Rogues and Knaves

When I expand my context of sexuality, women, and Nature, there are times where I hit a wall. And there are times where a breakthrough comes that unleashes all sorts of gems.

How fast we forget the maxim: "Men and women are different." We apply it only when we face a contradiction that cannot be explained rather than plunging into the depths to pluck out the mystery. If men and women are different, then they have different contexts.

Men and women have different contexts of honor.

Men and women have different contexts for love.

Men and women have different contexts for smarts.

By realizing that women are smarter than men (since it is smarter to have someone work for you instead of do the work yourself), it was a breakthrough that has unleashed many gems.

We know that love ends up being enslavement to men and power to women. This is why women are all for "love" including Hillary Clinton. While Mrs. Bill Clinton advocates love in politics, it means the same 'more power'. We all know how men feel in love. But how do women feel 'in love' aside from the calculating way?

I asked myself, "Since women's love is based on work being made easier, is there anything similiar for men?" There is. Technology.

Men love technology because it eliminates work and makes existing work easier. Men love watching for the latest new gadget and even love shopping over tools and technoligical works. This "love" men have for technology must be identical to women's "love" to men (except more so).

Men love the idea of robots. Women do not. Why? Because she sees men as her robots.

Women love technology too but not as much as men. Men see technology as a salvation of sorts. Technology frees men from work. In the same way, men free women from work. When I saw two men babbling endlessly about a new piece of electronic, it hit me how identical it was when two women babble endlessly about a new man. Except, imagine a technological product that could adapt and shape itself and serve you for LIFE! Now you see why women are so man crazy.

As the Matriarchy solidified, technology skyrocketed. This could not be a simple correlation. Women freed themselves from work through men and men are trying to free themselves from work through technology. Ironically, in the world where there is little to no Matriarchy is where you find the least technology. There are no technological Patriarchies.

No wonder the Matrix was so effective. Men had machines enslave them to be 'energy' or 'long term batteries' to exist while humans lived in an imaginary world. Men understand giant robots and technology so the horror of such a life is understanding. But the fools thought the 'controllers' in real life was religion, government, or corporations without considering women. Why? Guys are scared to death to face the possibility that women are the smarter and controlling sex. Almost like a self-therapy, on MGTOW boards, men constantly re-iterate how "stupid" women are. My previous post of 'Women are smarter than men' didn't create disagreements but created personal insults against ME! haha.

Men do live in an illusionary world but the programming is based that men and women are NOT different from one another. Men never consider women to have a different context of honor, love, children, and all. They assume honor, love, children, etc. are universally the same by both genders.

Women do not know how men love. They do not enter our world. They do not hear the great songs of literature and all. They only know that "love", which is the process of her being a master over a male, makes him happy as well (a slave's happiness).

The idea of a man going their own way is alien to her. The real label for a guy doing the MGTOW is the word rogue. Love is authority to her.

Rogue- A man who is 'going his own way' when it comes to "The Way".

Rogue means different things to different people. Rogue, to other rogues, means someone who is uncontrollable, someone who wants to be free. To knaves, rogues mean someone who is an inferior organism. In this, knaves and women join together in hating rogues. And, of course, to women, a rogue is someone who cheats.

Women do not see rogues as threats. They see them only as scoundrels because they refuse to obey woman's authority. If a citizen decided to take matters into his own hands and arrest someone breaking the law, a politician would view those active citizens as scoundrels. (Example: President Bush calling citizens who arrest illegal immigrants as 'vigilantes'.) It is all about context.

Knave- A male servant that obeys "The Way".

There are multiple types of knaves. There is the financial knave which we label as Husband. There is the sexual knave which we label as Boyfriend. There is the shepherd knave (guiding other males into "The Way") which we label as Politician. Remember, many priests today are politicians. Many businessmen are politicians as well.

"Boyfriend" applies to players whose goal is to please women and think themselves "awesome" because they get to sleep with women.

Nice Guy is a proto-type husband. Most Nice Guys learn to sexualize themselves enough to become "Boyfriend" which ends them up becoming "Husband".

Women actually do want nice guys. But they know that sex is the hook to control the guy. If a guy does not sex the woman, she cannot get her hooks in him. This is why women demand guys to sexualize themselves so they can control them. A guy refusing kisses is a guy she cannot wrap around her little finger.

The authority of our time is not God (for as Nietzche said, "God is dead."), is not State, is not even Wealth. The ultimate and unquestionable authority, of which everyone, president, investor, and priest, must bow to is LOVE.

Rousseau, the man whose writings sparked the French Revolutions and destroyed the Lockean Revolution, deliberately chose 'love' as the authority. Now, "Love" is going to solve all problems, make all the trains work on time, cause peace in the Middle East, and educate all children. "Love" is the post-modern chimera.

Not obeying the authority of LOVE is like not obeying the authority of the STATE. "But Pook! The State can kill you and arrest you!" So can 'love'. Child support, divorce proceedings, and destroys and controls. It is "love" trumping the authority of law and, by doing so, make tyrannical law.

