will invariably engender her opposition or inaction.

Particularly if a woman returns to her “abusive” boyfriend or husband after you have tried to save them, helping someone claiming domestic violence leads over and over again to unnecessary, sometimes aggressive or violent conflict with third parties. Even when this does not happen to the worst extent, you find yourself invested in an emotionally unstable woman, whether she causes the instability herself or not.

Most important of all, there is usually no evidence to support claims of domestic violence, bar the fickle testimonies of the couple. If you choose to help, you are almost certainly engaging in a wild goose chase with next to no merit. In today’s climate, asking a woman to do the dishes is probably considered domestic violence.

My experiences

Does the helping hand really help? Most times it doesn’t.

I learned fairly early on in adulthood that helping women “abused” by men is typically a fruitless exercise. For example, around the age of 19, I attempted to intervene in a situation where a female friend was being told, among other things, that she was worthless by her boyfriend at the time. At one stage, he even told her to kill herself. With zero sexual interest in the girl, I simply thought the guy’s behavior was wrong.

Yet, rather than thanking me for my assistance, my advice to this girl was greeted with histrionics and ingratitude. It also attracted a series of threats from her boyfriend, none of which eventuated. I had brought myself into heated verbal exchanges with this guy, without it having any impact whatsoever on the girl. If anything, the whole saga solidified her feelings for him. Aside from maybe interjecting in the “kill yourself” part, I had wasted my time completely. Nevertheless, it was a great lesson to learn so young.

I came to realize that women like this ex-friend are positively attracted to men like him. No amount of investment in time or energy would deter what were emotional longings for Mr. Demeaning. Second-hand experiences I had before and after this situation suddenly began to make sense.

#WhyIStayed and other similar bullshit

The internet exploded with questions about [Janay Rice] — why didn’t she leave [Ray Rice]? Why did she marry him? Why did she stay? I can’t speak for Janay Rice, but I can speak for Beverly Gooden. Why did I stay? — Leaving was a process, not an event. And sometimes it takes a while to navigate through the process. I believe in storytelling. I believe in the power of shared experience. I believe that we find strength in community. That is why I created this hashtag. I hope those tweeting using #WhyIStayed find a voice, find love, find compassion, and find hope.”

— #WhyIStayed “creator” Beverly Gooden promoting Beverly Gooden

Yes, because hope, rather than self-preservation, will save a woman who is a victim of actual domestic violence.

In addition to biological drives that impel women to stay with or seek out domineering sex partners, boyfriends, and husbands, good old feminist “storytelling” also motivates females in sticking by or returning to men that they claim hit them or, much more ambiguously, “mistreat” them. A whole cottage industry has developed to support the narrative that women can and should stay with supposedly abusive partners.

If we’re being brutally honest, #WhyIStayed and other feminist call signs keep swarms of feminist typists gainfully employed. They sustain the small rate of actual domestic violence so that these typists can continue to publish articles, despite them being highly exaggerated ones.

Of all the modern-day battles we could say are uphill because of perverse cultural conditioning, seeking to assist a woman who claims to be abused takes the cake. Realistically, what are your prospects of dissuading a woman from what is usually a self-determined, psychological, or biological course of action? If you say your chances are relatively high (whatever that means), is the expenditure of time and energy really worth it? The impact on your own life is likely to be much more than you anticipate.

An exception to the principle for sisters, female cousins, etc.

Doing more for family still makes sense, with limits.

There are some common sense exceptions to what I have been saying. If you or your family have more skin in the game and find one of your relatives in trouble, you obviously should try harder. Inasmuch as family units have been eviscerated in recent years, blood and similar ties still count for something nowadays.

Bear in mind, however, that many of the same limitations you have with female friends or acquaintances will apply in large part to your relatives. Maybe you will draw the biggest line when it comes to protecting your (future) daughter, but the rest of the time you are probably gnashing your teeth over sisters, cousins, or other female relatives who will just not listen to you (and who are in all likelihood gilding the lily about the level of mistreatment, too). If laying down the law doesn’t work the first or second time, cut your losses and move on for the time being.

There may come a point when you need to involve police for the very small minority of cases that truly warrant it. That is your call. And, of course, I am not advocating against helping women when you know at the gut level that they need it. What I am saying is that you need to avoid being a martyr in circumstances where being a martyr, literally or figuratively, is against your own interests.

Remember, most women either don’t want to be saved or are willing to cost you your state of mind and resources should you put yourself on the line for them.

André du Pôle #fundie returnofkings.com

5 Qualities That Dying Empires Lack

André is a young European who left his decaying country in 2012 for greener pastures. He enjoys exploring subterranean places, reading about a host of interconnected topics, and yearns for Tradition.

Along with blue pill and global governance comes the Hollow Empire. We live in the golden age of marketing, public relationships, and propaganda. Many people are good at crafting appearances and virtue-signaling by the standards of the degenerate mainstream. The cities are littered with awesome, hip images, but this world is full of it.

Cities are full of useless bureaucrats, con artists, effeminate men, and man-jawed women. People are fake. Interests and excessive desires are either veiled under passive-aggressive forms or openly communicated through sheer assholery. No mystery why stoicism came back into fashion among conscious men: when your day is full of fake smiles, you’re better off working on your inner fortress. (And when you’re stoic and poor, bulking on a budget makes you better off as well.)

In such a world, some human qualities are sorely lacking. They are often perceived as signs of weakness, naivete, or as antics. Or some start counterfeiting and misdirecting them.

1. Loyalty

Sheep dogs are amongst the most loyal breeds out there. Have you seen a lot of them in metropolises? Bourgeois bohemians prefer small, frail dwarf dogs that cost a small fortune. Or cats, whose displays of egoism and moodiness are always overlooked because they’re sooo cute.

Loyalty is a noble trait. It supposes courage, constancy, straightforwardness. A loyal parent cares. A loyal citizen does his duty and tends to become a pillar of his community. A loyal friend is someone you know you can count on. Unfortunately, loyalty has been both abused and derided. Since the 60s, the media started associating it with purportedly “oppressive” and narrow-minded people while encouraging sheepish behavior towards the latest craze.

Being loyal to a girl who would only remain if you treat her badly would be foolish. Beyond this, it is hard to be a loyal patriot once you know how much nation-states sent Europeans kill each other for nothing but neoconnish interests. As French writer Louis-Ferdinand Céline said, “you think you’ll die for your country but what you’ll really lose your life for is bank vaults.”

2. Kindness

According to the dictionaries, being kind means having a benevolent, friendly, helpful disposition. In a normal society, kindness would be the sign of a good nature and it would be rewarded. In The Current Year, kindness towards women or strangers will have you exploited then called a loser or hypocrite. Men with low self-esteem started to serve women in exchange for absolutely nothing: this warped beta niceness has become a patron for kindness in general.

‘I’ve tried speed dating and all the dating Apps, but every time I put my real age, all I get are idiots and losers,’ she told the New York Post. ‘I figured, why not make them useful and have them help me around the house?’

She found a match with a man wearing overalls and wielding a hammer in his profile photo and invited him over to install her air conditioning— After he successfully carried out the installation, Bloom asked him to leave and didn’t answer his messages asking her to go on a proper date. (Daily Mail)

Displaying kindness towards freewheeling female hypergamy is the same than being loyal to a brand that makes millions out of sheeple. A sane mind doesn’t do it.

3. Politeness and courtesy

Both words refer to a kind of high culture: refined interests, a genuine concern for arts and belles lettres, a tactful and gallant temperament. Polite, courteous manners thrived during the eighteenth and nineteenth century. They were derided as bourgeois by Bolshevists and promiscuous bohemians. Today, loud-mouthed girls know nothing of it, and both have been turned into either mild-mannered spinelessness or pure snobbery.

The arts associated with politeness, such as theatre or classical music, were appropriated by old money whereas the masses are fed with pop garbage. Actually, you can be polite and courteous if you hop in the right context, then use it as a folding screen for game, Sandor Szavost-style. Otherwise you will come across as formal or distant or snobbish. Indeed, neither do boyish immaturity nor grrly aggressive narcissism provide good grounds for taking a woman’s hand and leading her through an impeccable tango.

4. Forgiveness

Jesus Christ extolled forgiveness beyond revenge. Clear the slate, turn the other cheek. Just like toleration, forgiveness works best when it is reciprocated: I’ll forgive your misdeeds because you will forgive mine, I’ll tolerate your antics because you will accept my eccentricities. When the reciprocal aspect wanes, these qualities turn into sheer weakness. Forgiving a BLM activist who sent your brother into a coma only means giving him a pass so he’ll do the same to you.

The Golden Rule, just as any of its derivatives, only works within a context of reciprocation and mutual trust. German jurist Carl Schmitt noticed the Latin Bible told about forgiving the inimicus, the disagreeable guy you’re squabbling with, not the hostis or foreign enemy who will take your head as soon as he can. There is no point being forgiving towards an enemy you have nothing in common.

Unfortunately, the chaotic Current Year destroyed most boundaries. It is sometimes hard to say who’s an inimicus or occasional yet brotherly rival you can forgive, and who’s a hostis you should always be vigilant of.

5. Patience

Arno Brecker did nothing wrong

As the saying goes, the early bird catches the worm. Being patient, planning, delaying gratification, is part of achieving great things. (Unless you’re picking up a Western whore whom you should bed early). The occult elite does not want you to be like that. Rather, those on the top want you to look for instant gratification.

The social media crack pipe, junk food, porn, and video games are designed so you get a massive rush of dopamine early on and get back there for more. If you go down this road you’ll become impatient, addicted, unable to work long hours without some unnatural gratification.

Of course this mindset makes you dependent, frail, unable to provide for yourself over the long term. Impatience is often associated with neuroticism, immaturity, and seeking external validation.

Being patient—without being passive—is required to tread the long path towards the top of the mountain.

Conclusion

Patience can be exercised alone on a purely Stoic fashion. Being patient only requires mastery of oneself, not of others. The four other qualities are essentially social but hard to exert in an anomous, low-trust society. Our natural propensities, from loyalty to the desire to provide, were misdirected and exploited. This made us wary of society in general and of other individuals in particular. When people are foreign to each other they are bound to screw and get screwed.

The better angels of our nature, yet, are still there. In spite of constant bickering and backstabbing the dissenters are closer to each other than to degenerate normies. Some girls can become reliable housewives. Hipsters who snark at old-fashioned qualities are the kind of people who build nothing. If we manage to build thick relationships again, we will effectively foster a civilization renewal.

David G. Brown #sexist returnofkings.com

5 Men Who Substantially Upgraded Their Women

David is a lifelong dissident and intellectual rebel. He despises political correctness, which replaces real, needy victims with narcissistic leftists out for a free meal. Though still a young man, he has watched society descend into its present morass with great sadness, combined with a determination to help make things better. He tweets when there's something worth tweeting here.

The sexual marketplace need not suck all the time. Plenty of men have laid out the path for you, often initially shacking up with the women they felt they deserved and then moving onto greener, hotter pastures. If you’re in doubt, take a look at the following men who saw the light and found themselves a better-looking woman.

[...]

Have you got the courage to find someone better?
image
If your relationship with a woman honestly works, all power to you. For many men, however, things are not so rosy. In a number of cases, these guys will be much better off by cutting their losses and finding someone they not only think but know is better. Are you one of those men who might need to make a change? Think it over.

Max Roscoe #transphobia #sexist returnofkings.com

Japan Bans Chicks With Dicks

Max Roscoe

is an aspiring philosopher king, living the dream, travelling the world, hoarding FRNs and ignoring Americunts. He is a European at heart, lover of Latinas, and currently residing in the USA.

At the risk of breaking a personal journalistic rule of devoting far too much time to an incredibly miniscule and unimportant issue, I must draw attention to a recent win for masculinity. The island nation of Japan recently made a common sense decision regarding the extremely minute portion of its population that is dealing with the first world problem of its genitalia not matching the perceived sex of the owner, known in the West as transsexuals or “gender questioning individuals” to use the word salad nonsensical parlance of the day.

image
Sure thing, toots, just as soon as you lose the balls.

First, I should clarify that no one is being banned, deported, or shipped out of the country in a way that a more aggressive nation like Saudi Arabia might handle this issue. Instead Japan has a simple policy which efficiently handles the transsexual question—one that seems to bewilder and confuse the Western world, who must devote weekly news articles, federal legislation, prime time (((television programming))) and endless discussion on how to handle this fraction of a percentage of its population.

It works like this: do you have a penis? If yes then you cannot be a chick. It’s as simple as that.

With that one universal test, Japan has disposed of the endless head-scratching and policy making by Western politicians, critics, and social justice warriors about how to describe their private parts on government identification cards or which restrooms to pee in. In Japan you will be considered a man as long as you have a penis. End of story.

Likewise, if you have a vagina, you will be considered a woman. No matter what clothes you are wearing, how deep your voice is, or how you choose to “identify” that day. The beauty is in the simplicity.

image
Japanese Sex Change Operation

While Western nations must debate and compromise, legislate and propose, carving out exceptions for this or that behavior and endlessly consulting irate social justice warriors in a futile attempt to placate them, Japan disposes with the entire question of transsexual people with the simple question.

