Sunday, February 7, 2010

The Lost Art of Discipline VIII - End.

(Image courtesy of Daikinbakuju.)

Greetings Ladies and Gents,

Sorry about the massive delay. In between working, studying, child rearing and investing, I completely upgraded all of my home office equipment, which involved a lot of set-up time.

Now that a former bedroom has been completely transformed into a fully functioning office, I'm ready to rock!

Since I've been known to prognosticate, let me just say that I believe that telecommuting from home, based on current internet and computer technologies, will be the new wave of the future.

Why commute, waste fuel, and blow money on office space when your workforce can submit industrial strength reports, spreadsheets, etc from anywhere in the world via email, skype, web-based ERP systems or Google Apps?

Not only can individuals and organizations save a ton of money, folks will quickly realize that one can do a tremendous amount of work in a very short period of time. Will the Four Hour Workweek become the norm rather than the exception? Indeed, is the end of work itself virtually upon us??

Only time will tell.

In any event, I'll stop digressing... 'cause Kirigakure is back at you with that real talk!! Today's post is the last in a series [1][2][3][4][5][6][7].

Previously, we've talked about discipline as a virtue, why it is a much needed ingredient in any successful relationship, how feminist public policy has outlawed discipline between man and woman, how the lack of discipline is destroying relationships across the Western world, and why good girls hook up with the bad boys who give them a twisted version of the discipline they crave.

All of this leads us to today's subjects: 1) Further exploration of why good girls like bad boys, 2) why women test men to see if the man is going to give them the discipline they need, want, and desire, 3) and what must be done to reintroduce discipline as a virtue into modern relationships.

Why Good Girls like Bad Boys, Continued.

Mr. F Roger Devlin, in his thought provoking paper, Rotating Polyandry and Its Enforcers, writes:

Women often speak of seeking "commitment” from men, but this would seem to imply a preference for marriage-minded men over others. (Michelle) Langley observed the very opposite tendency in her interviewees:

They often form relationships with men who are emotionally inaccessible. Instead of choosing men who are interested in developing a relationship, these women choose men who make them feel insecure. Insecurity can create motivation and excitement. Women who seek excitement in their marriages (and many do) will often forego the possibility of real relationships for the excitement of fantasy relationships…. It’s not uncommon for women to pine for men who shy away from commitment, while they shun the attention given to them by men who are willing and ready to make a commitment.

If we replace the word "excitement" with manliness or thumos, then we have another observation that supports my contention that women seek and desire a man who is stronger than they, and is able to express his manliness through thought, word, and deed. I would also add that a woman needs to feel respect for her man, and be secure in the knowledge that he is prepared to discipline her as circumstances warrant.

Mr. Devlin continues:

... Langley distinguishes, based upon her interviews, four typical stages in marital breakdown.

1) The wives begin to feel vaguely that “something is missing in their lives.” Then they experience a loss of interest in sexual relations with their husbands.

Part of that missing something, would be the manliness that initially attracted her to him in the first place. As discussed previously, a man, under pain of legal sanction, must keep his emotion and his thumos firmly under wraps. As his woman loses respect for him, the magic sex factory shuts down.

Getting back to the essay:

Like other observers of the contemporary scene, the author notes the pervasiveness of female anger. “It’s impossible…to understand anything about women in this country today, unless you understand that a) they’re angry, and b) their anger is directed at men. Women today aren’t seeking equality. They want retribution-revenge."

At this point, I would like to share a passage written by Dr. Robin Skinner:

Men must stand up for themselves instead of cowering in a corner, hoping the women's movement disappears like a bad dream, and international family therapy pioneer, Dr Robin Skynner, said yesterday.

Women around the world were waiting for men to engage in the debate and fight back like real men, Dr Skynner told the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists conference in Wellington.

"For the family to work well, men still need to retain some aspects of the traditional male role and fathering functions," he said. "Women seem to desire this too, and appear to feel sexually repelled, or certainly not attracted, if the man ceases to retain some element of his assertiveness"...

... In family therapy, women were encouraged to spell out their men's faults, and for a while the men would stonewall but eventually fight back.

"Women were always pleased when their men at least fought back and became men."

Letting the anger out also freed up the positive feelings they had for each other and often revived their sex life.

"Women don't want men to fizzle away," Dr Skynner said. "They want men to be men still. They want a man who's a man, and sticks up for himself in more ways than one. If he doesn't they despise him. That's what men have to do, they have to fight it out."