But now that we know the authority is 'love', we rogues now have tools to protect ourselves. First, if accused by any crime, proclaim it as a 'love crime'. Second, if accused of using women, just say that you are searching for love. Third, if accused you are becoming too wealthy, tell how you did your business to 'love' the world and, if that doesn't work, start a charity to show just how much you 'love'.

When a rogue appeals to "love", women will assume he is just a knave and, therefore, not a problem. All knaves will get grinded up in "The Way" eventually, right?

Women appeal to "love" to get them off the hook all the time. MGTOW, or as I prefer, rogues ought to start appealing to "love" just the same. Ironically, the appeals to love will set rogues free.

Two Spheres

Two spheres of life are placed upon the Earth. They exist on top of one another. Where one lives in one sphere, that person cannot see the other sphere. These spheres are the masculine and feminine spheres.

As men, we have our systems of beliefs, our moralities, and values. All men share similiarities that it is better to be smarter than dumber, stronger than weaker, and wiser than stupider. But 'smart', 'strong', and 'wise' exist only in a certain context: and that is to work. To accomplish.

When men look at women, they wonder how awful their existence must be. For women, in men's eyes, are stupider, weaker, and dumber. Men see women doing menial tasks, and we wonder how they do brain dead jobs.

Men think women are very emotional and can be like a frail flower.

Some men, when they think they 'understand' women, end up projecting their own male contexts into women. For example, a man thinks his context of horniness is shared by a woman's. He says, "She is just as horny as I!" (whereas her horniness has a tactic involved)

Men peering at the feminine sphere is like men on the shore of the world peering into the ocean. They see shadows of movement on the other side and consider that liquid underworld to be mysterious yet pretty shallow. Certainly nothing as complex and wonderous as above!

But let us jump into the waters into the Feminine Sphere. As we jump into the water, we realize there is no liquid underworld. We appear on the surface just as when we left but it is a new different overworld. And, likewise, there are women standing on the shore peering into the depths of the ocean wondering what it is like in the masculine sphere. They see the shadows and it seems interesting, a little mysterious, but they too think it is a shallow existence. And they pity men for their shallow existence.

The feminine sphere is just as wonderous and detailed as the masculine sphere. Both were created by Nature or Nature's God. Each sex pities the other for their 'shallow' existence.

Women do not think men are smart. They may be intelligent, but women will always think they are smarter. The feminine sphere operates in a different morality. For a woman, to be 'smart' is to manipulate others to do work for them. Beautiful women are despised by other women because they have the potential to become very rich.

To women, men are stiff creatures who, if they give intelligent talk, are percieved as talking nonsense. There are more practical concerns to talk about such as shopping and sex.

Both men and women exist for feelings. But men do not recognize video games, football, or the praise they get from jobs or girlfriends to be 'feelings'. Also, women do not recognize that decorations, shopping, food, and sex to be 'feelings'. When a woman insists on remodeling, it is considered very important to her. But if a man were to suggest a new HD TV to replace the old TV, the woman would think it nonsense and to consider the man is interested only in new feelings.

Women see men as weak creatures whose only benefit is that they can work for them. This is why when a woman dumps you, she uses BS language like "Let us just be friends" and all without telling you what is really wrong. She percieves men to be stupid because, let us face it, many men do act stupid around women.

To women, religion is totally different than what it is to men. Everything exists in a different context. When a man is with a woman wearing a hot outfit, don't look at her but at the other women on the street. They will be staring daggers into her.

Women do not care what men think of her. It is nice if a man turns to look at her. But if a woman turns and looks, then her day is made. Instead of saying a man said something about her, say that a woman said something. She will demand to know who the woman is and what was said. But as for the men? Well, who cares about those shallow simple creatures.

"But Pook! History books are filled with great men. And women read those books. So obviously the masculine sphere is superior." Yes, women read those books. But history itself is part of the masculine sphere.

The masculine sphere is full of straight lines, of towers, and pyramids.

The feminine sphere is full of reflections, of webs, and massagers.

Consider the home. Many men design the interior of their home for utilitarian purposes or for cool electronic equipment. Often, it is a black look everywhere (non-reflection). Men do this because it creates a mood within him.

A woman sees it totally different and considers the interior of the home a priority. She puts up drapes, carpet, constantly cleans, gets matching furniture, all because it creates a mood within her.

Men believe women are all about feelings because when they interact with them, that is all he sees. But women believe the same about men. They see your video game systems, speakers, and fast car and think, "Toys".

The problem that has occurred was that somehow along the way, the feminine sphere was proclaimed to be the 'master morality' while the masculine sphere was proclaimed to be the 'slave morality'. Society views a 'man' as only a being that works for a woman. And a 'woman' is a being that holds the leash over a man.

When a man thinks of equality, it is a difficult concept. Sure, he knows he should be fair, but he can barely respect women as equals. This is the same for women. They also barely respect men as equals.

I am tired of men standing on that shore, pointing at the water, and declaring, "What a shallow existence women are living! They are not fit to live!" It is because on the other side is a woman, pointing at the water, doing the exact thing. Women are very smart. They are just smart in ways men do not percieve as smart (so they just label it 'woman's intuition). Women do the exact same for men.

