Boomer men will be like “you know what’d be a great idea? A late in life second marriage to a woman that will try to steal my estate from my children for the benefit of her own after I die. I can’t see how that would be bad at all. Fuck it, I’m gonna do it.”
When the marital norm was strong, you just got more rubbish people locked into rubbish marriages, grinding each other down and raising kids who absorbed the dysfunction at the genetic and family life level. Everyone pretends this was noble.
I am not convinced of this.
The modern era is a selection event. Not everyone is equipped for marriage. Not everyone should breed.
The people who can still attract a committed partner, stick around, and raise kids that make it to the next round win. The ones who can't because they are too impulsive, too poor at choosing, too low on the traits that make stable reproduction possible, well they lose. Their genes lose.
But even failed pairings or no pairing at all still mostly produce kids who survive and reproduce, because the buffers around modern marriage, easy exit, cultural acceptance of single parenthood, and welfare blunt the old fitness penalty.
So the reduction in those self sabotaging patterns happens, but slower and noisier than it would have under tighter historical conditions.
Don't save them. Don't rebuild the scaffolding.
Let the selection run.
A child loves their parents so sincerely from the moment they’re born.
Every time I think about that, I’m amazed by how many years of effort it must take to fill their head with enough hurt, fear, or disappointment for them to stop loving you.
So let me get this straight.
A woman in her young twenties, new to Los Angeles, agrees to meet a guy after talking online under the impression he’s roughly her age. Instead, a significantly older man, looking around 35 shows up having already misrepresented himself.
She immediately notices abnormal behavior, he walks into the bar scanning the room instead of engaging with her, hyper aware of his surroundings, acting visibly strange enough that alarm bells start going off.
Then, within minutes, he pivots into telling her he manages influencers and OnlyFans girls, which in practical terms often means acting as a pimp and then he starts aggressively pressuring a young woman he barely knows to start doing sex work, move to Miami with his help, and let him grow her brand.
So from her perspective
Lied about who he was.
Showed up significantly older than expected.
Displayed bizarre hyper vigilant behavior.
Immediately introduced sexualized financial exploitation.
Began attempting to recruit an isolated young woman new to a major city.
And your conclusion is,
“HAHA WOMEN SAY THEY’RE STRONG BUT THEY CRY.”
No, dipshit.
What you just watched was a woman recognizing, in hindsight, that she had likely just encountered a predator.
Women don’t spend their lives learning situational awareness because the world is full of good hearted entrepreneurial alpha males.
They do it because men like this exist.
And after escaping a high adrenaline situation, the nervous system processes the threat afterward. It’s called a delayed stress response. Fairly basic neurobiology, though admittedly concepts above a 7th grade reading level tend to struggle in manosphere circles.
What’s genuinely fascinating is how men who spend every waking hour screaming about protecting women are almost always the first ones mocking women for correctly identifying dangerous men.
Which tells us the quiet part out loud.
You don’t actually hate women being emotional.
You hate women recognizing predatory male behavior before men like that can benefit from it.
But sure, Richard. Tell us more about female irrationality while publicly demonstrating why women have to develop situational awareness in the first place.
Outstanding work.
@Aarvoll_ Telling your child that someone is "hot" is psychological molestation, IMHO. He should've said she was pretty and left it at that. Any sort of sexual talk around children is so gross!
All children start with poor impulse control because the parts of the brain responsible for self-regulation are still developing.
You cannot teach a two-year-old the same level of self-control as a ten-year-old because the necessary neural circuits do not yet exist in the same form. Development takes time.
When you hit a child, you trigger a powerful stress response. Stress hormones surge, the brain shifts into survival mode (fight, flight, freeze, fawn) and the child's ability to think clearly, remember lessons, and practice self-control drops. The child is focused on avoiding pain not learning. And since you the parent are the source of the pain, they learn to avoid (flight) or appease you (fawn reaction).
The irony is that many parents say they use physical punishment to teach self-control, yet self-control is a capacity that must first develop before it can be trained.
Around age seven, most children begin developing enough neurological capacity that deliberate self-control training becomes effective. Before that, physical development matters more than discipline. After that, development and training begin working together.
A child's self-control grows in two stages. First, the brain develops the capacity. Then the child can be taught the skill. Punishment just delays the time it takes to physically develop the capacity.
Nothing says: “Learn emotional regulation, son,” quite like a fully grown man physically lashing out because they became emotionally frustrated by a seven-year-old.
Outstanding demonstration of manliness. The child screams, cries, struggles emotionally, or behaves impulsively because their brain is still developing, and the dad responds: “Clearly the mature solution here is violence.”
Then later: “Why is my kid emotionally reactive?”
Your parenting strategy literally turns your frustration into physical punishment for the smaller humans under your care and supervision.
Hitting your kids is in the same category as circumcision, iPads, strict adherence to the CDC vaccine schedule---it is for Ns, goyim, and walmart pajama people. It lowers IQ (Straus, 1995), increases aggression (Gershoff, 2016), is less effective than a timeout, and requires escalation to keep working. The replies to articles like this are filled up with the Dumbest People Who Ever Existed saying "it worked for me" and then genuinely malicious and hateful morons dropping reaction gifs of like daffy duck swinging a belt
"EVERY STATE IN AMERICA ALLOWS YOU TO PHYSICALLY CORRECT YOUR CHILD. It's legal. It's fun. Bring it on." -- profile says: Cat Sanctuary Dad. Unyielding steel. Workouts, keto, cat chaos, anime rants. Godzilla, Gundam, Mazinger, Ultraman, classical art, manga.
If you hit your kids, you will create permanent emotional distance with the only person/people you could ever be that close to, not to mention sending them down the road of being as much of a lost fuckup loser as you are who will hit their own kids, or wont, but only after spending a decade figuring out why they reflexively apologize all the time.
There is one woman who does “shit like this.”
That one woman, however, is able to consistently secure the participation of thousands of men, and hundreds of thousands of male fans who actually pay her money to do “shit like this.”
So which side is in desperate need of the restrictions, exactly?
A young girl was brought from Guinea to a wealthy suburb near Dallas. She spent the next sixteen years of her life in forced servitude, Yudhijit Bhattacharjee reports. https://t.co/WXVHugU2HN
do men—while raping women, laughing or remaining silent at rape jokes, perpetuating and turning a blind eye to femicide, pedophilia, misogyny, maternal mortality etc—forget they were birthed by a woman? hmmmmm
I saw someone of here say that no man believes he is mistreating a woman; rather, every man believes he is giving women exactly what they deserve. My brain hasn’t been the same since.
It's scary to acknowledge how much longer your days feel when you don't psychologically retreat into technology
Makes you realise how much of your life has disappeared into various screens.