Unfortunately, men are prohibited by law and custom from taking the appropriate actions to confront and dissolve female anger, complacency, and boredom. Our entire culture, from television broadcasting to feminist public policy, literally brainwashes us to avoid taking the appropriate actions that would prevent much infidelity, discord, and strife. It seems that our society has mandated an all or nothing approach that helps to produce complete male passiveness and female resentment, or, in some cases, drives women and men alike to commit heinous acts of violence against one another as tempers flare and things get out of control.

Either way, political feminists win, and men and their families lose.

Mr. Devin informs us that:

Much of this [female anger] is due to feminist indoctrination. An ideological regime (and feminism may now, I think, legitimately be called a regime) paints the past in the darkest colors possible in order to camouflage its own failures...

No arguments there. The author continues:

It should also be pointed out that the very terms “retribution” and “revenge” imply that husbands have wronged their wives somehow. If this is not the case, and Langley admits that today it mostly is not, the proper terms for the women’s behavior would be “wanton cruelty” or “sadism.” This supposition is strengthened by some of the author’s own observations: “I’ve noticed that once a woman reaches a certain point, not only does her anger persist, she wants to continually punish and inflict pain on whomever has angered her…. The men that I talked to often used the word evil to describe the behavior of their wives...”
If someone is attacking you in a cruel and sadistic manner, the ordinary response would be to fight back, either in a physical or a literal sense. And, on a larger scale, liberal governments have traditionally defended its citizens against wanton acts of cruelty whether it be libel, slander, or assaults against property and person, and supported those who defended themselves by legal, intellectual, or physical means.

Unfortunately, in our time, men and men's natural rights are fair game. Men have no rights, property, reputation or honor that are worthy of defending in the face of female onslaught.

Consider rumors surrounding Tiger Woods' marital dispute at his home [1]. Contemplate the now proven FACT that Rhianna started her now infamous domestic battle royale with singer Chris Brown [2]. Note the fact that these two men have been widely mocked and dragged through the mud as enemies of women. Note that the women involved in these incidents (allegedly, in the case of Elin Woods), have been absolved of any potential blame, responsibility, or accountability for any actions that could be considered acts of domestic violence.

After all, there is NO EXCUSE for domestic violence... except when the perpetrator is a woman.

Indeed, as E Belfort Bax pointed out, back in 1913, Western law and culture has failed to uphold a man's honor in the face of female accusation.

It goes without saying that, when one class of humanity has the right and privilege to abuse and oppress another class with impunity, they will cheerfully do so. And naturally, the oppressor will despise the oppressed for their weakness, and for their acceptance of cruel and sadistic torment.

Men will receive no respect unless and until they stand up for themselves, as well as for one another, and impose much needed discipline upon their wayward female counterparts, as well as upon the politicians and institutions that are abusing their power and using their high offices to enslave the male masses. Unless and until we do so, women will become even more angry, and government, business, and academia will become more controlling, usurping, and totalitarian.

After all, what politician respects the rights of a class of people, if the downtrodden group accepts their second class status?

Getting back to our article, Rotating Polyandry and Its Enforcers, we read that:

... Women may want men to make them happy, but they do not say, and probably do not know themselves, how this might be accomplished. “Women want men to read their minds—or, more accurately, their emotions—because it’s what they do, easily…. Females want males to anticipate their needs and desires.” (Obeying their every command is not enough.)

And here is the crucial point. The Wise man must know and understand female behavior in order to survive in a long term relationship as defined at the beginning of this series. Dating is one thing... marriage with children is quite another.

However, feminist propaganda has taught men that they should obey their wives' every command, say "Yes Dear" as a response to everything, and avoid conflict at all costs. The fact of the matter is that men must know and understand HOW WOMEN REALLY ARE, WHAT THEY REALLY NEED, AND WHAT THEY REALLY WANT. And, the politically incorrect truth is that women need men that are unafraid to correct them and put them in their place when their hormone driven minds decide to embark on foolish, selfish, or self destructive behavior.

(More on the Female Brain.)

(Even more.)

This is the cold reality that political feminist society and political feminist public policy refuse to acknowledge. Indeed, as many Men's Rights commentators have pointed out, men themselves refuse to recognize the truth because it is much easier to "love 'em and leave 'em" than to put in the sometimes difficult and dangerous work of inter-relationship conflict management.

Whoever said that men seek "Patriarchal Domination" as a matter of course must not have lived with a woman for very long. Any man who has successfully dealt with the full fury of female insensibility will tell you that it is extremely stressful to deal with the difficult, moody, or demanding women in their lives. Be it tongue-lashings, the silent treatment, or small objects hurled through the air with the greatest of ease, women have a profound ability to drive a man absolutely crazy, even if he is the most knowledgeable and Zen like gentleman to ever walk God's green Earth.