A few are able to travel to the other sphere. But they are always travelers and can only observe. They will never be native to that other sphere. Esther Vilar was one such traveler. Her "Manipulated Men" described women to a T but what she labels as men's hopes and dreams is a little 'fuzzy'. But that is enough. No woman can understand a man well enough as men can (just as men cannot understand woman as women can). But Vilar knew enough of our sphere to communicate.

"Manipulated Man" should reveal that there is a looking glass and, on the other side, there is a feminine world that is invisible to us. Vilar gave us a lens to 'see' it. We should strive to sharpen that lens. The better we understand the feminine sphere, the better we understand women.

Civil War in the Matriarchy

Semi-pussified males and men mistakenly believe Feminism is the Matriarchy. This is understandable because feminists are 'visible' because they are trying to invade the masculine sphere.

Women are smarter than men because they have manipulated us to not just work for them, we are to die for them at a moment's notice. It was during the 1940s and 1950s that women began pooling their leverage and cementing it over men. This was the time when 'engagement rings' from Da Beers were popularized. Media began turning women into goddesses and idealized the 50s nuclear family. That nuclear family idea is the woman staying at home and getting men and society to work for her. If a man was not married, he often could not even find a job. The employer would say, "I will give job to the guy who has a family because he needs it more." Up until this time in all of Human history, women had to work. Now, due to mechanization and all, they could get men to work for them.

Men working for women and obeying them- this is the Matriarchy. The victory was so complete and men were completely wrapped around woman's fingers. But this wasn't enough. Not content to have the masculine sphere work completely for the feminine sphere, women sought interest in conquering the masculine sphere as well. These are the feminists. As men, we can see them because they are entering our masculine world and trying to take it over. But the feminine world is invisible to men, and they had no idea how controlled they were.

Feminism has sparked a civil war within the Matriarchy. The feminists believe they have a manifest destiny to conquer the masculine sphere as well. They believe that freedom means that women are allowed to choose which gender they want to be (man or woman). Of course, men do not get this choice as we are sinking closer to becoming a legal underclass. For proof, know that woman has a choice of 'career' or 'homemaker' but man only gets on choice: 'job'. Women have careers, men only have jobs. Remember that.

As Feminists attempt to absorb masculine values including careers, promiscuity, and all, they come in conflict with the old style Matriarchy. At first, they were set to respect the boundaries of one another and existed side by side as feminists pushed for more control of the masculine sphere. Then something happened.

Men began to notice the feminists intruding on their world. And their initial complaints were against them. They said, "I will never marry or work for a feminist. Take her slutty career ways away from here!" Matriarchy who relies on men working for them noticed that their servants, men, were rebelling against the feminists. They saw the writing on the wall: if men can convince themselves to not work for some women (feminists), they may stop working for all women altogether. With speed, the Matriarchy began to attack the Feminists. But it is not a complete attack. Matriarchy is attacking Feminism only where they make female domination most visible to men. This is why when you hear a Matriarch write an anti-feminist book, she says, "Feminism has gone too far." The complaint is not that Feminism exists but only that it has gone 'too far'. What defines 'too far'? 'Too far' is nothing more than men noticing the manipulation.

Feminists view conquest of the masculine sphere as the key to power. They are, literally, power hungry. They do not care if some men stop working for them since they can now work for themselves.

As the two set their sights on one another and fight, this is the time for men to slip away from both.

Fish-Hook Metaphor

I used to think, dating wise, that I was the fishermen and women were the fish. How wrong I was! We, happy men, are the fish. And women dangle the bait of pussy in front of our faces waiting for us to bite. When we bite, we get snagged on the hook. Relationships literally become a tug of war with women trying to reel the guy in and the guy, if he has spirit, fighting to stay in the ocean. Should the guy have no money or potential, he is "too small" and he gets thrown back. (Interestingly, women dislike most short men as fishermen dislike small fish.) Also, fishermen dislike using nets since that takes the 'sport' out of fishing (the fish can't fight back). Interesting that women tend to take pleasure in the 'sport' as well and hate it when the 'fish' jumps from the water onto the frying pan of marriage. She must prove she is a woman (a fisherman) by having some sort of way to prove her 'skills' (unless she is old and doesn't care anymore. Transparent prostitution would be to her like using a net.). When pulled out and caught (marriage), the fish is put to work given some more bait (sex) to get going. Should the woman tire of her fish, she divorces it which is putting the guy on the grill and getting as much meat (money) from him as possible. From her perspective, there are always more fish in the sea.

And what of the fish's perspective? In their natural state (single), they see themselves swimming around in an underworld. The bait and woman they could see as 'going towards the light', heading towards a new world itself! And once "married", the fish wants to go back to the big sea but he cannot.

Women, speaking to other girls of a new guy they met, refer to the event as, "Look at the BIG ONE I caught!" If a woman fishes too long, her bait becomes soggy and loose (ewwww). And, like a fisherman, women know how to jiggle the bait and make it "dance" to attract attention.