In the Japanese system, Bruce Jenner would not once have been a news story during my lifetime, as he has done nothing newsworthy since winning a 1976 Olympic medal. If and when he actually removes his penis and replaces it with a surgical vagina (Sugina from hereon), only then could he be properly considered a female and could announce he would like to be referred to as Caitlyn. (A person changing their sex is still not a newsworthy story to me, but I suppose there are those who would be interested to know what happened to this former hero of theirs).

image

Japan is a fascinating nation. As an island nation, it is naturally more isolated than most cultures, and is able to control physically and culturally what enters its society. Japan is one of the more difficult countries to immigrate to, and I have been told that Japanese will never fully accept Westerners, even if you take a Japanese wife and live there for decades (and why should they, as those actions will make you no more Japanese than Bruce Jenner installing a sugina will make him a woman).

Japan is one of the only societies in the world that was never controlled by Europeans. It holds on to its traditions, and has a strong history of physical fitness including the samurai warrior. While Westerners are committing virtual seppuku because they touched a woman’s butt in 1984, Japanese businessmen will glibly walk to a vending machine and purchase a high school girl’s panties for sexual purposes.

image
An oddity to a westerner, but in Japan men are not ashamed to be men

Odd? Sure, and I’m not going to even go down the road of weird Japanese kinks and bizarre pornography, but the point is the Japanese are proudly Japanese, and will not let others shame them into changing their behavior. I will always remember the line from James Bond’s You Only Live Twice concerning women and men, which made an indelible impression on me since childhood.

image
In Japan, men always come first. Women come second.

What Is A Woman?

Outside of the West in The Current Year, I doubt anyone has given this question serious thought, but today, sadly, it is necessary. If you ask yourself what truly makes someone a woman, It comes down to whether they have a penis or a vagina in their pants.

image
“OK is She REALLY a man or a woman?” Can only refer to one thing.

While there are levels of masculinity and feminity which vary between the sexes, at the end of the day, if you really want to know someone’s sex, you want to know what genitalia they have. All Japan is doing is confirming, yes, that is exactly what sex means.

TransTrenders: Belittling Those Who Are Truly Victims

Just as feminists are opposed to true diversity, the public discussion of sexual dysphoria is a distraction from the minority of people who have real problems with their sexual identification.

Just as those who suffer from the horrible crime of violent rape do NOT want to publicly discuss their traumatic past, those who suffer from rare sexual disorders or chromosomal mutations that affect their sexuality are embarrassed and saddened by their condition. Those who truly have a medical condition which causes their genitalia to be deformed, or not match the sex they mentally feel, or who were a victim of a botched (((circumcision))) want to quietly rectify the problem and live life without others knowing about the unpleasant thing that happened in their past.

The LAST thing they want is to publicly exclaim that they were one sex and are now the other. Which seems to be ALL that being a trans-trender is about. Watch a Youtube video of a prominent transtrender like Justin “Riley” Dennis, and all you were hear is endless talk about their gender identification or their transition (despite the fact that they have rarely if ever actually snipped off the bits and therefore have transformed nothing).

Common Sense: A Lost Idea In The West

image
Dr. Wang, Japan’s Top Sex Change Doctor

By forcing those who claim their sex is “wrong” to surgically correct their sex, Japan is calling their bluff and separating the trans-trenders from the trans-genders. There is no further debate or discussion needed with such a policy. While the West is trying to fire, fine or even imprison academics for using the wrong (read: gramatically correct) gender pronouns when referring to snowflake students, Japan has a simple system: If you want to be a woman, you need to have a vagina. If you weren’t born with one, get one first and check back with us.

A Win-Win Policy

While most of us probably aren’t comfortable with the idea of going to bed with someone who was born a man, the truth is, if one are attractive enough, and has a vagina, men will want to sleep with you, especially if they don’t know about your past (this is a universal truth, not specific to trannies). So if potential trannies really want acceptance by men in the sexual marketplace, this is exactly the model they should be following.

Corey Savage #sexist returnofkings.com

10 Feminist Fantasies That Could Become A Reality In The Near Future

Corey is an iconoclast and the author of ‘Man’s Fight for Existence’. He believes that the key to life is for men to honour their primal nature.

Around 2013 when I first discovered the manosphere, I knew things were bad in our society in terms of sex relations along with the corroding effects of feminism. But at the time, I didn’t appreciate just know how bad. In just few years since then, I’ve seen enough madness to know which direction we’re headed and it doesn’t look good. We already live in a feminist society and the harpies are pushing to make things even harder for ordinary men who just want to get on with their lives. The following will demonstrate what will happen to our society if we were to give into all the demented demands of today’s feminists.

Although this article is meant to highlight the craziness of it all, note that many of these concepts are already starting to take shape in our societies to become a reality.

1. Expansion Of Hate-Crime Laws
image
“You can’t save Mary Jane anymore, Spiderman. It’s ‘benevolent sexism’, and therefore, a misogynistic hate-crime.”

In England, trying to pick-up a woman or even just whistling at her is considered a “hate crime” if the woman gets upset by it. It is a real possibility that this law might spread to the rest of the West and expand to include other misogynist offenses including: looking at a woman (what feminists call “stare rape”), calling a trans-woman a he (there’s already a similar law in New York), arguing with women online, manspreading, mansplaining, helping a woman, and so on.

2. Consent Forms
image
Since women get to dictate the terms of all sexual interactions, consent forms will have to become a necessity in the future. And not just for sex, but in all forms of interaction like being able to approach a woman on the street. Maybe an app will be developed where a woman could consent to sex, conversation, or being looked at so that she could screen out all the low-life misogynists who want to compliment her for her looks.

3. Anonymous Rape Accusations + 100% Belief In Woman’s Testament
image
All men are rapists; we need to believe her because she’s a woman. It’s a perfect circular logic.

Feminists claim that the reason we live in a patriarchal rape culture is because our society discourages rape victims (always women) from coming forward and also because their words are not taken seriously. So, what they’re proposing is clear: rape accusations should be done anonymously and the “victims” should always be believed against evidences that are biased because— patriarchy.

Men have already lost their jobs, kicked out of school, jailed, and even murdered for false rape accusations while their accusers faced no legal consequences (and got to keep their anonymity). So, we’re not really that far from reaching that level.

4. Feminist Re-Education Camps
image
This book is not a mandatory reading in kindergartens yet. What more proof do you need that we are all oppressed by the patriarchy?

With feminism taking over the educational institutions and already working to reprogram men to serve the system, it won’t be long before men who have been found guilty of misogynist hate crimes to end up in re-education camps. We already have sensitivity training in jobs while colleges are adding courses on toxic masculinity to re-define what it is to be a man on feminist terms. It probably won’t be long before “toxic masculinity” is added to DSM as a mental disorder (in place of homosexuality) and treated like a disease in mental health institutions.

5. Government-Sponsored Feminist Tribunals
image
Canada already has an actual social justice tribunal.

Since it’ll be difficult to charge men of bogus hate crimes against women with nothing more than a woman’s feelings as a proof, the government may introduce tribunals similar to the kangaroo courts in universities and HR departments at workplaces, all in the name of creating a harmonious society free of hate. Those who enter these tribunals will also be destroyed by the media and have no chance of being employed and be subject to permanent social ostracism even if they’re found not guilty.

6. Systemic Castration
image
As I’ve mentioned in my other article, docile and compliant dogs are the ideal that feminists aim for in their efforts to domesticate men. A significant number of boys are already on ADHD medication to have their behaviors controlled while male sex offenders are given chemical castration. If all men are violent hooligans and rapists as some feminists claim, then the next logical step is to let the government control men’s testosterone levels to an “acceptable” level. Note that we already have many parents who are letting their children take hormones to alter their “gender.” This practice will likely become more common in the future.

7. Non-contact Sex
image
“She did not consent; I must not touch.”

Feminists have been so effective in terrorizing the beta males that many of them are afraid to interact with women in any shape or form. Consider that we already live in a world where walking past some deranged woman will get you accused of sexual assault. In the future, all physical contact with women may become sternly discouraged or even forbidden that more men will retreat to porn and sexbots as alternatives. Haptic technology for sex is already being developed to pave the way for a culture of non-contact sex.
8. Bachelor Tax
image
Did you think you pesky “MRA’s” could escape the gynocentric order by refusing marriage and going your own way? With the drop in number of men who are manning up that coincides with the rising number of single mothers who need to leech the welfare state, it’s not too unreasonable to expect a push for bachelor tax that will penalize men who refuse to put a ring on an aging, post-slut sow.

Knowing that it will cause a major backlash, the bachelor tax will probably not come into being in an obvious way. Instead, it will be introduced under the guise of supporting the poor single mothers and helping to foster families. Heck, considering how men are the primary tax payers while women are the primary beneficiaries of the welfare state, you could say that we already have a gynocentric taxation system in all but name.

9. Polyandry
image
Women already practice ‘Alpha fucks, Beta bucks’ strategy. So why shouldn’t an empowered woman be allowed to do it openly without shame?

With the institution of marriage already destroyed and with many men already accepting cuckoldery as the norm in the form of “open marriage,” women may as well be allowed to have multiple husbands. And why not? We already know that there are far too many men for the number of women in our society and that those lazy men should do more to support women. Is it that crazy to have one husband for sex and another three for money? I’m sure many desperate simps will have no issue sharing a wife with several other men as long as they get some cuddling action when she’s not too busy banging her more attractive husbands. The implementation of bachelor tax, mentioned above, will also make marriage more desirable.

10. Concentration Camps For Men
image
The final solution to the testosterone problem.

If the above measures to protect women and ensure equality are implemented, it’s likely that all the misogynists will grumble in anger and resist them. If that is the case, it might be best to take the advice of the feminist, Julie Bindel, and place all men in concentration camps. No man, no problem! If you’re wondering how feminists could even achieve this, know that there is already an army of goons called the police who will gladly do as they’re told to maintain the gynocentric order.

Conclusion

As I’ve said in an older article of mine, feminism is practically a terrorist movement that demands more and more political, social, and cultural oppression of men for the sake of radical women who play the eternal victim and cry for never-ending privileges. While you may think that the above nightmare scenarios are over-the-top and unlikely to happen, I bet those who lived just few generations ago couldn’t have imagined what we’re witnessing today either. Feminism, by colluding with the government, will continue to grow like a tumor and it will not stop until you make it stop.

Remember that if we don’t fight back, no one else will.

Corey Savage #sexist returnofkings.com

7 Ways Modern Women Treat Men Like Dogs

Corey is an iconoclast and the author of ‘Man’s Fight for Existence’. He believes that the key to life is for men to honour their primal nature.

For all the feminist criticism of men supposedly treating women like dogs, it is actually today’s feminism-infected women that are treating men like domesticated animals.

While the majority of women still prefer masculine men for relationships, I’ve been noticing how more and more women today are defying their biology for ideological reasons and are pursuing long-term relationship with men they’re not even attracted to just because they are supplicant and effeminate. If this trend continues unabated, I expect the entire male population to turn into weak and feckless bonobos who grovel around to serve female interests.

Observe the following comparisons to see how men are being turned into dogs for both women and the state:

1. Dogs are optional

Dogs as pets are optional. People get a dog only when they want one; it’s not a necessity. Men today are also increasingly becoming an object of utility for a woman rather than a man whom she forms a bond with for a nuclear family. She will marry a man when she wants to (if at all) and she will dump him when she feels like it.

2. Once attached, dogs offer unconditional loyalty

If you want a picture of what the feminists want from men, just imagine a world where all men are male feminists.

Once dogs have a human to call a master, it doesn’t care whether he is a scumbag, loser, criminal, or homeless. Dogs are faithful no matter who their master is and what he does. In fact, they’re so loyal that they’ll even remain with an owner that mistreats them. And that’s exactly what feminists want men to be.

If you observe the rhetoric of the feminists, you’ll notice two general themes: first, the desire to be free from all criticisms. And second, for men to believe them and “support” them no matter what. Feminists want their prospective low-testosterone boyfriends and husbands to fully accept them for who they are no matter how disgusting, slutty, crass, and toxic they are. They want their men to show unconditional loyalty so that they can openly cheat on them and brag about it. And men, if they don’t want to be called a misogynist, must never question their partner’s past or present behavior and remain faithful even if they’re treated like garbage.

3. Dogs do what they’re told

Once the owner has secured his dog’s loyalty, he can train it to behave on command. Some owners enjoy the power they have over their companions and they will order their dogs around for fun.

Western women today have discovered that there are truck loads of desperate men who will do just about anything for them to win an ounce of female approval. These women have successfully used men to take them out on expensive dinners (only make fun of them on their blogs afterwards), buy pizza for them for free, shovel snow for them, and so on. The women who order these men around like dogs didn’t even have to train them as they’ve already been conditioned from birth by the society to do what women tells them to do.