The path that I and others like me have chosen, i.e. Male Headship of one's household, is NOT easy by any means.

Indeed, it is much, much easier to let sleeping women lie than to enter the Lion's Den!

But I digress.

Mr. Devin proceeds to detail for us what men SHOULD NOT be doing in the face of irrational female behavior:

... most men blamed themselves and “beat themselves up” for the things they thought they had done wrong in the marriage. Their initial response to their wives’ stated unhappiness was to try to make them happy. “In most cases, their husbands launched futile attempts to make their wives happy by being more attentive, spending more time at home and helping out around the house.

Regardless of these women’s past and present complaints, the last thing they wanted was to spend more time with their husbands.” (Langley notes that wives do often complain that “my spouse doesn’t pay attention to me,” but calls this code for “I want another man.”)

In fact, wives often became angry precisely over their husbands’ efforts to please them, because this increased their own feelings of guilt for infidelity. Some also perceived the similarity between this behavior and their own earlier efforts to get their husbands to “commit;” women know better than anyone that efforts to please can be a form of manipulation.

The women sometimes responded with a kind of countermanipulation: “they thought if they were cold and treated their husbands terribly, the men would leave, or ask them to leave.” Sometimes this happens—which, incidentally, explains why divorce initiation statistics can be misleading. A significant portion of the roughly thirty percent of divorces which are formally male-initiated result from the wife deliberately maneuvering her husband into taking the step...

But it is not always easy for women to obtain a divorce in this manner: “Some of the women couldn’t believe the things their husbands were willing to put up with.” (So much for men not being committed.) The author recounts cases where women deliberately tried to provoke their husbands into striking them because they calculated it would be to their advantage in the looming child-custody dispute.

One reason husbands may be so difficult to provoke today is that they realize the only result will be a jail term for “domestic abuse” or a restraining order preventing them from seeing their children.

Most of the men didn’t have anyone to talk to other than their wives, which is why I believe they tried so desperately to hold on to them…. Some of the men were so dependent on their wives, they didn’t think they could live without them, but one thing all the men shared was a fear of losing their children.

The men I interviewed feared losing their family, but the women didn’t seem to have that fear. The women thought of it as losing their husbands, not their family. More often than not, the men were forced to move out of their homes and away from their kids. They lost all of their attachment bonds and felt as though they were losing their whole identity.

Many of the men became suicidal when their wife left and remained so for a long time afterwards. A few of the men said that they felt homicidal.

On the other hand, “the word used by the majority of women I interviewed to describe their husbands [was] ‘pathetic.’” When the full extent of their husband’s emotional dependence upon them comes out, women are not moved or gratified; they feel contempt for what they see as weakness.

This is powerful stuff gentlemen... I would urge you to download and read Mr. Devin's writing in its entirety, as he has much more to say on this topic.

For our purposes however, let us understand that the typical woman, as defined at the beginning of this series, HATES A WEAK MAN, AND RESPECTS A MAN THAT IS STRONGER THAN SHE. This is the cold truth, and all the political feminist propaganda in the world will not change this important fact. Once respect has been lost, the relationship is, without a major miracle, doomed to Splitsville.

In our modern political feminist landscape, the vast majority of men who refuse to obey political feminist social graces are the "bad boys", the pimps, and the Playas. Their very unwillingness to bow down and conform to the rules of political feminist social intercourse is what makes them so appealing to so many women in our day and age. And, incidentally, I care not if a woman says she disagrees with this thesis... the actions of the 80% (i.e. the majority) of her sisters speaks much louder than mere words of protest.

It doesn't matter what women say. It does matter what women actually do.

Testing a Man's Resolve.

And now, we get to the heart of the matter. What's a man to do, once he comes into the understanding of what woman is, and how she really wants to be treated?

To start our discussion, let's begin with this tract from website Fondly and

Without giving examples or going into detail, a recurring theme is women who nag or taunt their men. For those men who negotiate, plead or try to avoid this taunting, the process may seem to be interminable. In fact I believe it is not interminable at all: those men who respond decisively find that this stops the woman's troubling behaviour immediately. This deliberately annoying, frustrating, unpleasant and anti-social behaviour by women is what I now call the "test the man's resolve mode". It is an all-too-common feature of man-woman relationships - though I know of some relationships, including some of my own in the past, where the woman did not behave like this at all.

This "test the man's resolve mode" is not necessarily done deliberately or consciously. Unless the man does respond decisively, the taunting can lead - over time - to irrevocable breakdown and loss of love. It can also cause the man to loose control and hit the woman in a dangerous fashion - in a way which is entirely out of character. This is a decisive response - although not the cool, controlled, authoritative physical response which would best have satisfied the mental processes which were driving the woman's nagging, taunting or occasionally violent behaviour.