It is good to think of the juicy bait. But remember the hook hidden inside.

One fun thing to do is to swim to the woman but ignore the bait. The woman becomes confused! Eventually, she’ll move on to another fish and may do the ‘Let’s just be friends’ line. As Anti-Dump said, women will work with you if they like you. She knows that if you do not swallow her bait, she cannot get her hooks in you. While women are attracted to sexualized men and want them to be sexual towards them, always remember that on their back the meter is running. The hooks, remember the hooks. Prostitution is stupid for women since they can get more money by marrying. As Sheen said, “You pay the prostitute to leave, not to come.” Sheen knows that it is hook-less sex.

Remember the fish-hook metaphor when a woman says, “Hey, you want to hook up?”

Matriarchy Behind the U.S. Immigration Bill

The flaw of the Democratic Representation is that politicians will ignore long term problems for short term gains. Everyone is familiar with politicians kicking cans down the road so they can get elected today. But, ironically, sometimes this happens in reverse.

To my non-US readers, the U.S. Immigration Bill in Congress would effectively grant amnest to millions of illegal immigrants. With a stroke of a pen, Congress does have power to turn non-citizens into citizens. They have done this before about twenty years ago and before that. It is said that if any illegal immigrant is allowed to get into America, then they are 'clear' since, eventually, amnesty will come.

The political swirls are interesting here. One would think the Republican Party would be against such a bill due to the conservative base being against illegal immigration and, certainly, amnesty. Yet, President Bush and other major Republicans are leading the charge. Conservative base in America found out what was going on and probably hammered their representative hard because, suddenly, the bill fell apart.

In politics, when a bill falls apart, usually Congress moves on. Not this time. Extroadinary efforts are being moved to ressurect the bill and get it passed from both parties. But politicians in conservative districts are being heavily influenced to back out. And they are because they won't win the next election without those votes.

So why is this bill so important? The first graph shows why. The second shows how.

Aging baby boomers will create a nightmare in Social Security and Medicare. No politician will mention this, but they need all these new immigrants in, made citizens, so they can begin making more taxes.

So how is Matriarchy involved? Who makes up the majority of Social Security and Medicare users? Women. (Men die too fast.) They could raise the age of Social Security. They could put on many fixes. But there are also other Matriarchy issues with the Amnesty issue.

Third World Labor saved Feminism. Often, women will work and pay these immigrants to be their nannies. In the early nineties, there was something called "Nanny Gate". Clinton wanted the Head of the Justice Department to be a woman. The first woman went up to the Senate (since Senate must confirm each cabinet post) and, lo and behold, when she paid the nanny she did not pay the nanny's social security cost! Alas! So Clinton dropped her and put up another woman. And, again, when she paid her nanny she did not pay for Social Security. Noticing the pattern, Clinton then got a woman who wouldn't have a child so there would be no nanny gate. Which woman would you guess, by looking at her, would never have a child? Yep, Janet Reno.

Agriculture and Textile industries are also heavily for the Immigration Bill (for the reasons you would expect). But, ultimately, the real reason for the dogged insistence of this bill is that it is believed it will help stop the upcoming Boomer retirement recession (which will be mostly women).

RIP Eternal Bachelor

Eternal Bachelor blog is no more. All the archives are also gone. It is up to Duncan to whether he explains more on the complete shutting down of his blog. The removal of the archives strikes me a little suspicious.

There were two problems with Eternal Bachelor blog:

One, it was becoming very popular.

Two, Duncan had put his full name on the blog and his content could be a little too close about his work environment.

Of course, the blog's demise could be exactly what was said: ranting takes too much time and he got tired of it.

Regardless, it is an important reminder to never use your real name or put up pictures of yourself on the Internet. They can and will be used against you. You don't want a potential employer to be able to google you and find rants against women or something else. Putting out real fact about you on the Internet may win picture contests but it may haunt you in the end. I know if I hadn't stayed anonymous, "Pook" and my real self would be connected which would end up either silencing "Pook" or "Pook" gets twisted in such a way to please those who hold leverage over me. In the last US Presidential election, someone who came out and spoke against a candidate based on previous real-life experience with him, and was very effective at doing so, ended up suddenly getting fired from the job he had worked at for decades. Grudges linger in politics. When a political person does not get what he wants, long knives come out.

Men are most vulnerable in two ways: when they are single (and any woman can be sent to 'get' them) and when they are not financially secured (i.e. they work for someone else). The reason why high-up US political candidates are always married and wealthy is because only then can they begin resisting the two above consistent attacks.

You must have your own financial system if you wish to really speak freely (and effectively) against elites. And even then, they can throw endless lawsuits at you to burn up all your money. One major radio political commentator in America was "under legal investigation" for oddball crimes at least for three years.... with no charges ever being made.

Or consider the Duke Lacrosse Team case. Those boys survived that legal challenge because of their wealthy background. You or I would have been steamrolled.

In legal matters, err on the side of caution. Remember that www.americanwomensuck.com and www.dontgetmarried.com were cited in recent U.S. legislation (or was it some kooky senator? What does it matter...). The only reason why feminists haven't shut down MRA sites is because of the Supreme Court's rulings on the Internet being a place for 'free conversation'. But if they know who you are in real life, they can come after you.

Overheard in New York

Some good Matriarchy quotes. Warning: bad language

The Rejection of Existentialism

The sweet perfume of the Matriarchy that intoxicates its people is, essentially, existentialism. Language means things, and I grow suspicious when definitions of words are changed either deliberately or not. Tragedy today means something occuring that causes such anguish that there can be no easy way to comfort. Every unexpected death is considered a 'tragedy'. But tragedy actually means a choice is involved with the chooser reflecting on his poor choice. People, not knowing their literature, would see and read the "tragedies" and feel 'bad'. Hence, everything that makes us feel 'agony' that cannot be comforted is declared to be a tragedy. It is woman's definition of tragedy.

Ironically, choice is all the rage these days. But it does not mean what it used to mean. A difficult choice meant to accept difficult consequences in the form of suffering, disapproval of others, ostracism, punishment, guilt, and, in general, damnation. Without these tough consequences, choices have no meaning. It is accepting the consequences that gives Antigone her nobility and the unwillingness to do so that makes her sister Ismene less so.

The Matriarchy likes to speak much of the right to choice. What the Matriarchy is really saying is that there are no necessary consequences, that disapproval is only prejudice and guilt only a neurosis. "Do not worry," says the Matriarchy. "Political activism and psychiatry can handle it." We have no-fault divorces as well as no-fault car accidents (hmm, a connection between the two?). Society is now at the point of no-fault choices.

So what is the evil of Matriarchy? It is conflict. Conflict is the evil we must avoid, among the nations of the earth, among our neighbors, and among ourselves. When conflict appears in politics, for example, one is not to stand behind one's principles like a man. Rather, one must be "bi-partisan". If a conflict appears between nations, "diplomacy" must be used. With people, "communication" must be applied (or whatever else they call it). In within ourselves, a conflict emerges. But to feel comfortable in life is to live the life of a cow.

Reason-Revelation. Freedom-Necessity. Democracy-Aristocracy. Good-Evil. Body-Soul. Self-Other. City-Man. Eternity-Time. Being-Nothing. A serious life is being fully aware of the alternatives and thinking about them with all the intensity one brings to bear on life-and-death questions knowing that every choice is a great risk with necessary consequences that are hard to bear. The alternative is blind obedience to "The Way". People following "The Way" do not know any alternatives and their 'happiness' is surface only- they are literally bored to death.

Do you choose to marry... or not? Do you choose to have children... or not? Do you choose to spend your time pursuing the arts... or starting a business... or living a life of leisure? I prefer the "MGTOW" (Men Going Their Own Way) label over the "MRA" (Men's Right Activism). MGTOW has men making choices and living with them. These do include some men getting married and having children. But they are not follow "The Way" because they actually made a choice. I get the impression that MRA adheres to the conflict-resolution with political activism being the solution to the percieved problem: polical inequality (which no doubt legal issues have to be dealt with. But even if they are dealt with, happiness will not magically descend into men's hearts. Legislators cannot create happiness. That is up to us.)

Men are alarmed that the more they know about the Matriarchy and all, the more conflict they sense which can create suffering and agony not just within ourselves but between families, between individuals, and, ultimately, nations. But treat conflict as a source of inspiration, creativity, and strength just as the ancient artists and philosophers did. Like women, we men cannot have our cake and eat it too. But throwing off the shackles of existentialism, which is the existence of a cow, i.e. cowism (hah), our life becomes more enriched and the moments more intense and charged than anything of a conflict-free life. We suffer but we can also laugh. While you may not hear the residents of hte Matriarchy really in 'suffering' (they are on their prozac, their 'feelies' of movies, and other htings to become conflict-free), you also do not hear them laugh. When they do laugh, it is a weak and most pathetic laugh, nothing like the hearty belly-laugh of one intermeshed with life. When weak men laugh, they do a "ehh ehh ehh" artificial type laugh. It is scrawny and annoying. A hearty laugh that echoes the room, no one in the Matriarchy can do it.

The notion of choice and consequences does mean that one never feels at home on Earth. God is attacked today because He brings conflict: good vs evil, heaven vs earth, virtue vs sin, and so on. Jesus did declare that He did not intend to bring peace but "a sword" to divide brother against brother, family against family, and nation against nation. The notion of God is the notion of conflict. Since conflict is considered the only true evil today, God, and all the issues He brings, must be steamrolled into being conflict free. That is why God and religion is only practiced today, even among theologians, as agents of removing conflict. Of love and tolerance.

But without conflict, Love is also dead. Psychologists have put it to death. In its place has been sport sex and 'meaningful relationships'. Should it not be surprising that thanatology or 'death with dignity' is on the way to putting death to death? Coming to terms with the terror of death, Socrates' long and arduous education, learning how to die, will no longer be necessary. For death will not be what it used to be. What will replace it remains to be seen.

If you want out of a monotone existence, take choices and reflect on the conseqences. You will begin to experience the highs and lows of life. You will suffer. But you will also laugh. A wrong choice will spawn tragic thoughts. A right thought will spawn comedic thoughts. Now, life becomes more thrilling than theater. You will travel back to the Matriarchy Kingdoms and find people strapped to home theater set-ups staring passively at people acting the highs and lows of life.

When Maximus threw his weapon at the crowd in "Gladiator", he said, "Are you entertained!?" Well, are you? Are you going to be more entertained by merley existing and watching theater when not working or BEING theater and turning your life in mixes of tragedies and comedies?

Women always choose the former (which is why they are so movie and pop-culture obsessed). They seek boyfriends who are the latter (for it entertains them). Nice Guys and others who follow "The Way" are never interesting to them or anyone else. The nature of the Nice Guy is to avoid conflict at all costs.

A Matter of Ego

Looking back, I have wondered why I didn't fall prey to believing women were 'everything divine', end up marrying, or fall into being a player to focus on their needs all the time. I am sure you may have wondered this about yourself if, you too, are free.

Early in my life, there was a bashfulness in me that helped keep me away from women. But Nature re-asserts itself and overcomes shyness eventually. So it had to be something else that kept me off of "The Way". Every man around me was a 'family man'. I also had a highly religious upbringing. But Nature, also, eventually overcomes that.

In school, there was a conversation that I find myself suddenly remembering. A hot cheerleader girl was at my table in Biology class (assigned seating for everyone I believe). Apparently, this girl was not the typical air-head but very observable. One day, she turned to me and said, "You are very different from the other guys."

Yeah, because I was shy dorky wimp who couldn't approach the coolness of the football players and other 'cool dudes'.

While I didn't say that, I thought it. She must have picked up on it for she then said: "Unlike the other guys..." she pointed to thugs leaning back talking against the cabinets and pointed in the other direction where the sports guys gathered to talk about the 'next game' and then at the nerds studying hard to get a high score to match their other high scores, "You do not have an ego."

Something about the conversation felt very comfortable. Rarely do I come out of my shell and share my innermost hobbies and all (I don't even do it on the Internet). But she listened and talked back on a similiar level. I was beginning my craft of writing, and she seemed genuinely interested in it.

Now, I'm sure the sosuave guys will go, "zOMG Pook! Why didn't you go for her!? LOL!!!" First, I thought she was attractive but I wasn't "hot" for her. Remember, I was very young then so many of my hormones were asleep. Two, the conversation was nothing romantic. Three, she was years older than me. Hell, I couldn't even drive then.

Now thinking about it, I had another identical case with another hot cheerleader. She was obviously modeling and, at this time, I WAS old enough where enough hormones were kicking up interest. She was definately a guy magnet. Instead of discussion about egos, it was more about the craft of writing and reading.

A skeptical reader would now say, "But aha, Pooky, with you recounting these young adult moments is proof of your momentous earth shattering ego. You only remember the discussions with the hot cheerleaders because you convienantly forget the discussions with the ugly girls." Actually, I don't remember any similiar discussion with ugly girls. I have had similiar discussions when I got older but they were with married women my age (and had their guy and wasn't looking at me as a target). There was no way those girls back then were trying to get their hooks in wimpy me back then (not when they had the entire football team to choose from). Maybe they were curious that I wasn't over them like the other guys, but I don't think that is it either. There was no incentive to talk to me and I had no incentive to talk to them being my old bashful self. For once, they could talk to me on a wavelength I could identify without the usual hooks, traps, and snares.

In my personal life, I demand this wavelength of my friends as well. I find the idea of turning co-workers into friends just because of proximity to be bad. But women are so manipulative that it annoys me that they do not give me a chance to know who they really are, good or bad. I hate fake people, men and women.

Anyway, how one worships their ego very much alters their fate in life. In our Matriarchy, women have a 'master morality' while men follow a 'slave morality'. So it follows...

The less of an ego a man has, the less likely he will be enslaved (by either a woman or heavily leveraged by a corporation).

The less of an ego a woman has, the less likely she will enslave and manipulate.

Western women are filled with their egos which is why they are so awful. Western men are filled with their egos which is why they are so wimpy. The wimpier the guy, the bigger his ego it seems.

When foreign women are brought back inside the Anglosphere, they often become 'corrupted' and turn as bad as other women. The West is very ego-worshipping. The idea of dropping to one's knees and declaring how horrible you are is very foreign in America (except some of the religious. But remember, the Pharisees were religious too but had greater egos than anyone else. Jesus insulted them to their face). The girls in their previous countries had no reason to worship their ego.

Fighting your ego is the way to keep your perceptions sharp and remain free.

Men's Projection Is Greatest Weakness

Men and Women are different.

We say this, but then we go on. The biggest mistake men make is projecting themselves onto women. They think that because he feels romantic, that she does as well. So off goes his thoughts into a sweet air of pageantry.