4. Dogs are treated for good behavior
image
Dogs need to be treated to reinforce good behavior; the same is true when you want to domesticate men as second-rate citizens.

Women understand just how desperate the general male population is for affection and sex. Women today are leveraging this power over men to make them behave the way they want them to, rewarding these simps with faked compliments so that they’ll continue being good boys.

5. Dogs defend their masters
image
One serves a man, the other serves the government and its harem of women.

Besides companionship, the main roles dogs play is to defend their masters. In spite of all the calls for equality, the reality is that women still expect men to defend and save them. The men suffering from white knight syndrome will go as far as sacrificing their own lives to rescue women they don’t even know.

Feminists also don’t mind that many men are serving the police and military force to serve their alpha boyfriend: the government. Women are innately attracted to power and the government is the new protector and provider of women that grows bigger and stronger each day while ordinary men are becoming weaker and irrelevant.

6. Dogs are neutered

Although men aren’t getting physically neutered the way dogs are, other methods are being employed to psychologically castrate men. This includes the epidemic use of ADHD drugs to tame boys, ridiculous laws aimed at controlling men’s sexual interactions with women, and the overall cultural currents to shame masculinity while promoting all sorts of degeneracy that dilute it. Today’s wives don’t even want to get sexual with their husbands.

7. Dogs that are not domesticated are pests

“Masculine men are organizing a meeting? They must be rapists!”

When a dog is not owned by a human being, it is considered a pest that needs to be controlled.

Men today who do not submit to the feminist agenda are constantly attacked as being losers, sexists, misogynists, rapists, and so on. In today’s feminist society, you either serve the female imperative or you’re a Neanderthal who is out of touch with the times. Steps are already being made to control every aspect of male behavior in public.

You should also remember that dogs are natural pack animals (think of their cousins, wolves). By being removed from the pack, they become isolated and dependent on their masters. Can you see how the same applies for today’s men?

The Differences

In addition to being dogs, men are also expected to serve as drones to keep the feminist nanny-state running.

In spite of all the similarities, there are differences that need to be addressed.

First, unlike dogs whose owners house them and feed them, men are not supported by women. Women are free to throw men away like used tampons or divorce their husbands to extract their cash. If anything, men are usually the ones who must provide for their wives.

Second, whereas dogs are under the responsibility of their owners, men are expected to be fully responsible in all their interactions with women. It is the man’s job to ensure that a woman is giving consent even if both parties are drunk; it is men who must watch over their own behavior to ensure that what they say is non-offensive and conforming; and it is men who must ensure that women feel perfectly safe and comfortable in all their interactions. If you so much as walk past a woman in the wrong manner, you’ll be accused of rape. Again, it is the man’s responsibility to ensure that he is acceptable enough to share the same space as women, not the other way around. Feminists want “equality” without accountability.

Are men becoming collectively domesticated?
image
The domesticated cows we see on farms didn’t end up the way they are now naturally. It was through thousands of years of herding and selective breeding that they became smaller, more passive, and accepting of their conditions. But the fact is, it doesn’t take thousands of years to transform entire species. In this article which I recommend you read, a Soviet project to domesticate foxes have shown that it only takes several generations of selective breeding to transform wild foxes into effeminate and tamed versions of themselves.

The global testosterone level around the world has been mysteriously dropping for the past few decades. While chemical toxins in all the products we consume and come in contact with has been given as one possible explanation, I wouldn’t be surprised to find out that we as species are gradually becoming emasculated at a genetic level through the selective breeding process. In other words, we are becoming socially engineered to be effeminate. It’s not something impossible when you consider that easily tamable beta males, the sperm donors, are usually the males women select as their mates after they themselves are done riding the cock-carousel. I think it’s a factor we should consider besides the emasculation through cultural degeneracy that we’re already familiar with.

Men are supposed to be men unleashing their primal energy through raw adventure instead of getting tamed into submission. I have no doubt that the systematic domestication efforts of today is what is causing collective male nihilism, depression, and frustrated energy. Men who are awake must allow themselves be men.

If you like this article and are concerned about the future of the Western world, check out Roosh's book Free Speech Isn't Free. It gives an inside look to how the globalist establishment is attempting to marginalize masculine men with a leftist agenda that promotes censorship, feminism, and sterility. It also shares key knowledge and tools that you can use to defend yourself against social justice attacks. Click here to learn more about the book. Your support will help maintain our operation.

Ted Deveer #conspiracy returnofkings.com

Is The US Government Planning A Fake Alien Invasion?

I’m Ted, I read old books, and my interest in Stanley Kubrick has nothing, absolutely nothing, to do with my interest in conspiracy theories, not at all, no way. And I like my privacy.

As utterly insane as it sounds, it seems possible that the US Government is preparing to try to convince the world that there is an alien invasion about to happen, in the largest “false flag” since 9/11.

You’re probably bursting out laughing now and asking yourself, “Why would Roosh allow such a crackpot to write an article?” and I’d like to preemptively respond by (a) asking you to give me the benefit of the doubt for the course of these 1,000 words, (b) noting that this is just a hypothesis that we will see proven or disproven over the next months, and (c) making clear: I don’t believe in UFOs or alien lifeforms but I do believe that the media puts on large-scale coordinated shows in conjunction with the government.

Here are five reasons why I think the show—which I’ll call the “Aliens (Bio)attack!” Show—is likely to happen over the next months.

1. The US government is suddenly talking about UFOs

First, in December, the NY Times had an expose which argued that (a) the Department of Defense has videos taken by Air Force pilots of what it believes are UFOs (the video is included in the article at that link); (b) the DoD has some of the materials collected from these UFOs secretly that they are studying; (c) the DoD has a secret department dedicated to tracking UFOs; and (d) many high-level people within the DoD, who have access to classified intelligence that we don’t have access to, believe in UFOs.

This leads me to one of only two conclusions: either aliens exist or the US Government wants us to think that aliens exist. I’m going to make an assumption—that may or may not be true but it’s just a belief I have—that either aliens don’t exist or if they do they’re not in contact with the US government.

I’m a bit too scientific, not to mention too skeptical of what the government tells us, to believe in extraterrestrial intelligence. If you believe the US government is in contact with aliens, then click away—the rest of this article isn’t for you. This leaves me with only one conclusion: for some reason, the DoD wants us to think aliens exist. Why would they want to do that?

2. The media is excited to spread UFO theories

Second, this article is part of a deluge from the mass media of alien articles over the last months. And we know that the US federal government has deep ties to the press. Just days before the NY Times expose, Newsweek published “Alien Life: Europa Plate Tectonics could be Feeding Life on Icy Jupiter Moon” (Dec 5th 2017) and “Do Aliens Exist?” (Dec 8th 2017), presciently predicting the trend of the month. Google Trends shows how it’s suddenly being spoken about online non-stop out of the blue.

Incredibly, the CIA’s official Twitter account is now tweeting with instructions on how to take photos of UFOs. In October, NASA claimed that a cylindrical asteroid-like object that they can’t identify is flying 100,000 mph in our solar system, but it is from another solar system, the first time ever an object is in our solar system that originated in a different one. It has apparently been named Oumuamua, which doubly-presciently means “messenger” in Hawaiian.

All the articles before the expose and the official CIA tweets about it make it harder to argue that it’s just a cool topic for the media to talk about since the expose; it must be deeper than that.

3. Aliens make for a great external threat that can get citizens to rally behind the government

Third, it makes sense for the government to do this, from their eyes. It’s a way to unite the entire country (or world) against a common enemy, while also an excuse for a power grab. And an easy way to steal more money—oh, we need vaccines against alien viruses, my friend’s company happens to make them and it will cost $10 billion—but we need it!

Plus, if the deep state is in a war against the President, as seems to be the case, then the deep state probably needs to activate some pretty extreme contingency backup plans it had been planning for a long time. Break glass in case of emergency.

4. Alien-obsessed Blink 182 singer is deeply connected to the CIA/NSA apparatus

Fourth, there’s a weird connection with Tom DeLonge, the singer of Blink 182. He just created a UFO-seeking company whose board and advisors are all the first rate CIA/NSA operatives. And he goes on Joe Rogan’s podcast and has a bizarre interview in which he seems to know nothing about UFOs or his new company.

The best synthesis of DeLonge’s weird behavior—creating this UFO company, somehow getting all these top CIA/NSA operatives as his advisors, yet knowing nothing about any of it—is that he’s a front man, trying to use his huge following to bring more widespread acceptance to his “belief” in aliens.

5. The “aliens attack” plan was long ago revealed through code name Project Blue Beam

Fifth, there have been conspiracy theories in which people have been whispering about this for decades. Just Google “Project Blue Beam” or “Serge Monast” and many articles, from decades ago, will discuss these multi-decade plans. A good starting point is a speech Monast gave summarizing Project Blue Beam 20 years ago, shortly before his mysterious death.

Another good starting point is RationalWiki’s page about it, which—although it argues this is a fake conspiracy theory and doesn’t exist—is an excellent summary of the idea. Plus reading and considering both sides of any debate with an open mind is essential to intellectual honesty.

How will it play out? I have no idea. But I’m willing to put forth a testable hypothesis: over 2018, we’re going to see more and more media about aliens, including more top scientists (“Stephen Hawking”—name in quotes on purpose) and Hollywood celebrities believing in UFOs and that they’re coming. This is testable using Google Trends to track what’s being discussed online. All this chatter led by the Mainstream Media will build up to some sort of attack, likely a bioattack, that may or may not happen in 2018.

Lets see how this plays out, but regardless of whether it happens or not— we live in interesting times.

David G. Brown #fundie returnofkings.com

Straight Men Will Soon Be Called Homophobic For Not Sleeping With Gays And Trannies

David is a lifelong dissident and intellectual rebel. He despises political correctness, which replaces real, needy victims with narcissistic leftists out for a free meal. Though still a young man, he has watched society descend into its present morass with great sadness, combined with a determination to help make things better. He tweets when there’s something worth tweeting here.

In 2017, straight men who refuse to date biological males dressed like women were shamed on a number of occasions for being “transphobic.” We should expect that at some stage, very possibly in 2018 or 2019, heterosexual males will also begin to be attacked en masse for not wanting to have sex with men.

Obsessions over “gender fluidity” and the rise of SJW brainwashing amongst kids, including those in elementary school, mean that expressing a perfectly normal and healthy heterosexual preference is becoming increasingly hard. In Australia, one notorious transgender Marxist, Roz Ward, went so far as to make up “statistics” saying that half of all teenagers are sexually attracted to their own sex. What will the claimed figure be in 2018 or 2019 and how will that impact on guys who know they are only attracted to women?

You don’t have a right not to date transgenders

After straight men understandably began to report transgenders messaging them on Tinder, outlets such as The Huffington Post came to the rescue, decrying the rampant “transphobia” in the dating market. In another instance of typical SJW hysteria, a contestant on The Bachelorette got into hot water for verbalizing a common enough concern of men, namely that heavily dolled-up transgender “women” regularly try to pass themselves off as biological women. With this sort of putrid political climate, it is very easy to imagine a time when not being sexually attracted to Barry or Steve will be equated with anti-gay “bigotry” as well.

Indicating the warped social totem pole that is regularly putting transgenders above women, straight females are also being shamed, albeit to a lesser extent than heterosexual men. CNN, for example, just couldn’t figure out why the majority of women weren’t open to dating this transgender “man,” as if genitalia were a completely irrelevant part of sexuality. Who would have known!

The stage is set

SJWs do not want tolerance. They want a kind of uniformity, where the groups we are meant to accept and praise actually end up dictating what someone else can or cannot do sexually. The failure of most men (or women) to want to date a transgender is a setback, for sure, but this will not stop SJWs from continuing their agenda in the same and other ways.

Even “men’s” magazines are now part of the fray, joining a series of outlets celebrating supposedly straight males who screw gay guys. GQ continued its abysmal fall in 2017 by publishing “The straight men dating men and the gay men who fall in love with them.” Salon, however, is a very unsurprising offender for its long-term pushing of straight men’s “malleable” sexualities. All we are missing at the moment are widespread calls for men to stop being “homophobic” and give themselves to other men fully.

Just wait and see

As a result of the negative reception most folks gave to the idea of dating a transgender, some might say that this article is alarmist. Well, I would counter that since we have already seen the sexualization of children according to SJW ideology, it is perfectly foreseeable that straight adult males will be encouraged or shamed into wanting sex with men. If this article is proven wrong, it will be either due to blind luck or because we see positive, long-awaited developments in the West.

Remember, probably well over 50% of discussions about sexuality nowadays concern lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender experiences, despite people of these orientations comprising perhaps 4% of the population. If this is not a sign that your heterosexuality is considered abnormal or not fully acceptable by SJWs and their enablers, I don’t know what is.

James Miller #sexist returnofkings.com

The Case For Gendo-Nationalism
image
James Miller is a political strategist and policy intellectual from New York City. He is the founder and president of the James Miller Foundation.

