One of the greatest “lifehacks” for a man is learning how to make money without an employer. That means operating as an independent contractor, being your own boss, and having your own “hustle” - to make a living by selling to others and cooperating with them, but not by slavishly obeying a "boss".
A masculine man is, in essence, a man who enjoys a large degree of autonomy in how he earns his living, which is why men who exist only as employees are, on average, far less confident and potent. Their time is not their own, and they are not building anything that belongs to them, because they are living under rulesets written by other men that generally exist not to benefit them, but the rule makers. And so they learn to suppress, dilute, and restrain their natural aggression just to secure a paycheque.
Institutional life largely functions as a low-grade humiliation ritual for men by acting as a form of spiritual castration. This is the true reason for ever declining rates of male participation in institutional life. It is not the sudden explosion of female greatness, but rather the simple intolerance for and rejection of the institutions in their current form for all but the most self-effacing of men.
Institutionally, normal expressions of masculine force are treated as problems to be managed, policed, and punished. Any respectable institution - any white-collar environment especially - makes it clear: if your masculinity makes anyone uncomfortable, you will be sanctioned.
So men are, at scale, conditioned to socially mask and behave in ways that are “feminine friendly” - which in practice just means behaving less threateningly by being less authentic and more self-effacing if they are to survive professionally. The system trains a man into timidity, then chips away at his sovereignty because it is optimising for compliant functionaries, rather than patriarchs.
People ask “Where have all the real men gone?” and this is exactly where they went.
You engineered a society whose economic ladder requires men to blunt their teeth before they can climb it, by tying their status and capacity to earn a livelihood to how non-threatening and programmable they are. Unless a man finds unconventional, non-institutional ways to earn, he is required to spiritually lobotomise a great deal of his natural masculinity simply to provide for himself.
This is a loud but unspoken trade-off going on at a societal scale, and the implications of it for the birth rate, relational satisfaction and greater human spirit are dire. The collapse of natural gender polarity puts us all out of alignment - nobody wins when one loses.
Contrast this with a man who works mostly around other men in blue-collar trades, or who runs his own small business. He doesn’t need to be rich, let's say he is a humble but self-employed window cleaner, for example. That man has more control over his day, and more freedom to speak and move as he pleases, and therefore possesses more agency in deciding what he tolerates and with whom he associates. And from this, comes a certain confidence. He is “more of a man”, because he carries more risk and lives with more freedom. The same is true of any business owner or person who has more say over the personal conditions by which they work.
Men who live without safety nets, who refuse the guarantee of a fixed salary in exchange for the reality of freedom, are the only men walking a masculine path. This shows in their character, their “aura”, and the way they speak and carry themselves. Men who choose permanent employment over any attempt to build even a modest side-venture, who cannot endure a bad week or month and must have the comfort of a predictable cheque almost certainly end up weaker for it.
Obedience as a primary orientation suits women more than men. Women can of course rebel, and often do in more personal contexts (which is why they are more prone to disrespect their husbands than the employers they obsequiously put in 110% for), and I say this to make the following point: organisationally, they're generally more dispositionally submissive to authority than men.
Male deference is calibrated to perceived competence and dominance: is he sharper than me, could he beat me in a fight, can he lead. Female deference is more responsive to status cues: are they more senior, institutionally powerful, more socially connected etc. A man’s reverence is tied to a sense of the other’s actual acumen, where a woman’s tends more toward evaluating social position.
Obeying someone simply because they have more money, or a higher position within the organisation, regardless of whether they are inherently more virtuous or competent is a feminine pattern of orientation. This is why the subordinate employee role fits women more naturally than it fits men, although paradoxically the institutions reward in women precisely what they punish in men: less warmth, and more ruthlessness - so women pay a heavy price too, because they are also repeatedly conditioned to behave in ways counter to their natural behaviour.
In simple terms: the institutions are highly androgynising in that they flatten both core masculine and feminine energy, with a bias towards an overall culture of feminine passive aggressiveness - they make men less masculine and women less feminine, then tie social inclusion and material survival to it.