The "test the man's resolve mode" is usually emotional taunting, complaining about things not being right, complaining about his behaviour or attitudes, pestering him to do something impossible or pointless. Sometimes - according to some surveys, quite often - the woman initiates physical violence.

Whatever the barbs directed at the man, lets assume for the purposes of this discussion that the provocation is without any rational justification. It is however keenly pursued by the women, who feels that it is her right or that she has not alternative but to combat or pressure her man as best she can...

Many women cannot abide men who do not stand their ground. Many women fall out of love with a man who doesn't deal decisively with the shit a woman can dish out.

Men who may be emotionally ready to deal properly with this crap - thanks to their biological inheritance and perhaps what they have learnt from their father - may not in fact act demonstratively since they are trying to be nice sensitive guys. Things can then develop rapidly along tragic lines - with a spiral of more provocation and violent outbursts and quite likely destruction of trust and/or the relationship.

This in-built, instinctive "man testing" mechanism, (Lord forgive them for they know not what they do) is obviously an evolutionary advantage since women need a man who can defend her and her children against wild animals and the Hun. She does not want to find out that her man is weak when the Hun come over the horizon - the automatic test method has evolved to detect signs of weakness during ordinary life, when the Hun are likely to be far away and while she has time to seek out another man. (A successful quest leads to the most dangerous manoeuvre in a woman's life - buttering up the new man, without arousing aggression in the first and then leaving the first one for the second without getting killed in the process - but this is getting off topic.)

So she leaves the man who does not act decisively and falls in love with the biggest brute she can find, often dreaming that she can win his heart and make him tender and caring towards her, but remain a pushy bastard towards everyone else. Such a bloke, if he is truly the leading, action packed man she seeks, won't take any nonsense when she (instinctively and non-deliberately) taunts him...

So here we are. We know that the women in our lives are going to test us, whether we like it or not. The challenge is, how do we manage these inevitable conflicts in an appropriate and responsible way? How can men deal with these tests without resorting to wanton and unwelcome violence, or without indirectly contributing to total relationship breakdown?

These are thorny questions, but we need to start asking them and start coming up with solutions that will enable marriages and long term relationships to survive and thrive in the 21st Century.

As I will discuss in future posts, I believe that political feminism is on its way out, and that social, economic, and political upheaval will be the main drivers of evolutionary change.

As we speak, Bond market bubbles around the world appear to be ready to burst. I believe that when sovereign debt defaults begin in earnest, it will force widespread and massive social and political change.

Ultimately, I think that strong families are going to be the bedrock for peace and economic prosperity in a new age. And, in order for man and woman to live together in harmony, virtues such as discipline, long legislated out of the social compact, will need to be relearned and revitalized. As I have detailed over eight postings, discipline is a vital component that cannot be ignored any longer.

Someone is going to have to take the lead in the typical family, and in 80% of couples, that leader is going to be the man. Most women, consciously or unconsciously, aren't going to have it any other way, as we have plainly seen.

So then, what tools should the Average Joe keep in his toolbox?

At the present, there isn't much a man can do when faced with a woman that seeks to test his resolve. He is in an inferior social and legal position, and he should therefore avoid hazardous situations such as these as best he can. Until feminist public policy finally implodes upon itself, the safest and best thing a man can do is to avoid marriage and family AT ALL COSTS, or relocate to a jurisdiction and culture that respects marriage and manliness.

But, for the sake of argument, lets assume that feminist public policy is completely overhauled. When this actually happens, then the Wise Man should observe these guidelines:

1) Don't be afraid to express yourself, and don't hesitate to engage your woman in verbal debate when she is clearly in error.

As we have seen, there is no way to avoid conflict. Consequently, men should not hesitate to state their minds and show their emotions with the goal of bringing harmony and balance back to the relationship. And, when correction is needed, a man must bring the argument to his woman. Even if you lose the debate (which happens sometimes), your lady will still respect you for standing your ground.

If you observe women interacting with one another, you'll quickly notice that they don't hesitate to speak up when someone has done them wrong, or when someone violates the unspoken rules that the group has laid down. Women tend not to give other women a pass on rude or disrespectful behavior... and neither can you.

2) Be prepared to listen to her issues, and recognize that you don't have to take them seriously all the time.

Sometimes, women say things just to say it, or to express their emotional state. Just because a woman says something, doesn't mean that her man has to move Heaven and Earth to correct the situation. Sometimes, men have to tolerate their woman's insane babbling just like one would humor their 98 year old grandmother. Just nod your head, smile, say "un-huh," and resume your online Halo deathmatch. All is right in the world.