The alt-right and their leaders have often stressed the need for the establishment of a ethno-state on the North American continent. While I can understand many of their concerns as a middle-class white guy who lives in a gated community in the suburbs of New York City, I honestly do not have to deal with the minority problem on a day to day basis.

Whether the Bronx is being flooded with new arrivals is simply not my problem. Thots, on the other hand, affect us wherever we live. It doesn’t matter how great your neighborhood is or even how religious your state is. America has become a degenerate nation, and thottery has pervaded all aspects of American life—Northern and Southern, Protestant and Catholic, conservative and liberal, normie and alt-right.

image
A thot prepares to flash her breasts to a crowd of onlookers in a ‘conservative’ state in the Deep South.

Traditionalism Is Hopeless

Many on the right advocate for traditionalism. They think we can just return to the days of a nuclear family, reverse all three waves of feminism, and let women assume their traditional role. While I respect the arguments made by traditionalists, I have concluded that any sort of rollback is now politically impossible in the United States. We have lost the culture war. There is no going back. Sure, you can flee to a country where remnants of traditionalism still exist, but they are merely a little further back on the ongoing global shift towards female ‘liberation’ and the dissolution of family life.

Furthermore, while this problem has been substantially amplified in recent years, it is certainly not a modern one. Thots have consistently been the downfall of powerful men throughout history. John F. Kennedy was compromised by the Soviet Union as a result of depraved female temptresses. Even Adolf Hitler’s defeat in the Second World War can be attributed largely to the presence of Eva Braun. Cleopatra’s betrayal of Mark Antony the moment a more alpha chad arrived on the scene surely serves as one of the clearest demonstrations of the subversion of the opposite sex.

Richard Spencer similarly and correctly recognizes a return to the days of actual white supremacy is impossible and undesirable, and instead advocates for a white ethno-state, building on the momentum of left-wing identity politics movements. Although I respectfully disagree with him on that issue, his fundamental analysis is correct. We cannot return to an undefined point in the past when things were somehow better on the issues that we care about. All we can do is seek to influence the future. I have thus come to the conclusion that the only solution to our current thot debacle is peaceful separation between the sexes, and a resulting male gendo-state.

Now, this notion may sound absurd. Most traditionalists love and respect women, and simply wish for them to return to their historical place in society, rather than be done away with altogether. They must come to understand that separation has now become a necessity.

image
We may reach the point of open conflict with the opposing gender.

Separation Is Necessary

Cultural feminism has degraded women to the point where co-existence is a net negative to males. Women weaken men by their very presence, co-opting and hijacking even traditionalist movements by embracing the rhetoric and yet leaving much to be desired in terms of the personal example they set.

As the last few weeks have shown, women are able to completely destroy the reputations of decent, upstanding men through false accusations of sexual abuse. Women compete with us in a job market that is rigged against us by politicians who have come to see women as an essential voting bloc to appease. Women now even proudly declare that they do not need or want men in their lives.

Why don’t we put that to the test? Let us see how well the opposing gender fares when left completely to their own devices. In this way, we could use the rise of feminism as force of acceleration in order to promote our bid for nationhood. It is ironically fairly likely that the world’s first gendo-state will consist of pink haired female ogres LARPing as Amazons. But once the precedent is set, males will have a unique opportunity to seize the moment and build the case for our secession.

The Vision

Gendo-nationalism would involve near-total separation between men and women. A physical border would be erected between the respective male and female nation-states, and travel between these gendo-states would be tightly controlled and require permission from the governing authority of the gendo-state being entered. In the male gendo-state, which I have little doubt will be far more successful than its female competitor, male chauvinism will be the zeitgeist of the new order.

In addition, we need to think about the only real thing we need women for—sex. Advancements in robotics in recent years are quickly making this need obsolete. Future improvements in cloning technology may even allow us to replace women for the purposes of reproduction. Until the point at which a solution is devised, the gendo-state could have a work visa system which prostitutes and surrogates could utilize without permanent settlement in our new nation.

image
Soon, we will no longer need women to lead fulfilling sex lives.

The Path Ahead

Before we can have separation, we need to have a general sense of male identity. Now, I believe this to an extent to be inherent and hardwired, hence the presence of so many all-male social groups in our society. Nevertheless, we must promote the importance of masculinity and push close identification with our gender’s collective interests as a component of that.

Subsequently, we need to urge our fellow men to gradually start removing all emotional attachment to women. They’re to be seen as a tool, not a crutch. Emotional attachment makes men the weaker sex because women are inherently able to exploit it, and ensures the perpetuation of the anti-male status quo. Once it is overcome, the foundations for a gendo-state can be laid.

Free from the shackles of womankind, men will be able to embrace their true potential. We will have hours more in our days which would otherwise be wasted on entertaining vacuous thots. We will no longer be treated like second class citizens in the very nations we built and shed our blood for. Our inherent physical and mental supremacy will give us a substantial edge in the world marketplace. Much as ethno-nationalist movements played a major role in defining the 20th century, my hope is that gendo-nationalism will define the 21st.

Christopher Leonid #sexist returnofkings.com

The Mainstream Embrace Of #MeToo Puts Us One Step Closer Towards The Enslavement Of Men

Defining male agency during the collapse of the Sexual Revolution.

The progenitors of the #MeToo meme have been elevated to that dubious plinth of social endorsement, the cover of Time magazine.

image
#Iwouldnt

These women did not “launch a movement.” However, the current wreaths-to-laurels victimhood craze does bear out the completion of an important cultural cycle.

Free Love Wasn’t Free

A core premise of our sexual dystopia is:

‘My body my choice.’

Within the bounds of legality, we are supposed to believe that neither sex is more damaged by their coital decisions than the other. The retro-active outrage now mounted by women at men on account of mutually consensual sexual intercourse (and calls for the bounds of legality to be shifted accordingly), reiterates that this is not actually the case.

The struggle of many a post-prime girl for exclusivity with a series of increasingly inferior suitors, must be a brutal way to discover that it is still impossible to raise a joyridden car back to its factory-new price.

Men are checking out of monogamous commitment, leaving two generations of women wandering a widening bimbo-limbo between settled life either as a housewife or denizen of the increasingly cash-strapped welfare state (the overwhelmingly administrative sector jobs provided to ‘career women’ being a manifestation of the latter).

As an institution, marriage is only debased further by social and legal efforts to enforce commitment from men to polygamous women who spent their bloom years in promiscuity. Although such an iniquitous contract could be excused by a myriad of exceptional circumstances, the unprecedented glut of women beneath the male investment threshold turn the exceptions into clichés.

The Gynocentric Interpretation

A defining characteristic of corporate and clickbait discourse is the effort to sublimate readers’ frustration into outrage while bypassing the question of accountability. Time and others are now under huge pressure to find mythologies to both explain the dissatisfaction of their female readership and serve as the basis for corrective political action. Someone must be to blame for their problems; anyone but themselves.

What Time has produced is a fairy tail without a prince. It begins:

‘Movie stars are more like you and me than we ever knew.’

We are then introduced to a wide range of women who were:

‘brought together by a common experience.’

They were actually brought together by Time, at great expense, to confirm the biased premise of their leading article. Time then chews over each of these women’s testimonies, droning on and on and on in a tantric, mantric, incuntation of its utterly banal and predictable conclusion:

image
Time have revealed their straw man – and he’s called Donald Trump.

I suspect that the feminist Trump-tantrum is not caused by Trump per se, but by the part of American society which voted him into office. It’s an important distinction because it means that, as a political instrument, Trump is needed the most by the very people who like him least. Without Trump, the outrage would be revealed for what it truly is: a million personal vendettas against a million brash, powerful and wealthy American men who these women consentingly gave their bodies to.

Trump’s appeal to the free market and private capital (as well as the string of hot women who have let him ‘grab ‘em by the poosy’), is more than just a refusal to push the envelope on welfare policies which enable sexual liberation—it is an exposition of the gulf between what is conventionally true and what is actually true about modern female sexual opportunism.

The self-deception may be genuine, but was revealed nonetheless when #metoo was triggered by the loss of societal contingency plans to ensure female sexual freedom (alpha fucks and beta bucks), by constraining that of men. The fat child screams not while it is happily eating itself to death but when the cookies are taken away.

[Video titled "Satan leaves a woman's soul as Trump is sworn in"]

Feminism’s Finale

The premise of #metoo has now been twisted by various degrees to its own complete inversion. Nearly a year ago, I was told by a County Court in Britain that I owed money to a woman whose sexual advances I had gently rebuffed some years before. Neither I nor the court had any idea why I owed her money or what her claim was, but I still had to defend myself.

A case that would never have come to trial twenty years ago dragged out for months as she gradually patched together a claim (without evidence), which gradually escalated to an allegation of sexual abuse.

My trial was the direct result of her assumption that society would stand behind her in extracting resources from the man of her choosing. I was lucky that she had a legal history of ‘choosing’ other men before me, and the judge sent her howling from the courtroom.

But what if I had been her first shot? What if she’d gone to the Crown Prosecution Service?

I add, for the sake of completeness, that I am a strict adherent of pre-marital abstinence and, in the case of this particular woman, had never kissed, hit on, made a pass at, nor been in any form of romantic relationship with her. #Iwouldnt—and that is precisely what enraged her.

Let the irony of this case serve as an illustration of the extent to which feminine imperatives can now be exercised to strong-arm men into compliance. If you have earned a #metoo assertion like I did, you’re probably doing something right.

What for men in 2018?

The dregs of women will always preen their sexual worthiness in a sensational light by announcing that a man once made an unwanted pass at them, just as feminist Phrynes like Emma Watson will always lend a pretty face to their ugly cause (phoney outrage is her profession’s prerogative. I bear her no grudge).

Our toxic tributary of sexual realism to the mainstream discussion sees the feminist victimbragging for what it really is: another attempt to circumvent rational analysis and keep society plugging the feminist narrative. Soon, #metoo will become as passé as ‘Trump Bedroom Backlash,’ but these phenomena are mere symptoms of a deeper social condition.

As private debt piles up and resources cease to flow, society will have to find new ways of demanding that men judiciously restrain their own behaviour on behalf of the unfettered dualistic sexual strategy of women—sexy badboys and stable providers stepping up and down as and when women demand it. The contradictory messages that this sends to men are now compounded by the constant possibility of being criminalised for making a faux pas.

Today, as trials move from the courtroom to the press and to Twitter and Facebook, the degree of kafkaesque reassurance that I had—the basic certainty that I was on trial—is starting to ebb away. A lot of men who don’t grasp the underlying biomechanics behind the sexual victimhood phenomenon are doomed to be spirited on a windowless train of THOT thought from false premise to final solution: their enslavement to women, either directly or via the state.

The chaotic disconnect between the claim and the truth is not a means to an end but the end itself. This climate of fear is the West’s way of forcing the marriage of mankind to womankind, joylessly mandating social responsibilities without providing any privilege. The carrot has gone from the sexual contract and only the stick remains.

image
It can still be a beautiful life for men who don’t answer to society. Careful though, the beta version of this man is Smeagol Gollum.

The harder men try to opt out of commitment to women, the stronger the social effort will be to drive them back, until escape from women will turn into escape from society itself.

Bryce Lockwood #fundie returnofkings.com

A Guide To Weimerica

Bryce Lockwood is a straight white male who works at a university in a blue state and thus cannot use his real name. He writes, he lifts, he has skin in the game, and he lives at Ground Zero for Weimerica. He possess an ever-present sense of humor that would have seen him quip, “Merry Christmas, ya filthy animal!” had he been the SEAL that capped Bin Laden. He also has a masochistic streak that has expressed itself by climbing Mt. Tammany in the rain and reading the citation sections of various history books. He recently had to buy a new wardrobe as his waist shrunk from his workout and he just passed day 60 of the NF challenge. Friendly to stray dogs, hostile to stray thots.

“Weimerica,” an amalgam of Germany’s pre-Nazi era Weimar Republic, is a term you’ve probably heard in the past year if you’ve been active in the ongoing political maelstrom that is social media. Some alternatively call it “Clown World.” I prefer “Weimerica” as it more specific to what the United States has become recently and hints at a cataclysm yet to be.

This “guide” to Weimerica was written on the fly in-between back-to-back New England snowstorms, originally for an audience of one person. The genesis of this guide was the impending first-time visit to the US of a friend of mine from Lebanon. I wrote it not to show how bad things are, but instead to show how ugly things are. Not to frighten, but to inform on the many unpleasant realities that are all too quickly (and conveniently) forgotten about on a day-to-day basis. How indifference is the order of day despite the ever-tightening noose around the necks of most people.

So what is Weimerica, you ask? Read on and find out.

What is Weimerica?

Weimerica is—.

—homicides being up 20% from 2014 (equivalent in raw numbers to more than the September 11th attacks).

—the 17,250 confirmed homicides of 2016 being more than any other year since 1997 (when there were 18,208).

—66,324 drug overdose deaths in a 12-month period (the Vietnam War saw 47,434 hostile deaths over 15+ years).

—44,193 suicides in 2015, with suicides being at 30-year highs in 2016, and suicide being one of the top ten causes of death in Weimerica.

—23,000,000,000 views on Pornhub in 2016 (729 per second every single day non-stop for the whole year) with there being only 7,466,964,000 people on Earth.

—70% of Weimerica being on prescription medication with 20% being on more than five medications at once (and life expectancy still dropping).

—real income showing little to no gains for decades on end.

—being worse off financially than your parents.

—a decrease in the average household income in New Jersey from 2005 to 2015.

—everything being fleetingly temporary, you won’t have that long lasting job, house, car, marriage, etc., like your parents and grandparents did.

—nearly half of all pregnancies being unintended.

—Weimerica is a colossal, dystopian shopping mall filled with 325 million atomized, rootless individuals with no common culture, cause, language, religion or background, united only by their shared consumerism (“Did you see the Giants game last night?” “Oh my Gawd, Stranger Thingssss!”).

The Motto for Weimerica: “NO LIVES MATTER”

A seven-time convicted felon and five-time deportee fatally shoots an innocent passerby in the back with a stolen 40-caliber Glock handgun on a public pier? Acquitted.

A crying father begging for his life shot to death crawling on his hands and knees towards a SWAT team aiming AR-15s and screaming at him? Acquitted.

A bride-to-be gunned down in front of her house in her pajamas when a police officer sitting in his squad car suddenly draws and fires pointblank into her face? No charges.

22,000 attend a country music festival surrounded by high walls and patrolled by security guards and police officers in the most heavily surveilled city in the Western hemisphere? Gunned down by the score with total impunity in the biggest mass shooting of all time.

926,190 abortions in 2014, with an estimated 98.3% being elective (meaning unrelated to rape/incest and medical complications).
Everything Is Fake

Zillow.com and other real estate websites photoshop clouds, grass, and trees around properties and present them in a way that makes them appear much larger and more modern than they actually are.

These two pictures are of the same person:
[pictures omited]

Wall Street rating agencies graded $400 billion worth of subprime mortgage bonds without knowing what was in them, giving many of them the highest “AAA” rating (effectively making them rating agencies in name only).

The 5-star Mandalay Bay hotel in Las Vegas employed an unregistered, unlicensed illegal immigrant as a security guard.

Love To Hate

Everything being either “awesome,” “insanely good,” or “the best ______ ever,” or “shit,” “shitty,” or “the worst _______ ever,” with little to no middle ground and/or reasoned opinions. For example, the discrepancy in reviews for The Last Jedi and nearly every one of the 100+ reviews I read for the Ford Fusion being either “BEST CAR EVER” or “Should be recalled, WORST CAR EVER.”

Every piece of media being heavily and ridiculously scrutinized down to the last detail for any inane reason to hate it. For instance, one of the top comments on a YouTube video for “Shout” by the Isley Brothers accused the video’s author of not including enough black people dancing in his/her photo montage and further asserting that this lack of inclusion was deliberate.

Hating something because it is successful/popular just to go against the grain. For instance, actual “professional” reviews of Dunkirk being “Yeah, yeah, it was great, but why weren’t women the main characters?” and “Yeah, it’s good, but Christopher Nolan and his Nolaniods—.”

The hate-watching of TV shows (Keeping up with the Kardashians, Jersey Shore, etc.) propelling them to ultimate success.

Insane Anti-Social Atrocities Are The New Norm

4 out of the 5 worst mass shootings in Weimerican history took place in the past five years.

The worst mass shooting in US history (600+ gunned down) disappears from the news and thus collective consciousness in the space of a week.

The Sutherland Springs massacre (which featured babies being executed at pointblank range by rifle fire) disappears from the headlines within a day or two. This shooting would have ranked as the worst in Weimerican history as recently as 2007.

The mass shooting body count record for Weimerica was broken in 2017 a mere 15 months after the now-second worst mass shooting in Weimerican history occurred.

The firearms technology used in recent mass shootings has been around for decades, and gun laws as a whole have never been stricter and mental health resources have never been more available (remember 70% of the population is on prescription medication), so why is this happening now?

War Is The Default State

After 16+ years in Afghanistan and 14+ years in Iraq (and 6,935 total US deaths), war is the default state of Weimerica and no longer afforded special or notable status (in contrast, the major combat phase of the generation-defining Vietnam War was seven years).

0.4% of the population is active-duty military, meaning ~95% of the population most likely is not emotionally invested and/or cares minimally about whatever combat is/was taking place (or will take place).

The Everyday Absurdisms Of Weimerica

Prescription medication used to combat anxiety, depression, and suicidal/homicidal thoughts and actions causes anxiety, depression, and suicidal/homicidal thoughts and actions as a side effect.

A Rutgers University professor lamenting the Sandy Hook massacre so much that he made a YouTube video about it, but still believing in infanticide up to one year of age.

New Jersey has the highest paid police officers in the nation with an average salary of $100,000/year, but also has three cities in the top ten for “worst homicide rate” and those officers still have the right to shoot you to death if you don’t follow their conflicting orders to the letter while having a gun pointed at your head.

Parents working and saving money for twenty years to send their kids to college only for them to return home after graduation hating them, their country, and themselves in addition to being tens of thousands in debt.

One-fourth of graduates leaving college with a four year degree in hand are no better off than if they did not go to college at all from a wage perspective.

The maintenance staff at a college making more than most of the graduates of that college because they are unionized.

Consensual sex (“fuck me in the butt!!!”) being redefined as “rape” with such concepts as “enthusiastic consent” (Yes.=Rape, YES!=not rape), “continuing consent” (“ask every ten minutes if it’s okay to keep going”), and “affirmative consent” (“Can I hold your hand? Stroke your thigh? Whisper into your ear?”).

The wife of “American Sniper” Chris Kyle saying she married him because “he was a nice guy.”

“I do not care, I am a millionaire, I do not give AF.”

Some Classic Weimerican Quotes

“I was naked underneath my clothes.” ~A woman explaining her #metoo moment.

“CRAWL TOWARDS ME! IF YOU FALL, YOU BETTER FALL ON YOUR FACE!” ~A police officer’s reasonable and coherent order that must be obeyed upon penalty of death.

“He was turning his life around!” ~The classic family/friend lament of a dead victim/perpetrator with a less than stellar background.

“He changed into something he wasn’t.” ~The pathetic attempt of a high school chum of a mass shooter to cover up for the fact that he somehow missed what a psycho his friend was.

“Russian interference!” ~A viable excuse for anything and everything.

“The hoes are laughin’? YEP!” ~An exchange between a confused TV doctor and a 14-year-old aspiring female rap artist.

“He was COMPED!” ~The humblebrag of the coked up brother of a mass shooter/pasty.

“Stay in the car.”~A plea to do nothing and ignore the situation, whatever it may be.

When Did America Become Weimerica?

No firm answer, I first noticed it in the spring of 2009 when there was a constant stream of family murder-suicides and mass shootings, some of them recession related. Afghanistan also escalated that year (with death tolls doubling for both Britain and the US from the year prior) under the election promise of “I’ll get us out of Afghanistan, take that to the bank!”

Things really picked up steam in 2012 when large public mass shootings began occurring with increasing regularity, labor force participation hit a three decade low (meaning there was no economic recovery), and drug overdose deaths had already jumped 211% (in the Northeast) in comparison with 2010.

Maximus Decimus Meridius #fundie returnofkings.com

The Orthodox Church Is The Answer To Reviving Christianity In Europe And Saving The West

Maximus is a Man, capital M, period. Love. Truth. Justice. Liberty. Respect. These are the lodestones pointing true to magnetic masculinity in a polarized feminist west. His goal for writing on ROK is to be the gadfly that provokes thought and counters groupthink. You can find more of his writing at A Dream That Was Rome .

First let us take a look at a Christian faith that is strong, vibrant and alive.

Christianity is a beautiful faith. For all my previous criticism of its intellectual formulation, the one thing it gets 100% correct is that it actually enshrines the nuclear family unit – Father, Son and virgin Mother. In that respect, it is more patriarchal than Islam in overtly formulating The Father as divine authority, The Son as heir to that authority, and the virgin Mary as model all women should aspire to be as wife and mother. The video above is a 26 minute silent reflection on life inside a men’s Orthodox Christian monastery in Abkhazia. The power of the documentary is palpable for its very lack of speech and thus quiet testimony to the essence of Christian truth – the worship of God through Jesus Christ.

After the passionate response to my last essay, I went on YouTube to look up what I could find on the Eastern Orthodox faith. Here is a great video series I would like to share with you all.

For Christianity to return and thrive in Europe & The West, there must be unity.

The single biggest advantage of the Orthodox faith is its unity. There is simply too much division and conflict in almost all flavours of Christianity outside the Roman Catholic Church. Historically, the Orthodox faith does not have a real history of theology (per se). That is, the Orthodox don’t think too much or question too deeply about their faith. They accept. They believe. They practice. Most importantly, they do not allow any change – none – to what they believe is the original church handed down to humanity from St. Paul.

For the Orthodox, it is not about the intellectual foundations (i.e. theology) so much as the community of worshipers and keeping to past traditions. They keep to what their ancestors practiced and see no need to change anything. Doing so would be a grave break and violation of the past, a complete insult to the body of Christ and the family tradition that has been passed down for generations to preserve the faith.

Eastern Orthodox Christianity has kept the original Byzantine rituals and formulations for worship. A good example of its seriousness and unwillingness to change is the fact that they will not let anyone who is not Orthodox to take part in communion. They see communion as a serious ritual, the true taking in of the body and life of Christ, His word, and His salvation. To allow just anyone to partake without proper preparation, proper orientation, and proper intention, is dangerous. The liturgy and hymns are also old. They go back all the way to the original church over 1000 years ago and more. The swinging incense pots is not some ornate flashy thing they do, there is real spiritual purpose and foundation to everything in an Orthodox liturgical mass.

What I have just described is practiced by all Orthodox churches which may strike many American Protestants and Evangelicals as odd. The different designations (Greek, Ukrainian, Russian, etc.) are nothing more than jurisdictional boundaries. If you are Russian, you want to go to mass in your language and with your people. Each church is local and loosely affiliated with the others, but there is no over arching official hierarchy, no Pope as it were for the ENTIRE faith. What unites them as Orthodox is not a single authority ON doctrine (per se), but common faith IN practice (de rigueur).

In many ways, Martin Luther was a revolt against the Pope having authority over how to worship by the local community. His opposition to Indulgences and a paper titled “The Pagan Servitude To The Church” are reminiscent of my own intellectual wrestling trying to understand Christianity. For Luther, it was ultimately about a return of faith to the followers of Christ, not blind obedience to papal authority for which he saw no authority given to it.

@Martin Luther ~ Wikipedia

His theology challenged the authority and office of the Pope by teaching that the Bible is the only source of divinely revealed knowledge from God[3] and opposed sacerdotalism by considering all baptized Christians to be a holy priesthood.

Ironically, in Eastern Orthodox, the power of the church rests in the local faithful and has forever been this way. In one video, a story is told about an Orthodox priest who was invited to a world religions syncretic type seminar where he was quoted at the end of the conference as saying “Yes, there are many paths to God and all are valid.” When he returned to his local church and went to put the key in the door, the local church members had already changed the locks!!! How many Catholics would like to do that to the current Pope?!?! This is why the East rejected authority of Rome over THEIR religion. Christ belongs to the people, from God, and the Eastern Orthodox have protected this faith and non-hierarchical organization since the beginning of Christianity.

Why is it that Eastern Christians are agreeable about this? Why don’t they clamour and agitate for new stuff, for revision, for updating? The reason is that in the East, we expect the faith to actually do something. It isn’t just a matter of having the right institution, or having the right theology, though I believe the Orthodox church does have those things. That’s not what does it, really. It’s that we expect that practicing this faith will change people. And you know what? We see that it actually does. We see it over and over again. We see it in contemporary lives. We see people actually transformed.

To an Orthodox, they practice because it works, not just because it is right.

This— that single statement— would unite all Christianity. Gone would be the divisions, the arguments, the 1000s of flavours of Christ by each Protestant wanting to be a Pope.

If I ever become Christian, it will be in the Orthodox faith. This single video series has proved to me beyond a shadow of doubt that what the Orthodox has works. It works because—

Even after over 70 plus years of Communist oppression & outright murder, the faith has rebounded

Russians are Orthodox because faith in Christ works, not just because it is right. If you have ever known a Russian, you know how much they value what works and not what is bullshit. My intellectualization and analysis of Christianity is precisely the problem in The West. No single Christian tradition in The West, outside of the Catholic faith, can truly claim that what they have works, but they have ALL argued and warred for centuries about being right.

If Western Christianity did work, people would not have left. Leaving aside the massive hurdle of getting Westerners to actually stop being atheists or completely ignoring God, a Christian faith that can actually claim to work is precisely what will get someone like me back in the church. A claim I must repeat, that is actually backed up by evidence, not rhetoric.