This is why for a man, one of the most freeing thresholds he can cross is the point at which his survival no longer depends on people he does not like, trust, or respect.
To be financially self-reliant - to know that your bills, groceries and fundamental necessities are secured by money you generate on your own terms without dependence on bullshit workplace and institutional cultures is a profound behavioural self-affirmation that gives a man a type of confidence and natural swagger that simply cannot be counterfeited.
The true man then, in his fullest expression, does not work from within the system: but from outside of it.
Working 8-5 is a scam
Boomer minded slaves are making fun of her for this, but sorrow is the appropriate response.
Shift work is easier than 8-5, M-F, because you know your day has been sacrificed to your job beforehand.
8-5 is a false glimmer of hope.
You feel like you’re always there.
Once commute and getting ready is done you have an exhausted 2 hours of the day to yourself.
Even weekends the are fake:
Fatigued Friday evening, Saturday to do things you enjoy and by Sunday you’re already having to prepare to go back.
Your peak flow of consciousness is wasted at work everyday, doing what serves you no purpose.
She’s not lazy.
Actually, her inherent Will is so strong it rejects slavery.
$GME Next time Ryan Cohen issues another Convertible Offering, cause of GME surging up, this will be my response to you..
This video of Michael Saylor responding to raising more equity for $MSTR every time Bitcoin ₿ goes up..
Am I the only one that finds it insane most people work 8 hours for a boss they despise, only to come home and have like 3 hours to themselves they spend complaining about work, numbing themselves with alcohol & Netflix and getting ready for the next day?
glorified prison.
DIFFERANCES between STUPiD and IGNORANT:
A stupid person is someone who is so stupid…they do not know…they do not know.
Obviously, we are all stupid on different subjects. For example, if my car engine died, I would not have a clue on how to fix it. I am very stupid when it comes to engine repair….so I hire smart people to fix my cars.
A person is ignorant when they IGNORE a subject they know is important.
For example many “poor people” ignore the subject of money. They may know money is important but they choose to ignore the study of the subject of money.
My poor dad was highly educated but ignored studying the subject of money. So he worked hard all his life and died poor, although he had advanced degrees from brand name universities.
My rich dad was extremely smart when it came to money, investing, and entrepreneurship. He studied those subjects constantly.
When I hear bleeding heart liberals wanting the government to give poor people more money….I realize how stupid and ignorant those liberals are.
They failed to learn the lesson I learned in Sunday School:
“Give a man a fish….you feed them for a day.
Teach a man to fish….you feed them for life.”
Those words of wisdom apply to women and men.
Thank you for following my Tweets, games and books, if you have read or played them.
The world needs more people like you….people like my rich dad…people who value their financial education.
Take care.
L252 - ILUMINACIÓN BITCOIN con @RicardoBSalinas, junto a @leoMCY1
Tratamos:
- bitcoin, moneda y dinero
- regulación y banca
- el declive de Europa
- Ross Ulbricht
- Reservas estrategicas
- Gobernícolas
- la batalla cultural
Y mucho más. Ya disponible
🟡 https://t.co/XHrgVAqV3J
España seguirá fracansando y siendo un país lleno de imbéciles mientras aceptemos como normal el hecho de pagar más del 50 % de nuestros ingresos a una banda de delincuentes.
Opt out.
#Bitcoin
If you live/work in a high nnEMF/blue light setting, it may be in your best interest to use more glycemic control tools, such as more:
-ceylon cinnamon with your meals
-inositol
-B1
-Mg
Activities at desk:
-walking treadmill under desk
-standing better than sitting
-under the desk bike pedals if you sit
-grip trainer
-purposely tapping your foot
To name a few
Introducing: “What’s The Problem?”
Let’s help *everyone* get to the starting line.
Accessible to all, the story of Fiatello and the Big Red Button is something we can all send *before* the first Bitcoin book / podcast / video.
Please share it with everyone you care about (link below).
Thank you Bitcoin 🧡
@satmojoe