But what are the woman's thoughts on the matter? Like a cold blooded accountant. Like I said, men and women are different. When a man goes off with his pageantry, his poetries, his odes of love, she waits for him to get done and get down to business. If a guy keeps on with this nonsense, she thinks he is a doofus and continues on.

Imagine if when you bought groceries, the buyer began talking romantically about the 'green revolution', about how it is a modern marvel how we can enter a grocery store and find everything we need, of how glorious round the shape and size of the store's melons, or the shapely way the pears are. The checker would be astonished if customers behaved such a way.

Who knew the key to understanding women would be found in the thought process of accounting?

The values we, as men hold, are completely different than the values women hold. The apex of a woman's life would be something like relaxing in a hot bubble bath in an island paradise. But men prefer truth, ideals, and victory.

Good and evil do not exist in woman's lexicon. She is far more utilitarian since 'good' and 'evil' means a more celestial divine standard. Women who use sexuality as a means to and end is percieved evil by men. But to women, it is percieved entirely differently. What women view as the greatest sin is for men to STEAL the goods. Rape, not murder, not terrorism, not genocide, is the greatest of wrongs to them. It is because rape is stealing their goods. With murder and terrorism, well, that kills mostly men so that is not that bad. But rape is almost always against women. Also, with Victorian zeal, the greatest of crimes is also sex predators (who are, curiously, almost all men). They are always displayed on the nightly news. They often get hit with paying for their crime double by, first, jail time and then being told where they can live and all. I can think of worse crimes than sexual predation such as murder. The reason why they chose sexual predation against the entire Church was, in their eyes, the worst of all crimes.

So why do women love murderers? Go to any prison and you will see beautiful women come and go. Again, men and women are different. When a man commits violence, men consider it 'evil'. Women do not. In fact, women consider violence to be confidence. If women did not think this way, then why do murderers have such hot girls? The truth points to itself.

It also explains a political mystery: why feminized politicians view outright dictators like Castro and Hussein as if they were not only legitimate heads of state but 'confident' heads of state. This brings up the question of Hitler, who is universally abhorred. The simple answer is that there needs to be 'some' sort of person to be hated. Anything these people 'hate', they will instantly call 'fascism' (without using the word in its proper context). For example, Pook is 'fascist' for having this blog. Does that mean I am setting up a government to control people? No. But Hitler makes a good person for the "Hate Minute" where everyone gathers, a picture of Hitler appears, and everyone starts 'hating' at the same time. There is so much association of this that anytime they, themselves, hate what someone says or does, that person is always made out to be Hitler.

Politics has always been corrupted. But politics became WEIRD when it got feminized. Centuries ago, American politicians would refer to concepts of 'good' and 'evil' without shame and refer to heaven and earth. But now, politicians act like women. They talk too much, use symbolism over substance, focus on their appearance, are more interested in cliques than the will of the people, and prefer to be friends with folks in Washington than to please the district that sent them there in the first place.

And they think they are entitled to ALL your money and percieve themselves "generous" for keeping what you have. Just like women.

Women are smarter than men

Henry Ford was a smart guy. Not because he could recite literature, history, law, or any of that on the fly but because he could get others to do it for him. When critics accused him of being stupid, he invited journalists in to answer any question. Around him he had his employees who answered all the journalists questions. "See how smart I am?" he would say. But a journalist said, "But Mr. Ford, you didn't answer a single question." But he didn't have to since he had others to do it for him.

From the vantage point of men, women have these characteristics:

-They show no interest in philosophy, literature, or higher spirituality.
-They show interest in celebrities, gossip, and a lowly ordered life (lack of spirituality).
-They appear emotional with lots of 'oohs and ahhs' as well as crying on the spot. They have temper tantrums. They appear giddy one moment and contemptous the next.
-They are physically weaker than men and do not perform well in the subjects of mathematics and engineering.
-They turn down 'nice guys' and mate with thugs and other scum. Sometimes they become single mothers and end up in poverty.
-When they are young, they think of dating all the time and are always on the look-out for 'Mr. Right'.

And yet, women are smarter than men. On MRA forums, you can hear men constantly give examples and say how dumb women are almost with a white-hot frenzy. What does women being dumb have to do with MRA? Nothing, yet it persists. The answer is that MRA men are in denial of the truth: that women are smarter than men.

Let us look at the vantage point from the woman. In fact, let us say for this moment you are a pretty woman. You do not need to work. All you need to do is get a guy to work for you. Viola, you are done.

On a man's financial statement, a girlfriend would be labeled as an 'expense' while a wife would be labeled as a 'liability'. But on a woman's financial statement, the boyfriend can be labeled as 'income' with the husband being an 'asset'. Men dislike dating for one part it is always money out of their pocket. But imagine if dating was putting money into your pocket, and, if you got the target, you would have an asset? Why, dating would fill your mind day in and day out! You would always be on the hunt for a working asset to acquire or 'potential asset' that was young enough to come and bloom to make money (especially if that asset had a college degree). Now, do see how women are smarter than men?