3) Lay down the law, and be prepared to enforce it.

This policy, Dear Reader, is why negotiation during the early stages of any relationship is absolutely critical. You MUST know what rules your potential mate is living by. You must know what programming drives her behavior. If your requirements are diametrically opposed to what your woman is looking for, then you are doomed to difficulty before your marriage even begins.

One must negotiate, in advance, what the rules are going to be, and, perhaps more importantly, what is going to happen if these rules are violated.

If you tell your future wife, in advance, that you are going to be the leader of the family, and if, after you get married, she attempts to usurp your headship position, what is the penalty? Are you going to move out for a while? Get a divorce? What are you going to do?

The enforcement side of things is the most individual and difficult aspect of any relationship, and is something that both sides need to discuss and agree to in advance. Unilateral creation and enforcement of "rules" almost always leads to epic relationship failure, and the failure to establish rules and penalties for their violation at the beginning of one's partnership leads to massive amounts of misunderstandings, frustration, and total breakdown in the long run.

Something else to remember... failure to uphold the rules previously agreed to by both parties is a glaring sign of weakness. And, as I said before... the typical woman hates a weak kneed man. Too many public displays of weakness, and your marriage or relationship will not be long for this world.

Conclusion... Sort Of.

Please understand, Dear Readers, that there are many more valid rules of the road than the three guidelines stated here. There are many diverse approaches to this sensitive subject. The good folks at Taken in Hand have examined this issue in depth, and I would urge you to check out what they have to say.

And, as I move towards getting out of the recommendation business, I would encourage you to do your own independent research, and formulate your own best practices that help you and others to create and maintain successful and satisfying relationships.

As an aside, I have been on a personal truthseeking quest for over three years now. Based on the massive quantities of information I have come across in my travels, I've come to the conclusion that the world is too big, and the truth is too varied for me to form a singular thesis that says, THIS ALONE IS THE ABSOLUTE TRUTH TO ALL THINGS.

There are, of course, such things as right actions, and wrong actions. Correct action bring success, while incorrect actions bring failure. However, in the scheme of things, there are many potential right answers, and these answers will vary based on the situation, people, and environment involved. The trick is to set one's course in the right direction, and be flexible enough to make adjustments along the way. The ideal is to focus on what works, and discard approaches and ideas that don't work and have been proven beyond doubt to be epic failures.

Actions taken must be appropriate for the given situation at hand.

This same principle is true regarding any of the issues that we discuss on this blog, and I believe this flexible approach is the one that will help us defeat Political Feminism, and restore the rights of Man.

My attitude towards blogging, and the Men's Rights Movement has shifted dramatically from when I first came into this truth. At first, I thought that I needed to beat it into people's heads what must be done, and that, based on my "superior" understanding, that all men and women needed to act in one certain way. Then and only then would Peace, Prosperity, and Enlightenment come to the land.

Nowadays... all I can do is laugh at myself.

Here's the thing. There are real issues that men have to face. And certain actions (such as getting married in the West) will lead to really negative outcomes (involuntary divorce, financial enslavement, loss of liberty, etc). Because of this, it is necessary for men to sidestep these potential issues. No marriage and children (and increasingly, no contact) with Western women, no problem.


Not every man wishes to forsake marriage and family life. Not everyone is willing to marry a foreign woman, or relocate to a foreign land. What about these men, who, like me, are brave enough (or foolish enough) to take the risk of raising a family in the West?

Not only do I write for hardcore MRAs, or against Political Feminist wenches, but I also write for the man who simply wants to know what Political Feminism is, and what are the consequences of our feminist public policy.

Because I have these diverse readers, I will simply say that I am changing my role from wanna-be instructor, to intrepid investigative reporter. I am not going to tell you what you should ultimately do, or how you should do it.

My new role, as I see it, is to simply gather and report relevant information. I will make recommendations based on my knowledge and experience, but ultimately, the path you take is up to you. Just be sure to fully understand the legal and spiritual pros and cons that come with any decision you make.

Finally, getting back on topic...

When it comes to the Lost Art of Discipline, each individual man and woman must decide how they are going to arrange themselves to meet future challenges, and to seize future opportunities. How you enact and enforce said Discipline within your relationship is up to you. Just recognize, Dear Reader, that Discipline is a vital ingredient that must be present if a long term relationship is to survive... and to thrive.

Peace and Hair Grease,


1 comment:

Anonymous said...

It seems good in theory. In practice, with the gender-feminists having changed the laws in the Anglosphere, "laying down the law" can get you a prison sentence.


For a primer on false rape claims and how they are used with impunity in the US, the UK, and NZ/Australia: