Americans Hold Record Liberal Views on Most Moral Issues

[BoomBoomMancini]

And whine about how society is unfair and the government needs to fix it like a feminist? Of course not. I take out most of my anger at the gym and spend most of my time disregarding females and acquiring currency. The rest of it is spent trying to figure how exactly the events in my past contributed to the counterproductive beliefs I subconsciously held in hope of understanding them and changing them.That may be the case. I suspect that changes on the scale of the sexual revolution and 2nd wave feminism will have to occur before we see any actual change.
Happy, married, American, and male? I am pretty sure you can only have 2 of those attributes.

This sounds like something out of Elliot Rodger’s manifesto.

Believe it or not, it’s possible to have a backbone and self respect as an American male without adding women to your list of enemies in your masculinity safe space. The two choices aren’t “sniveling guy in capri pants wracked with self hatred” and “resentful sociopath trying to do some kind of neo-Barbarian shtick”. There is a happy medium here.

 

[Walking_Home]

When it is time to rewrite the Constitution, the lessons of the past 100 years will be learned.
Apparently you do not realize that until very recently male sexual conduct was violently regulated by other men.Apparently you did not read what I wrote. The nice guys in the pews are not the problem. ** The jerks, the daughters, and the lack of leadership and accountability are.Complain about it all you want. It still worked**.

---

Violently regulated – is that why in the past unmarried pregnant girls/women were sent off for a long “visit” to a relative or an unwed mothers home. And the men just went on their way.

Yea – it “worked” to keep the double standard in the mans favor.

 

[dvdjs]

When it is time to rewrite the Constitution, the lessons of the past 100 years will be learned.

The last hundred years…?
The triumph of democracy and liberty over fascism and communism.
Works for me.

Apparently you do not realize that until very recently male sexual conduct was violently regulated by other men.

And women’s sexual conducted was also violently regulated by men. While we have issues to contend with currently, the prospect of retreating to such model here is not going to happen. Those who long for it are of course free to vote with their meet and move to a country with suitable repression, while they sputter to their ends.

 

[Regular_Atheist]

Evidently you don’t, as nationalists actually have an accurate idea of history.

They don’t at all. As I said earlier, they rely way too much on presentism. They can’t view history outside of their own modern worldview.

For one he’s not the one going around these forums and elsewhere saying :bighanky: “communism never existed anywhere, therefore it’s soooo good! Believe me, please!” :crying:

Well I’m not crying about it or upset that you don’t agree with Marxism. If anything it affirms my viewpoint.

Communism isn’t some utopia that needs to be tried. Marx wasn’t attempting to construct a new world based on scientific reasoning or evidence or whatever. He was simply critiquing our current society. Communism only exists as the negation of the current society, and all of the things that are wrong with it. Marxism is a social critique, not a blueprint for a perfect utopia. You don’t “try” communism. My job as a Marxist isn’t to try and convince you or anyone that a communist society would be preferable - that would be utopianism. The job of the Marxist is to radically critique everything in existence. The communist movement that abolishes capitalism won’t be motivated by their belief that socialism would be a good society, they will be revolting against the inhuman conditions they currently live in.

What an oversimplification! Why not elaborate on what is going on?

The economic development relates to the entitlement mentality. It’s a given fact that once people in democracies figure they can vote themselves special rights and benefits, it’s game over.

Man does not consciously determine his social relations, his consciousness is determined by the social relations he develops in. Imperialism, mass immigration, falling birth rates - all of these are a product of capitalism, of the need for capital to conquer foreign resources and foreign markets, and the need for capitalism to have a cheap source of labour to exploit. Even if the perfect white male Red-Pilled ancap dictator took power and ruled over the newly privatized McUSA he would be driven to imperialism by the will of capital, and all of the problems that come with terrorism and the refugee crisis would arise from this. The problems we face aren’t the result of weak-willed leaders - they are a product of capital controlling our actions, of the fact that capitalism forces us, as humanity, to make the decisions that are best for the growth of capital.

Take imperialism in the 1800s. It’s easy to see the scramble for Africa as a product of great men like Cecil Rhodes who were prepared to lead a nationalist struggle to conquer overseas colonies for their countries. But it wasn’t - it occurred because of the need for developing capitalism to conquer more raw resources, to exploit more corners of the world. It was done because it was economically necessary. As all of the corners of the world became consumed by capitalism and there was no new resources to conquer, capitalism fell into crisis, and the First World War emerged as a result of the lack of new land to colonize.

It most certainly is! Ever heard of Genghis Khan or Alexander the Great? I’ll even mention Mohammed.

What you’re defending here is Great Man Theory, a fairly archaic and unpopular school fo historiography. No historian subscribes to this theory anymore.

Yes, of course important historical figures exist, but the question is whether or not they are literally the driving force of history. Are these men who are able to bend history to their will, to consciously determine the development of mankind? Are these men merely products of their social conditions and do they merely work within the social conditions of the time, or do they literally drive history?

Since you’ve already admitted you don’t know much about the subject…

Well we were no longer discussing Rome but were instead discussing historical analysis in general. You and starshiptrooper subscribe to some form of Great Man Theory.

 

[Regular_Atheist]

And whine about how society is unfair and the government needs to fix it like a feminist? Of course not. I take out most of my anger at the gym and spend most of my time disregarding females and acquiring currency…
Happy, married, American, and male? I am pretty sure you can only have 2 of those attributes.

This sounds like something out of Elliot Rodger’s manifesto.

Believe it or not, it’s possible to have a backbone and self respect as an American male without adding women to your list of enemies in your masculinity safe space. The two choices aren’t “sniveling guy in capri pants wracked with self hatred” and “resentful sociopath trying to do some kind of neo-Barbarian shtick”. There is a happy medium here.

A lot of the “Red-Pilled” “MGTOW” guys are like this. Years of rejection from women and exposure to toxic masculine gender norms that they’re afraid they can’t live up to leads to a worldview based on misogyny and fear of being a “beta male.” Whenever they start to talk about their personal lives and views on women it becomes clear where their weird politics arise from. It’s a worldview that just absolutely reeks of insecurity and sexual frustration.

I think a lot of them could really benefit from therapy, to help overcome their own personal insecurities and issues with women.

 

[starshiptrooper]

This sounds like something out of Elliot Rodger’s manifesto.

You never read it. He refused to take any responsibility or initiative for himself and he never accepted the truth that life is inherently unfair. He spent his time hating on puas for being successful with women when he was not. He then killed 4 men and 2 women.

Believe it or not, it’s possible to have a backbone and self respect as an American male without adding women to your list of enemies in your masculinity safe space.

Let me live my life as I see fit. Do not require me to live my life to support and approve of lifestyles and ideologies that I disagree with. Apparently that is just too much to ask for.

The two choices aren’t “sniveling guy in capri pants wracked with self hatred” and “resentful sociopath trying to do some kind of neo-Barbarian shtick”. There is a happy medium here.

There is a right answer and a wrong answer but the middle is always evil.

 

[BoomBoomMancini]

A lot of the “Red-Pilled” “MGTOW” guys are like this. Years of rejection from women and exposure to toxic masculine gender norms that they’re afraid they can’t live up to leads to a worldview based on misogyny and fear of being a “beta male.” Whenever they start to talk about their personal lives and views on women it becomes clear where their weird politics arise from. It’s a worldview that just absolutely reeks of insecurity and sexual frustration.

I think a lot of them could really benefit from therapy, to help overcome their own personal insecurities and issues with women.

Like most dumb theories of the universe, there’s a kernel of truth in there somewhere. There really are people who think that masculinity is per se bad, and try to make boys feel guilty for enjoying stereotypically masculine things, or evincing the traditional masculine virtues.

Of course, it gets taken to a laughable extreme by guys trying to rationalize why they can’t get a date. Clearly, adopting some kind of Genghis Khan persona is the way to go!

Let me live my life as I see fit. Do not require me to live my life to support and approve of lifestyles and ideologies that I disagree with. Apparently that is just too much to ask for.

You do you, bro. I just think it’s sad. You don’t have to go through life as a ball of bitterness and resentment. But you’re right, you don’t need my endorsement.

 

[Walking_Home]

The ‘manosphere’ indeed, you couldn’t make up this class of idiocy if you tried unless you were a fairly gifted satirist.
[/quote]

---

I have grand-daughters and grandsons. I’ve spoken to the oldest grand-daughter – about the redpill/manosphere. Right now my grandsons are young – but I will make it a point to advice their parents to counsel them when older --about the “redpill/manosphere” so they won’t fall for that malignancy.

 

[Regular_Atheist]

You never read it. He refused to take any responsibility or initiative for it and he never accepted the truth that life is inherently unfair. He spent his time hating on puas for being successful with womem when he was not.

You are aware that most men are able to have romantic and sexual relationships with women without being pick-up artists, right? Most men don’t have to “take the red pill” to enjoy relationships with women. They’re just able to, because they’re well-adjusted and normal people.

Most of the men Rodger was angry at were just normal guys who could talk to women. He never even tried to speak to women, just got filled with anger and self-hatred when he saw men dating women he found attractive.

Of course, it gets taken to a laughable extreme by guys trying to rationalize why they can’t get a date. Clearly, adopting some kind of Genghis Khan persona is the way to go!

The is the essence of the Red Pill/MGTOW worldview, really. Trying to construct a grand conspiracy that exists within society with the aim of preventing you getting a date.

The thing is they don’t really want to help themselves, to try and become better socially adjusted and learn to engage with women better. Instead they want to just write-off women as being evil and corrupted by feminism, spend their time “taking out their anger at the gym and disregarding females and acquiring currency” while fantasizing about the possibility of some kind of hypermasculine ancap utopia where men are finally in control and women will be forced to date them. That really isn’t a healthy worldview.

 

[starshiptrooper]

Of course, it gets taken to a laughable extreme by guys trying to rationalize why they can’t get a date. Clearly, adopting some kind of Genghis Khan persona is the way to go!

A rather poor choice of words given that Ghengis Kahn’s DNA is quite widespread. At least those guys realize what they did before was not working and are trying something else.

 

[Regular_Atheist]

A rather poor choice of words given that Ghengis Kahn’s DNA is quite widespread.

Yeah, the reason that the emperor of the Mongol Empire was able to have so much sex is because he behaved in a hypermasculine way that appealed to women.

Dating modern women in the 21st century is not a lot like the way in which Genghis Khan formed relationships with women. I would not look to Genghis Khan for dating advice.

At least those guys realize what they did before was not working and are trying something else.

There is nothing wrong with self-improvement and changing yourself and your behaviour to be more appealing to people that you want to date. That is a positive thing. The problem is how the MGTOW/Red Pill crowd hope to go about that.

 

[BoomBoomMancini]

“Ugh! Why won’t these stupid, vapid women date me!?”
seethes, grits teeth, pecks out a 40 page treatise detailing wrongs suffered by evil, manipulative women
“I can’t believe I’m home alone on a Friday night. It’s a mystery!”

 

[ATraveller]

Of course the “manosphere” sees it as “failed” Christian leadership – for it no longer follows the path of “stoning” women – controlling women “to save women from themselves”. After all – women by “nature” – from the time a girl is conceived-- is born to be manipulative etc. etc.

I can’t imagine what the ‘manosphere’ would have thought of the Puritans in New England. I should have paid more attention but I think I heard in cases of fornication, the men faced flogging and public humiliation but the women were just publicly humiliated no physical punishment whatsoever. I think they (again I didn’t pay as much attention as I should have) had laws allowing capital punishment but almost never used them just in rare instances and I think it was rape mostly. I guess the Puritans failed in Christian leadership then.

 

[SuperLuigi]

---

I have grand-daughters and grandsons. I’ve spoken to the oldest grand-daughter – about the redpill/manosphere. Right now my grandsons are young – but I will make it a point to advice their parents to counsel them when older --about the “redpill/manosphere” so they won’t fall for that malignancy.

Are you really going to tell your kids how they should parent because you have an axe to grind on CAF?

I’m sure that’ll go over well…

 

[SuperLuigi]

If you don’t want single parenting – men need to keep their pants zipped up. It takes two to make a child. The** man needs to held accountable** for his part not just the woman. But the “double standard” – and yes even in Christian culture – the woman is the one “stoned”.

The man IS held accountable and then some! Do you have any idea how many men live paycheck to paycheck while the mother funds her lifestyle on money that is supposedly for the kids?

Also, it wouldn’t kill the woman to say NO.

Of course the “manosphere” sees it as “failed” Christian leadership – for it no longer follows the path of “stoning” women – controlling women “to save women from themselves”. After all – women by “nature” – from the time a girl is conceived-- is born to be manipulative etc. etc.

The stoning example is a strawman. If you have a problem with stoning women (and you should), talk to the Muslims.

 

[SuperLuigi]

Of course, it gets taken to a laughable extreme by guys trying to rationalize why they can’t get a date

Actually, the men’s rights activist and people who lean that way are very successful at getting dates.

The people who can’t get dates are those who are afraid of feminists or sit around on Facebook being the “nice guy” who thinks the way to a woman’s heart is to get her to feel sorry him or threaten to be gay or commit suicide if she doesn’t date him.

Also, I don’t want to speak directly for Starshiptrooper, but what makes you think he’s even looking for dates?

And isn’t it hetero-normative bias by leftist standards on your part to assume all these men prefer women?

 

[BoomBoomMancini]

Actually, the men’s rights activist and people who lean that way are very successful at getting dates.

This has not been my experience, with the possible exception of girls with raging daddy issues. The wheels come off on those relationships real fast.

The people who can’t get dates are those who are afraid of feminists or sit around on Facebook being the “nice guy” who thinks the way to a woman’s heart is to get her to feel sorry him or threaten to be gay or commit suicide if she doesn’t date him.

Good thing those aren’t the only two choices, then. You don’t have to be a caricature of an uber-sensitive dork with a ponytail, OR a caricature of a barbarian warlord who covers his insecurities with affected disdain for women. It’s a big wide world out there. It’s entirely possible to be a nice person who genuinely respects women without becoming some kind of doormat.

And isn’t it hetero-normative bias by leftist standards on your part to assume all these men prefer women?

Probably? I know you’re contractually obligated to attempt twelve “ugh, libruls!” type zingers a day on CAF, but I’m not a leftist by any means. Not sure what you’re attempting to set up here.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

The man IS held accountable and then some! Do you have any idea how many men live paycheck to paycheck while the mother funds her lifestyle on money that is supposedly for the kids?

No, and I’ll bet you don’t know either.

 

[starshiptrooper]

Are you saying that women deserve respect just for being born with 2 x chromosomes? That is called chivalry and I am pretty sure it is sexist and therefore evil according to feminists. Respect is earned. Apparently suggesting that women actually be morally accountable is somehow disrespecting them. Fairminded people would call it equality.

That’s the only place the class of silliness red pill/manosphere eventually leads to. It reduces the complexities and contradictions and glorious mess that is the relationship between men and women to something very ugly indeed.

Right, Steinem, Dworkins, Solanas, Valenti, Brownmiller, and French had absolutely nothing to do with that. It is all the fault of a few guys who are all total losers on a couple of obscure websites.

 

[Regular_Atheist]

Are you saying that women deserve respect just for being born with 2 x chromosomes? That is called chivalry and I am pretty sure it is sexist and therefore evil according to feminists. Respect is earned. Apparently suggesting that women actually be morally accountable is somehow disrespecting them. Fairminded people would call it equality.

Nobody is saying that women should be respected simply by virtue of being women, but women certainly shouldn’t be disrespected just for being women. This is what you’re doing, and what all of the Red Pill/MGTOW stuff does. Nobody is saying women shouldn’t be held morally accountable. Your paranoid worldview where women get away with loads of evil stuff is not something most people experience.

Also chivalry was mostly an aristocratic martial ethos. Chivalric values regarding women and courtly life came later in the medieval period, and they certainly weren’t really what we imagine them to be today. You should remind people of that when you’re trying to defend western civilization back when it wasn’t degenerate.

Right, Steinem, Dworkins, Solanas, Valenti, Brownmiller, and French had absolutely nothing to do with that. It is all the fault of a few guys who are all total losers on a couple of obscure websites.

Yeah, because those people came up with all of the dorky stuff that makes up Red Pill “theory.” The alpha/beta hierarchy, negging, hamstering, pick-up artistry, the 80/20 split, spinning plates, incels, all of that stuff arises from them. Certainly there’s nothing positive or liberating in it for men.

Are you familiar with any of those theorists? I’m not incredibly familiar with any of them, but I don’t believe you are because there’s nothing cohesive about a lot of their positions. They definitely don’t all agree with each other. I am interested in knowing how they created the “manosphere.”