The final video I want to close off with is an Orthodox explanation of salvation.

This— brought tears to my eyes. It actually answered one, if not THE, core complaint Westerners have about Christianity as they know it – you are condemned to hell if you reject Christ, and no amount of good works or deeds or repentance can save you if you do not accept Christ, the end. Of importance to note, this priest refers to God only when explaining the Orthodox version of salvation; it is God, not Jesus that is the focus of Eastern Orthodox faith. I suspect this is why the Protestants split from The Vatican and we can see it in their further splintering right up to today; Protestants wanted more Jesus and less God talk from the Pope because it was Jesus that truly saves. (Once again, you can see why a non-Christian starts to scratch his head in puzzlement.)

This Orthodox version of salvation is one I have never heard from any Christian priest or pastor in The West. If Europe, if America, were to hear the message of God in the Orthodox faith, I think you would have a revival like none we have ever witnessed in the past. In fact, the whole Theoria YouTube channel is, I suspect, a production created for just that reason. Thousands of disillusioned Protestants and other long lost former Christians are filling the Orthodox churches. The Theoria video series was created to help orient and guide the newly faithful. Is their any other church outside Catholicism that is seeing this kind of resurgence? (Assuming Catholicism is seeing an influx, I do not know and just speculating because it too has a good history of unity in faith and would be The West’s oldest incarnation of Christianity.)

Conclusion

Putin is demonized in the West for many things, but the one reason “they” hate him the most? Putin and Russia are a walking, talking, living reminder of a faith they thought was all but extinct by their design and command. Putin’s Christian message is not just reaching America, but the entirety of Europe. Note as well that Putin is an astounding example of the claim to proof that the Orthodox faith works.

He has single-handedly inserted himself in Syria and reversed what was not just the holocaust of Syrian Christians, but the globalist plan to balkanize the region with Iran being the last Muslim nation standing in their way. For all those who claim Islam is favored by the elites and want it to take over Europe, just look to Muslim lands where, regardless of how you feel about Islam as a religion, the homeland of Muslim faith is being literally bombed into oblivion in a way Christian “Muslim invasion” Europe is not. Make no mistake, after Islam’s “victory” in Europe, it will be up next for targeted wholesale destruction by they who hate God more than they hate humanity.

I have no doubt that if Europe and The West can find its way back to Christianity, our future will look as bright as Russia’s. From even this most minimal and cursory review of the Eastern Orthodox faith, it is the only path back to Christ in Europe and The West that I can see actually working.

What Christianity needs is unity of faith, unity of belief, unity of practice and unity in God. All of this is found in the Eastern Orthodox church and nowhere else.

[Emphasis original]

David G. Brown #fundie returnofkings.com

Would You Rather Live In A Society Controlled By Sharia Law Or Social Justice?

David is a lifelong dissident and intellectual rebel. He despises political correctness, which replaces real, needy victims with narcissistic leftists out for a free meal. Though still a young man, he has watched society descend into its present morass with great sadness, combined with a determination to help make things better. He tweets when there’s something worth tweeting here.

If the flame of the West is snuffed out and the choice is between Islam and “social justice,” I’m choosing the former. Return Of Kings has long pointed out the travesty of open borders migration, which brings in hordes of anti-Western young men from the Middle East. Notwithstanding this, Islamized societies are much more preferable to the many social sicknesses pushed by SJWs.

Should our values be basically exterminated, aside from private contrarian opinions, I am certain that at least superficially going along with Islam will be the right choice for readers of this website as well. The legitimate criticisms we might have of Islam and its applications within countries pale in comparison to the anti-civilization core of so-called social justice. At least we can say that Muslim men are motivated by basic notions of patriarchy and an acknowledgment of gender differences.

The better of two bad situations

Here are just some of the advantages a society based on Sharia Law has over a “society” predicated on social justice principles:

* Unless you fall afoul of a member of the social or political elite, a false rape accusation against a man is extremely unlikely;
* No affirmative action quota is apt to take your job or promotion away from you and give it to a woman;
* The court systems will not buttress the power of activists and others who insist that your child has the “right” to be injected with hormones of the opposite sex and remove the genitals they were born with;
* Crime in your neighborhood will be dealt with, instead of local authorities or the judiciary determining punishments based on gender or race;
* Female hypergamy will be kept in check; and
* When couples divorce, the wife will know that she will almost never be unjustly enriched, like women with little earning power who get multimillion-dollar payouts from husbands for the rest of their lives.

Put simply, the average man will face far less persecution in an Islamized society than one run by SJWs. Without being defeatist, should the West need to die for a time, embracing Islam is the logical choice for someone who wants to make the most of a collapsed political order.

There’s weight in numbers, too

In addition to the rough ideological affinities we share with patriarchal Muslims, demographic realities support the idea of choosing Islam over leftism (if a choice could ever exist). Germany, the United Kingdom, and France are all projected to have Muslim populations of around 20% mid-century. A social laboratory like Sweden will be nearly a third Muslim by that time. Moreover, the political salience of these communities will be even greater than these soon-to-be massive numbers suggest, including the ability to use, like now, aggressive tactics to further Islamic interests.

The mostly pozzed non-Muslim majority will have to kowtow much of the time to the newer arrivals and their descendants. By 2050, expect the incompetence of SJWs to be fully laid to bare, with the authorities powerless to stop the encroachment of strict Muslim values in, say, a “liberal” France or Sweden. Given the option to join with either self-respecting Muslims or obsequious leftists, I know what decision I will be making, potentially long before 2050.

What’s your plan?

Roosh recently spoke about the black pill and the need to accept that all we can sometimes do is enjoy the social decline around us. Likewise, the Age of Trump hasn’t changed many of the deleterious SJW influences within our universities, media outlets, and “popular culture.” The end is not right around the corner, but a lot is still wrong with our societies.

Once the actual fall comes, however, people will have to stop observing and make choices. Inasmuch as we cannot predict everything, the probable successors to Western civilization are already known to us. As of 2017, adopting Islam in the future is the more common sense course of action.

Michael Majalahti #fundie returnofkings.com

The Inglorious Death Of The West

Michael is arguably the most acclaimed and accomplished pro wrestler in history out of Northern Europe, as well as the pro wrestling pioneer of Finland, where he has lived since 1996 after moving from his homeland of Canada. Michael is known as an outspoken figure that bucks the system and swims against the tide. Known in pro wrestling circles as “The Rebel” StarBuck, Michael has been a champion the world over, in addition to being a rock vocalist in three bands, a personal trainer, a voice-over pro, a business owner, an actor, an artist and a husband.

We have obviously come to the end of the West and Western civilization as we know it. No longer does it take a sociological “expert” or someone with a university degree to argue the point. Now it’s apparent all across the board. Our Western culture, whatever that even is anymore, is fastly disappearing and dying. And we’re letting it happen without even putting up a fight. This, I argue, will be to our own deserved demise.

We need to take a cold, hard look at what has led the West down the road of cultural ruin. After all, we’re only getting what we’ve ordered not too long ago.

Nietzsche the Prophet

I steadfastly argue that the single greatest factor that has led the west into the shitstorm it is now faced with is the abolishment of God and its resignation from all things even remotely Christian. Simply, we became inconvenienced with and ashamed of God and His statues regarding how we ought to orchestrate our lives. Even after the founding fathers of the West chose God-fearing, Biblical statutes to orient the ethical direction of the free world, we chose to balk at the freedoms and blessings afforded us under its banner and umbrella. Excuse my bluntness, but what the fuck?

What the hell was the big problem to begin with, that our Western society had to get rid of God and become so secular? Was it the allure of all things dark, forbidden, and sinful, much like the tempting apple in the Garden of Eden? Or was it just rotten, base human nature that tends to fuck up everything it’s given unless its spiritual self wakes up and enlightens the individual to better living? Or perhaps it was it the sins of the Catholic Church at large throughout world history, with its Crusades and and Inquisitions?

Any reasonable, sane person would understand that just because there is a killer loose in Disneyland, it doesn’t imply that the fault lies with Mickey Mouse. Anyone with even the slightest amount of intellect should be able to discern the obvious difference between what is faith and what is religion: one is a belief system that ordains personal decisions and and conduct of life at large, the other is a social construct of political yoke that serves to bind its members to its bylaws, rules and regulations.

Then again, the same applies to any secret society, alma matter, or club at large. So let’s get real for a moment and ask the hard, central question: what was wrong with the statues and morals of the God of Christianity, that we, as the West at large, decided to dump Him and move out from under His protective hand, as it were?

I suddenly recall a report that came out about the public school system in Canada back 1988, after the government decided to pull the Lord’s Prayer from schools in Ontario, where I spent the majority of my youth. What followed was a plummeting of school grades across the board, funny as that may seem. Don’t try to connect the dots, only consider the consequences at face value. The bottom line is, something happened in conjunction with this paradigm shift, and it wasn’t for anyone’s betterment.

Friedrich Nietzsche was right with his “death of God” analogy back in the day. We decided to kill God off from our lives and our society – societies that were largely built on Biblical principles and safeguards to ensure the posterity and safety of its people – and we left the door open for a horde of diverse and tumultuous demons to come in. We made our collective bed, in which we now lay. And the wages of sin is death. How fucking inconvenient for us!

The Fallacy of Relative Morality

There’s really no use or sense in complaining. It was a completely willful and conscious decision by us as a people and a collective society. God didn’t fit into our big picture and so we discarded the nagging voice of right and truth. We wanted our very own, custom-tailored, relative morality. We wanted to all be special snowflakes who would have their personalized cake and eat it, too. And in our deliberately blind gluttony, heresy, hedonism and salaciousness, we laid the groundwork for the inescapable law of reaping as we’d sown. Hey, don’t be fooled!

God is not mocked, and neither is the still, small voice of common sense and conscience within each and every one of us.When the dam broke, we were too ignorant to fix it. We let the landslide advance, unabated. The West let in the aggressive demands and doctrines of the east, the doctrines of which were adverse and foreign to the West to begin with.

The healthy not only tolerated but sought to accommodate the complaints and wishes of the perverse. The waters became muddied, unassimilable, and undrinkable. We were like spectators at the Colosseum, watching our own, unethical passion play unfold before our eyes, amused and sedated by it all at the same time. Things went from bad to worse and we just clamored for more fun, frills, and entertainment to fill our empty heads and void lives. Anything to dull the unnerving voice and moment of truth that kept beckoning to each and every one of us.

We didn’t protect our borders, our customs, our beliefs or our values, because we didn’t respect what we had. Someone else built the house which we inhabited; it wasn’t any skin off our own backs. We had no more sense of collective self, of tribe, clan or us. It became every dog for themselves. Me, me, me and even more me. Not you, not us. Just more of what’s in it for me, for my own, personal benefit, entertainment and pleasure. We took it all for granted, and now it’s being taken away from us.

With the death of God, we adopted new gods, albeit lesser gods at that. Mock gods like those offered at the altar of television, a conduit that taught us to believe whatever was fed through it; the media, who we believed all too eagerly at face value, without enough critical sense to question absolutely everything and ask the crucial and central question: “In whose interest is this message being sold to us?”

Popular music and its altar of indoctrination that has been admittedly so stealthy and shrewd, that even I, as a musical artist for nearly 20 years, can only marvel at its potency in conditioning the behaviors and attitudes of its audience.

Only as you age and grow as a person do you begin to see more clearly, but only if you steer clear of the mass sedation being force-fed all around you. That said, these new faux gods—and many others like the aforementioned—have filled the spiritual vacuum left behind by the absence of light that took immediate effect following the death of God, as foreseen by the accidental prophet, Nietzsche.

The Wages of Sin

In hindsight, we, as the West, have raped, spit on, shamed and insulted the Christian values that our lands were built on. We’ve become so goddamned secular, so boastful in our arrogant pride, that we’ve been ignorant of replacing the dismissed guards of our ethics and societal self with new, virtuous guardians of any kind. We’ve simply let ourselves drift, happily clueless, on our sea of indulgence and hedonistic pleasure. No one saw the hordes in waiting, and now it’s too late.

In our weakened state of constant self-gratification, we, as the West, have become weak. We’ve become milksops: easily offended and readily yielding, fragile individuals who hide behind the cloak of Big Brother. How the prolific words of Benjamin Franklin ring loudly now: “Those Who Sacrifice Liberty For Security Deserve Neither.” Indeed.

Even what’s left of our weakened, watered-down Christianity has become a feminized, ineffective, dead symbol of religious ritualism and ineffective, empty clamor. Gone are the strong men of old, the spirit of the founding fathers. Gone is the bravado, the chest held high with its breastplate of uprightness, the strong and unmoving fortitude that was ready and able to wield the sword of truth and brandish the shield of faith. Woe to us, for gone is the faith that was steadfast, the powerful beliefs that steered the moral uprightness of entire societies. We’ve got it coming to us, folks. In spades.

Summa Summarum

We need that old time Christian warrior mentality now more than ever. Our lands need it. Our people need it. The West needs it. Because the West will not survive without a return to its Christian roots. The secular mindset will not accommodate laws to protect the West, for were it able to provide that, it would have offered them up already. The proof is in the pudding, we’ve already seen the degeneration and decline of morality and societal spine under the banner of secularism.

No religion, no bullshit. Just rock solid Christian values and respect for the freedoms afforded by the vastly gracious nature of Christian and Biblical beliefs. The proof is in our past, if you need further evidence.What have you got to lose? Only the last, scarce remnants of your personal freedoms that are all being stripped away, falling through your fingers, if you choose to remain embedded in secular indoctrination. And if that be your choice, good riddance.

Matt Forney #fundie returnofkings.com

[WARNING: STAR WARS THE LAST JEDI SPOILERS]

[The whole review is dumb and should be examined as bad, disingenuous criticism, this submission is just highlighting the more ideologically-charged nonsense]

Pretty much everything about The Last Jedi is a conscious slap in the face to Star Wars’ white male fans. For example, all of the leading generals in the Resistance are women, including Princess General Leia (Carrie Fisher), which explains why they went from running the galaxy in the previous movie to being reduced to a handful of ships in this one. All of the First Order’s soldiers and generals save one are white men, while the Resistance is staffed entirely by non-whites and women, with the exception of Poe Dameron (Oscar Isaac).

Poe is by far the most interesting character in the movie, even considering how the script goes out of its way to shit on him. You can practically hear the writers muttering, “Fuck you, toxic masculinity!” every time he’s on screen. Despite being forward-thinking and courageous, Poe is constantly slapped down by his female superiors for being too “hot-headed.” For example, despite his bravery in taking out one of the First Order’s cruisers at the beginning of the movie, Leia demotes him for being “reckless.”

Later on in the movie, after Leia falls into a coma after miraculously surviving being blasted into open space (don’t ask), Poe discovers that her replacement, the purple-haired (yes, I’m serious) HR lady Holdo (Laura Dern) is planning to evacuate the Resistance’s last cruiser into unarmed transports, a suicidal and cowardly move. He intelligently proclaims a mutiny, only for Leia to side with Holdo, whose plan ends up getting all but two dozen members of the Resistance killed. Heckuva job, Holdy!

The film’s C-plot, starring Finn (John Boyega), is equally insipid. Frustrated with HR lady Holdo’s complete inability to lead, Finn teams up with Rose Tico (Kelly Marie Tran), a communist Montagnard with Down syndrome, to find a codebreaker who can keep the First Order from tracking the Resistance through hyperspace. They go to the resort planet of Canto Bight and literally start murdering people for the crime of being rich. This is Ghostbusters–tier dumb.

But none of this compares to how The Last Jedi rapes the character of Luke Skywalker (Mark Hamill). The main plot follows Rey (Daisy Ridley), the Mary Sue feminist street urchin, as she tries to convince Luke to help the Resistance and train her to use the Force. Luke initially refuses, whining about how the Jedi “deserve” to end, before reluctantly agreeing to Rey’s demands. Hamill’s performance is embarrassingly bad and Luke’s character arc is a sick joke, rivaling how The Force Awakens depicted Han Solo as a deadbeat Peter Pan.

One good thing about The Last Jedi is that Rey is given far less screen time then in The Force Awakens. She’s just as smarmy, unlikable, and unrealistic—her bizarre telepathic dialogues with antagonist Kylo Ren (Adam Driver) are a case in point—but this is still an improvement. Unfortunately, the addition of SJW masturbation fantasies like Rose and Holdo—who I’m pretty sure was given purple hair as a deliberate middle finger to the fans—drowns out this positive move.

...

Finally, General Leia somehow manages to completely evade responsibility for Kylo Ren falling to the dark side of the Force, even though she’s his mother. The plots of both The Last Jedi and The Force Awakens have Darth Bugman focusing all his rage on Han Solo (his father) and Luke Skywalker, with Leia somehow skating off. And despite the fact that Leia’s son is the second-in-command of the First Order—meaning she is directly responsible for the galaxy being plunged into war—nobody has a problem with her serving as one of the Resistance’s senior leaders.

...

The central problem with the new Star Wars movies—or revivals of any classic franchise, for that matter—is that contemporary filmmakers don’t understand what made the originals good. Star Wars was a product of the 1970’s: an epic tale of good vs. evil, drawing on cultural motifs familiar to Americans of the time. Bugmen like Rian Johnson or J.J. Abrams can see the surface elements of Star Wars, but without being immersed in the cultural milieu that birthed it, the best they can do is high-budget fan fiction with SJW nonsense drizzled on top.

That’s all The Force Awakens or The Last Jedi are: cosplay with CGI. The X-wings and lightsabers and aliens may look like the ones in the original trilogy, but the heart and soul aren’t there. In their place is poor writing, left-wing agitprop, and dumb jokes. The Force Awakens was dull and boring, but The Last Jedi will leave you longing for the earnestness of Jar Jar Binks. Yes, it’s that bad.

The irony is that Kylo Ren’s nihilistic mantra of “let[ting] the past die,” while completely inappropriate for a Star Wars movie, is precisely how modern moviegoers should treat the franchise itself. Star Wars is dead, nerds. It’s not coming back. It’s time to take it behind the woodshed and put a bullet in its brain. The original movies were great and some of the video games were pretty good, but the monkey’s dead and the show is over.

Ned Kelly #fundie returnofkings.com

AUSTRALIA’S GAY MARRIAGE VOTE MAY LEAD TO SPECTACULAR FAILURE FOR THE LEFT

Australia is currently voting in a postal survey on whether to legalise gay marriage. A clear majority of Australians support gay marriage but I predict that the “No” side will win the vote. When this occurs, the radical left will have no one to blame but themselves. There is a strong feeling of a Trump or Brexit type upset in the air, but the main reason that the “No” campaign will win is because the “Yes” side’s campaign has alienated the sensible center.

Australia is one of the few countries in the world that has compulsory voting in elections but this postal survey is not compulsory and I would be surprised if turnout is much over 50%. Opinion polls over recent years have consistently shown that around two thirds of Australians support gay marriage, but the expected low turnout makes the result of the postal survey hard to predict. Just as the “silent” Trump voters skewed the exit polls in the 2016 US Presidential election, there is probably also around 5% of Australians who are telling pollsters that they support gay marriage but who will in fact vote no.

The “Yes” and “No” campaigns

The “Yes” campaign is led by around half of the ruling centre-right Liberal/National government, including Australia’s Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, plus the opposition centre-left Labor Party and the far-left Greens Party. Almost all prominent Australians are supporting the “Yes” campaign.

The “No” campaign is led by religious organisations and a few conservative politicians. The fact that most Australian Muslims will undoubtedly vote no is an ironic turn for the leftists who have campaigned so hard to allow them into the country. The overwhelming support for the “Yes” side amongst prominent Australians from politics to media to entertainment to sport is reminiscent of opposition to Trump in the US and to Brexit in the UK.

The “Yes” side is not really making much of an argument, they just keep saying “love is love”. Presumably they do not think that incest, paedophilia or polygamy are ok because “love is love”, but they haven’t elaborated.

The “No” side is not making much of an argument about gay marriage either. Instead, it is arguing that gay marriage is another step towards political correctness and denial of free speech and religious freedom. Australia’s former conservative Prime Minister Tony Abbott is urging a “no” vote to “stop political correctness in its tracks”.

The left’s counterproductive tactics

The left is making two key strategic errors in its campaign. Firstly, it is arguing that there should not be a public debate or public vote on this issue. Secondly, it is bullying, persecuting and harassing anyone brave enough to declare that they will vote “no”.

The left has long argued against a public vote on same sex marriage saying that it will hurt gay people’s mental health and that straight people should not have the right to decide if gay people have “human rights”. The left does not appear to understand that people don’t like being told what they are and are not allowed to discuss, debate, say or think.

Some of the more radical leftist individuals and groups have also harassed, bullied and persecuted people who oppose gay marriage. On September 22, a “Yes” campaigner head butted Tony Abbott. A former champion boxer, Abbott assured the media he was “entirely unscathed” but said that he worries about “the brave new world of same-sex marriage if this is how some of the people who are most enthusiastically supporting it are behaving”.

In Canberra, an 18-year-old woman named Madeline was fired from her job at a children’s party business for advocating a “no” vote on her private Facebook wall. Capital Kids Parties owner Madlin Sims said she fired Madeline because “advertising your desire to vote no for SSM [same-sex marriage] is, in my eyes, hate speech”.

In Brisbane, the National Union of Students organised a rally outside a church to harass the attendees at a “vote no” meeting. The rally turned violent and one woman was arrested.

When “no” campaigners hired Skywriting Australia to write “vote no” in the sky above Sydney the business was abused on social media and the business owner received a torrent of harassing text messages including the following:

—you really are a shit human. You’re definitely the biggest piece of shit in Australia today. Probably tomorrow too. Hope you’re proud of yourself. Don’t be surprised by the hate coming for you. Titt for tatt, it’s only fair, right? You stupid, ignorant, remorseless, pathetic, old, LOSER.

The organisers of the skywriting later reported that GoFundMe “has decided to freeze our funds, until we give our names and locations. This is on the back of a massive amount of hateful messages we have received by people who want to silence our message and personally attack us.”

Of course, there are people on the “No” side who have behaved inappropriately too. The difference is that within the “Yes” camp the arguments that there should be no debate, or that those who oppose gay marriage should not be allowed to state their views, is mainstream.

Unlike the United States, Australia does not have constitutionally protected free speech. The Australian Parliament has passed laws imposing fines of up to $12,600 for anyone “vilifying” or “intimidating” another person during the gay marriage debate. I expect these laws will be enforced selectively against “no” campaigners for “homophobic” comments.

Lessons for the right

We shouldn’t underestimate the radical left, but we shouldn’t overestimate them either. Let them be themselves and they will alienate ten people for every one they convert. We on the right must not get down into the gutter to fight with these radical leftists or we will come out at least as dirty as they are. Let’s maintain the moral high ground and promote civilised debate, free speech, and non-violence.

Jean-Batave Poqueliche #sexist returnofkings.com

It is grim to realise that we have reached a point where our contemporary society is so sick, that it could be healthier for everyone if women were imposed the legal status of property instead of being free individuals. The fact that this absurd method could indeed create a safer society shows how cancerous our “progressive” Western world has become.

...

Women would keep the status of human beings even by becoming property. They would become the asset of a Senior Male Authority (SMA) from birth until his death or their own. In practice, the bond between man and female property would resemble the one between a legal guardian and a minor, incapacitated senior or mentally handicapped adult.

With women being children in adult bodies, the comparison is appropriate. But where the authority of the legal guardian expires in time, the right over female property would not be finite. All decisions would be taken by the SMA (father, older brother, then husband). The auction of a young woman from a father to a suitor of his choice would be agreed upon by setting a dowry.

Purchasing power would be in the hands of the SMA, preventing women to spend male income on frivolous and useless items like female “holidays” (the real sex tourism), designer clothes, drugs, club entrances and the like.

...

This measure would include the right of repudiation for the husband in case of serious misconduct. The decision would have to be studied and approved by a jury of adult all-male peers.

Repudiation would be efficient to keep women in line because they greatly fear being called out, held accountable, and losing resources or status because of self-inflicted behaviour, and this proposal would not deprive them from love. On the contrary, because of the affection that a man shows towards his property (added to the blood or family bound), the women he acquires will be safer. His “investment” has both a financial implication in addition to an emotional one.

To the triggered liberals, women are already property in Islam. But all I hear about it from the left on social media are crickets. Contrary to Shariah law, my theory does not include whipping, gang rape, honour killing, beheading or stoning when women are at fault.

...

10 societal benefits of declaring women legal property

1. No women in the military or police, so men and women would die less.

2. Divorce would plummet and single mommery would become a rarity.

3. No access to funds (under SMA supervision) for women would benefit the global economy.

4. Being a negotiable asset, women would be under constant male protection.

5. Women (and men) would die less of drug, tobacco, alcohol abuse and the heart diseases, cancers and violent or accidental deaths caused by it.

6. Due to heavy competition, women would have to be thinner, reducing the epidemic of obesity and the health risks that it involves.

7. Less child mortality and death during childbirth (women giving birth younger combined with better healthcare hence greater chances of survival).

8. No more left-leaning parties elected as women would be deprived of the right to vote.

9. Conservative governments elected by men would favour traditional families over leeches and degenerates.

10. Less domestic violence as women would avoid damaged men, having no personal resources (and hitting your woman would be like keying your own car: pointless).

...

7 ways this proposal would bring balance to the sexual market

1. No more welfare policies encouraging women to remain single or raise bastards. Welfare would be focused on those who need it the most, like veterans or the elderly.

2. No more inflated ego and instant gratification through attention whoring on social media. Its restricted access would create saner women. Promotion of degeneracy would be greatly reduced in the mainstream and social media.

3. No Instagram prostitution for wealthy sheikhs, being defiled for platform shoes and handbags with “stylish” patterns worthy of a child doodle.

4. Women would actively seek males based on their ability to provide, as they would have no alternative access to wealth.

5. Males would access a healthier sexual market, their hard work being rewarded by regular sexual intercourse, relative loyalty and children.

6. No more violent third world hordes imported by the votes of bitter women. No more homosexual agenda, gateway to the next great taboo, the pedophile-friendly agenda.

7. Professional advancement and success earned by women through sexual favours, like the one popular in Hollywood, would virtually disappear as adultery would be a valid reason for repudiation. “Promotion through horizontal refreshment” would only be used by already repudiated women, nothing of value would be lost.

...

It is not a panacea. The nature of women can’t be changed, but women-as-property would be finally held accountable after the “empowered” ones spent such a long time driving the Western world into the ground.

PrometheusReturns #sexist returnofkings.com

Yes, giving women the "right" to vote is privilege. Men fought for the "right" to vote and won it because it was and still is men that are forced to enlist in the military. Women are not. It's men that are forced to protect a country that is chock full of a stupid, indoctrinated, self-righteous, leisure class - women.

The day that men get special privilege that women have enjoyed in the West (aka White countries) for thousands of years then we can talk about "equal." There is no such thing as "equal." There's just a bunch of women and non-White parasites screaming Marxist slogans. This isn't going to last and the sooner it dies the better.

Tuthmosis Sonofra #sexist returnofkings.com

5 Reasons To Date A Girl With An Eating Disorder

Nothing screams white-girl problems louder than a good old-fashioned eating disorder.* But they’re more than that. Eating disorders have been—quite appropriately—declared a luxury reserved for only the most privileged members of the female race. In other words, the presence of one of the classic eating disorders is a reliable predictor of various socio-economic, cultural, and personality traits in a young woman–features that, in the end, are desirable to today’s American man. In a world where the “retail price” on the typical Western woman continues to skyrocket—while their quality continues its precipitous decline—there are some real gems to be found in the bargain bin.

I’ve dated several girls with eating disorders—in various intensities—and all of these traits have applied to each of them.

*While obesity is, in most cases, also an “eating disorder,” this list doesn’t apply to emotional eaters, food addicts, and fatties with no self control.

1. Her obsession over her body will improve her overall looks.
A girl who spends inordinate mental and physical energy on her looks is rarely fat. If you were to get into a long-term relationship with one of these girls, she’s also less likely to become complacent about her physique over time. Girls like this are usually deft at properly dressing their body type, which translates into a more stylish girl overall. And, because cheap clothing lines—like H&M—are shaped with straight cuts that are less labor-intensive and therefore more inexpensive, they look good in even the cheapest of shit. While they may have a “distorted body image” on the inside, that usually means staying trim and fit on the outside. Let’s not forget that fatties too, in the majority of cases, have a “distorted body image,” but in the unattractive direction.

2. She costs less money.
You can go out to nice restaurants and order take-out with the confidence that your expense on her will be minimal. In most cases, she’ll get a small dish–like a side salad–or just eat a little bit of whatever communal dishes you order. If you’re a hungry bastard, you can even finish off her plate. “Are you going to finish that?”

3. She’s fragile and vulnerable.
The case has repeatedly and persuasively been made that an inflated ego and an unearned high self-esteem are among the most unattractive traits in a girl. You-go-girlist “confidence”—grounded in little more than years of being told she’s a unique and special snowflake for no other reason than she was born female—renders a woman into an insufferable turd who thinks the world revolves around her.
An eating disorder often translates into the direct opposite: a girl who’s modest, fragile, and vulnerable. Instead of having to constantly wrestle with a difficult and obnoxious girl, you’ll be dealing with a tastefully insecure girl, who’s eager to please, and wants nothing more than your approval. She’s quick to apologize for transgressions, and will make the extra effort to see you–instead of flaking on you constantly. This level of vulnerability often brings out the best in men, whose protector instinct can’t help but get activated.

4. Probably has money of her own.
They aren’t too many poor girls with eating disorders. These girls come from money, and often continue to wield that spending power right into their adulthoods. Her instinct to please you will translate into her picking up tabs, coming to your door not empty-handed, or buying you little gifts.

5. She’s better in bed.
It’s a well-known fact that crazy girls are exceptional in the sack. A girl with an eating disorder has just the right cocktail of pent-up insecurity, neuroses, and daddy issues to ensure that your whole building knows every time you’re beating it up.

Say what you will, a girl with a mild-to-moderate eating disorder—that hasn’t excessively marred her appearance—is today’s best-buy in the West’s rapidly plummeting dating market.

Michael Sebastian #fundie returnofkings.com

How “Being Nice” Creates Serious Problems For Men

As I’ve watched the US and European nations destroy themselves through idiotic policies, I’ve often wondered how we got into this predicament. After much thought, I am convinced that most of our ills are attributable the drive to be “nice.” Here are some examples of how niceness is destroying us.

Being nice poisons our relations with women

Being a nice guy is the kiss of death if you want to get and keep a woman. This may sound odd because every woman, when asked, says that she wants a nice guy. In truth, women despise nice guys. What they really want is a strong man—a man who will lead them. But it is impossible to lead while always being nice.

Niceness is what leads men to beta orbit women on social media and in real life. The manosphere has been out here for years but I still see men posting comments like, “You look really beautiful,” to mediocre-looking women on Instagram. What do these men gain from commenting on an attention-whoring photo? What do you think the chances are that the woman who posts these pics will choose to date one of the 50 thirsty men who commented on her photo?

Being nice is even more of a liability in marriage and long-term relationships. It may be nice to ignore your mission to please your spouse, but it will repel her over the long haul. This is because niceness is inherently beta and women do not want beta males. I know two cases of men who had their wives cheat on them. In each case, there was nothing that the man did wrong. Neither man cheated on his wife, gambled away the family fortune, or developed a heroin addiction. They were both outstanding providers and fathers.

Their only fault was they were too nice. Their marriages could’ve have been saved if they had been more willing to unapologetically take the lead in the relationship.

Niceness in religion

Christian teaching has been deeply affected by the “will to niceness.” I recently read a discussion on Twitter between three theology students, one male and two females, at the Dallas Theological Seminary. DTS was once a conservative Evangelical seminary. Now it seems it has succumbed to therapy culture. The discussion consisted of the man challenging feminist talking points, but then conceding the argument to the women because he was told that he ultimately “could never understand being a woman.”

Sacrificing truth at the altar of niceness is not just something done by Protestants. In the past 50 years the Catholic Church has also de-emphasized its more difficult moral doctrines in the hope that it would become more welcoming. It has gotten so bad that some are teaching that having nice manners necessitates that the Church drop certain moral teachings altogether.

Of course, niceness in religion has the exact opposite of its intended effect. Rather than removing impediments to faith, it waters down that faith to the point where it is so insipid that there is no reason to even bother.

Being nice is destroying the West

Pretty much everything that ails Western countries is the result of someone’s stupid attempt to be nice to one group or another. Girl power was built on the premise that girls might feel bad about themselves and that is why they chose not to go into disciplines that are dominated by men. Gay marriage is the law of the land because we bought into idea that the homosexual men were sad that they could not enter into lifetime monogamous commitments.

When a few Social Justice Warriors complain about Confederate statues (most blacks don’t seem to care), conservatives quickly agree to take them down because they value being popular more than sticking to their principles. Europe and the US’s immigration policy is similarly driven by niceness. These nations are willing to sacrifice the lives of their citizens rather that make people who live in Islamic countries feel bad.

In reality, it is not possible to govern a country without offending someone. Trying to do so can only lead to foolish decisions.

Being good is not the same as being nice

Don’t be afraid to embrace your inner asshole.

You can’t go through life being nice to everyone. Sometimes you gotta say fuck it.

— Ed Latimore (@EdLatimore) August 23, 2017

One of the most common misconceptions of being nice is that it is the same as being good. This misconception even affects many otherwise red-pilled men. The truth is that being nice is often the exact opposite of being good.

The reason for this is that the compulsion to be nice springs from an inordinate desire to be popular and loved. The conservatives at National Review capitulate on every major cultural issue because they want to remain members of progressive society. Christian leaders who water down doctrine do it because they have a greater desire for the acclaim of the crowd than they do the salvation of souls. And beta orbiters on social media prefer to get a “like” from an internet thot to improving themselves.

By contrast, being good means you will sometimes have to assume unpopular positions. This is especially true on modern society where good and evil have been completed inverted. If you share the same political opinions your grandfather held, you will be branded as a fire breathing racist. You may lose your job because of it. If you want to restore the patriarchy, you will be shunned as a troglodyte.

Although there is a cost to being good, it is important to remember that history is never made by “nice” men, but by those who dare to hold lofty ideals even when it goes against popular opinion.

Conclusion

We must wage a holy war against “being nice.” But this holy war is not targeted at any external enemy but at the “nice guy” who lives inside each of us. You must oppose him every time he wants to beta orbit a girl online or in real life. Slay him when he urges you to put your woman before your mission. Crush him if he suggests that you should tone down your political or moral views to avoid offending others. At all times choose to do what is right and good, not what is nice.

This is a battle that lasts a lifetime. We were all programmed to be nice guys. Getting over that programming is not easy, but the rewards are worth it: you’ll will experience true freedom when you end the tyranny of nice.

Larsen Halleck #conspiracy returnofkings.com

3 Reasons Why Men Should Avoid Soy Products
Don't become a soy boy....!

Soy. The boogeyman of masculine men everywhere. Indeed, the term “soy” (and derivatives such as “soy boy”) itself has become a slang term encapsulating all that we hate about the state of modern manhood: weakness, effeminancy, soft facial features, and more.

But is that the case? We all know that soy is the only complete vegetable protein—which is to say it’s the only vegetable protein that has all of the essential amino acids—but is it really so bad for people in general and men in particular?

The short answer is: for “people” as a vague concept, no. It’ll keep you alive and functioning. But for MEN, specifically, seeking to be the best possible men they can be, the answer is a resounding yes.

What It Does, and Why It’s So Common

As I said above, soy will keep you alive—it is a complete protein, which means it will indeed give you enough protein to trudge through your daily life. That much, even I will not dispute.

As many have pointed out, soy is indeed an extremely common foodstuff and food additive, not just in its native East Asia but increasingly in the other four cardinal directions of the compass rose as well. Note that the three largest producers of soy beans, which make up a majority (80+%) of the world’s crop are all in the Western Hemisphere: the USA, Brazil, and Argentina.

And indeed, when I say it’s extremely common, I mean it with no hyperbole. In addition to just being eaten in its natural state, soybeans are processed into many foodstuffs such as the famous tofu and tempeh and vegetable oil. If that weren’t enough, textured vegetable protein, or TVP, is a soy product that is used as a filler/substitute in many meat/dairy substitutes and as an enhancer.

Why is it so common? While some conspiracy theorists would undoubtedly posit that this is all some fiendish Illuminati/Judeo-Satanist plot to emasculate men around the world, I don’t think that’s the case. Frankly, I’ve always believed in Hanlon’s Razor, the idea that you can never attribute to malice what can be attributed to stupidity—and I would paraphrase “laziness” for stupidity.

The simple reason for the preponderance of soy in the modern diet is simply that it is cheap, and corporations are primarily—and entirely— businesses, seeking to maximize their profits and minimize their expenditures. Thus, a cheap source of protein like soy is common, nevermind the side effects. And what are those side effects that deliberately harm men?

1. Hormonal Distress

Soy products are confirmed to inherently contain phytoestrogens, which can have estrogenizing effects on the human body. Indeed, they have been linked to positive effects for women, including the reduction of risks of certain types of cancer—and this happens to be the same effect that can occur with certain types of estrogen supplementation.

Since this is the case, we can also discuss the inverse (i.e. the same estrogenizing effects that are good for women will of course be bad for men). Of course, the issue is a matter of debate, but more than one study has reported negative hormonal effects of soy in men.

2. Decreased Male Fertility

Related to the above, a soy-heavy diet has also been linked to fertility dysfunction in men: lowered sperm counts and decreased semen quality. If you read this website, you’ve probably picked up somewhere or other that testosterone levels in the Western world are lower than they were in previous generations, and not only that, several studies have confirmed that testosterone and sperm counts are being lowered THROUGHOUT all Western countries.

Again, it’s not likely that this is a deliberate conspiracy, so much as an unfortunate side effect of cheapness and decreased quality of life.

3. Flatulence

And now going in a completely low brow direction, eating an excess of soy products has been linked to gastrointestinal distress. And needless to say, being associated with flatulence stink won’t do much for anything that you’re attempting to do, whether it be physical fitness, seduction, or business.

While one may not believe in the phenotypic changes associated with the stereotypically weak, spindly, soy eating male, the three reasons cited above are enough for any man to avoid this food.

What To Do

Seeing as soy isn’t required in the diet, avoiding it shouldn’t be so difficult. Just read all food product labels, avoid anything with soy, and avoid eating it directly. Replace it with animal proteins instead.

Make these simple changes, and see health and masculinity improve.