Celebrity worship is something that irritates us Men. Celebrities are not geniuses but quite the opposite! But scratch beneath the surface. Celebrities have money. Celebrities have power. Celebrities own the media. Maybe they aren't that stupid for how else could they have acquired that? Women look at celebrities as teachers for themselves. Celebrities are mind numbed fools (which puts them in common with women) yet they acquired so much. Women want that so they look at the celebrity as the model, the template to follow. Women often refer to their male admirers as their 'fan club'.

Intelligence and smart are too different things. A man may be intelligent yet be stupid. Michael Chriton, married five times and divorced four times. He is an intelligent man but pretty stupid. Issac Newton was intelligent. But he was stupid. (see how he pined for this one woman and her daughter(!)) Many men are intelligent. Most are stupid though.

Women are not the emotional ones. They see love in a very calculated manner. It is men who are the emotional ones. It is men who kill themselves over a girl or go bonkers in some other way. It is men who are the saps. The bottom line is when it comes to romance, women use men more than the other way around. Even the men who think they are 'using her' really is the other way around. How do I know this? Compare the 'work' a player does to the average hot girl. The average hot girl just puts on some 'hot' clothes and that is it. The player, meanwhile, spends agonizing amount of time working his 'game'. This game is like that wooden maze with the mouse (who is the player) and the cheese (the pussy) at the end. But who made the game? The women staring from the outside (as calculated as the scientist).

But what about the lack of spirituality? Surely, men are smarter from abandoning the lowly ordered life! But again, no. Spirituality is something that even a begger can obtain. But a big house, fancy car, and all that, no, only a few can get riches.

Many MRA men have realized that killing yourself for a job is not a smart idea. In fact, the smart thing to do is to have a stress free job with benefits (which women all obtain should they choose to work). Men might say, "But they do not know mathematics and engineering!" Actually, women don't know the humanities as well. So women changed the humanities to be whatever they felt like studying (feminism got rid of all the dead white male authors for example). So women are popping out with 'college degrees' that are worthless. But worthless to WHOM? Why, to many men at businesses who are interested in workers. This type of woman never had any interest in really 'working' anyway. She just wanted the status.

In the West, men operate from a Slave Morality (as described by Nieztche). The biggest believers in the Slave Morality are the 'nice guys'. Nice guys are great for marriage (i.e. slavery) but they are not good, to women, for dates and all. Why? And the 'thugs' that men think are losers because they do not operate from the 'Slave Morality' mentality, these thugs and 'scum' have much in common with western women. Women operate from a Master Morality. Every pretty woman thinks she is a huge celebrity in her little world. Thugs and 'scum' (from the male point of view) operate on a Master Morality so they are more in tune with women. From woman's point of view, nice guys are the 'losers and scum' who they must be careful with their words as to not break the slave's heart. But the thugs appear to be more 'equals'. When a Nice Guy finds his balls and acts that way to a woman, she is astonished. Now imagine how stunned a slavemaster might be when a slave stood up to him! The slavemaster would think, "Wow, that slave has lots of fight in him. He will make a great slave! He is not broken in yet." Notice how the thoughts are identical with women?

Women use shame tactics because they work on most men. Women, like little Caesars, can order men about at their will. This is why women are smarter than men.

But what of the single mother who lives in poverty? On first glimpse, yes, she appears very stupid. But actually, she is CLUMSY. One being clumsy is not the same as being stupid. Women aim at the stress free, fun life (which is smart) while many men aim for more-stress, responsible life (which is often stupid). Women want to live to the fullest. She will screw the guy should it be in 'the moment'. But she got pregnant not because she was stupid but because she was clumsy in not applying birth control. Hence, Planned Parenthood and so many other agendas pushing birth control education (and free birth control) everywhere. Many groups, men and religious groups, believe this is a hedonistic for-the-love-of-sex act. What it is, really, is a calculated for-the-clumsy-women act.

Granted, with both men and women, there are differentiating levels of stupidity and smarts. But, comparing the whole of one gender against the other, women are smarter than men.

Look at how politicians bend to their aim.

Look how they have taken over colleges.

Look at how courts serve them.

All the marriage laws run in a circle around woman, elevating her, while pushing down the man to serve for her. Child payment and assets-taken-by-divorce are really nothing more than legally enslaving a man.

See how, in romance, men are in full anxiety and go to tremendous lengths for a woman (where as she hardly goes to much lengths at all).

Women are smarter than men. You know this was the truth you've been fighting against for so long. We cannot improve until we accept this tremendous fact: women won.

"But Pook! Women were not smarter than men throughout most of history? So what happened?" What happened was that women were able to make men stupid and, thus, manipulate them at will. How a man becomes "stupid" to be ripe for "manipulation" is the matriarchy's great secret and is for another post altogether. And it isn't what you think.

The comic Jeff Foxworthy realized this truth himself when, as he said, his wife declared that she was hot and he, automatically, got up and turned on the fan. She didn't ask for the fan to turn on, but he automatically did it. Walking back to the couch, it hit him. "Women are smarter than men," he realized because they have us working for them.