Complaining Is Not Enough.

Welcome to my blog. Its purpose is to explore various topics regarding sex, marriage and family — an area with many problems today, as has been amply explored by the “red pill community.” They have done an excellent job of analysis and description. But, little has been said about solutions, and this persistent lack has been troubling me, so I will take it up. I tried doing a little bit via YouTube, the preferred medium these days it seems, but I am not suited to it. So, I will join with Dalrock, Rollo Tomassi and others in print. Like Dalrock, I am happily married, for seventeen years, and have a son. (Yes, it really is “happily,” perhaps because my wife is Japanese, and her English even now is bad enough that she is isolated from Western media and the society of Western women.) Perhaps I would like to have my son, when he is older, to have some kind of woman available besides wasted harlots.
In general, I am a Traditionalist. This is different than today’s TradCons, which Dalrock (among many) have rightly eviscerated. But one thing you can say about Traditional solutions is that they have actually worked, in real life, for a long period of time, and produced good results. You could invent some kind of new solution, but Utopian dreams sometimes don’t work out. I am not a Christian, although I find that they are my natural allies, so I am Christian-friendly. Ezra Pound once did a broad review of spiritual traditions, including many in the East. He eventually decided to become a Christian (specifically, an Anglican), not because he was not aware of the many failings of the Anglican Church in his day, but because he realized that, if he wanted to gain the advantages that come from cooperation with like-minded people, he would have to join some kind of existing community.
I say often that “you have to tell women what to do.” They seem to be incapable of organizing their actions without external leadership. This leadership may come in the form of individual vision, or it may come in the form of social norms, in-group behavior, and the artificially-created “social norms” and “in-group behavior” manufactured by the Cultural Marxists in music, television and movies. Women have a choice of which leadership they choose. But, they seem to lack the masculine capability of analysis and description, awareness of longer-term cause and effect, and also based on this, invention of definite solutions, independent of existing norms. Without someone else to do these things, who they can follow, they are rudderless. Some women are quite intelligent, but this ability is usually channeled entirely toward the Rationalization Hamster, and also lies, manipulation, and deceit. (This is basically the Rationalization Hamster applied to others.) But along with this, women are open to suggestion. If some men start telling women what to do, and it seems to them an attractive proposition, some women will follow.
And so, although you can lament the present condition of women in the U.S. and the West today, unless you tell them what to do, they will not change. It is not enough to say “I don’t like this and I don’t like that.” Eliminating options and identifying problems are important steps toward figuring out What To Do, but do not create a solution in themselves. Along with this, men have to clarify what they want. Today, we lament the fact that most women today are unfit to be wives and mothers, and are frankly dangerous and destructive in those roles. And yet, we seem to like having a large supply of sluts on ready call, so we have been perhaps a little hesitant to say: don’t be sluts. Obviously, we are going to have to make some decisions here. Are you ready for a world in which women are sexually unavailable until after your wedding day?
Unfortunately, by focusing on analysis and description of present conditions, men are, in a way, telling women what to do. Men say that “all women are like that.” Women hear this, and, following what they are being told by men, as is their nature, behave in the manner that such men say they behave. While it is true that women certainly have the potential to be “like that,” and today that potential is reality, it is also true that, in the past, they were not like that. Just as there is “women’s nature,” there is also “men’s nature.” For example, men have the potential for domination and plunder, that we see in every gang or group of bandits, and which anthropologists have recorded in primitive human societies around the world. And yet, most men today are not like that. The difference is part of what we call: civilization.
Thus, I want to focus on concrete, specific solutions. For example, there is near-universal agreement that today’s laws regarding divorce, sexual assault, domestic violence and other interactions between men and women are grossly anti-male and dysfunctional today. But, you rarely hear anyone say what, then, the laws should be. If you were to change it, what would you do? In the past (before 1970), for example, divorce required either mutual consent and terms acceptable to both parties, or, for a unilateral divorce, abridgement of certain conditions, notably adultery or serious domestic violence, with evidence that would hold up in jury trial. In another example from history, divorce among the ancient Romans would result in the man keeping the children. This served as a double preventative: most women would avoid divorce if it meant being separated from her children; and also, a man looking for a younger, sexier wife would probably be handicapped by having custody of his children. This would naturally require someone to handle childcare; and what better (or cheaper) person than the children’s natural mother? At the same time, a younger, sexier women would probably not be very interested in caring for another woman’s offspring.
Besides not telling women what to do, men today are bizarrely, pathologically politically inactive. Men need to join together and get things done to change the laws, just as men have always done to produce any change. Look around you: who is going to do it, if not men? At the very least, men should support existing men’s rights organizations. It is true that they have been woefully ineffective. But, more money would probably help fix that. Any man who is unwilling to give $25 to an existing MRA organization deserves everything he gets. This is evidence of extreme learned helplessness. Think of it like doing political pushups. If you can’t do even one pushup, you are in bad shape my friend. Get over your learned helplessness. Give another $25 to the YouTube Redpill personality of your choice. Divorce law is State law, so eventually there will have to be an MRA organization for each state, which lobbies and informs State legislators: the Ohio Society for Men’s Rights. If all concerned men were giving $100 a year in total to the cause, there would be enough money around that other men would have the funding to establish such organizations. Unfortunately, most men cannot risk too much opprobrium, as it jeopardizes their livelihoods. Thus, we need specialists, whose livelihood is itself based on objecting to the status quo, and who can serve as professional lightning rods.
Men are the builders of civilization, not only in steel and concrete, but also in laws and principles. Women nurture the creations of the men of their choice. So: start building.

Get A Housekeeper

Around here, we encourage women to be stay-at-home homemakers.

But, if you are one of those high-earning married women in a dual-income household with children, and with more money than time, then consider getting a live-in housekeeper.

This used to be common in — not only the upper class — but the upper middle class, and even when Moms also stayed at home.

A housekeeper doesn’t need to be paid much, since she would have almost all of her living expenses covered. You would still have to pay minimum wage of course, but that is only about $20,000/yr.

Desexing the World

Miles Mathis, who is also interesting for many things, recently took up the topic of relations between men and women, including a lot of details about his own marriages.

Desexing the World

Mathis doesn’t really go for the “no sex before marriage” line as we do here. Mostly, he is all for it, as part of the path to marriage, in what you might call a 1980s sort of way. Basically, it is the typical “things should be like they were when I was young.” Nevertheless, much worthwhile commentary in the piece.

Jim’s Blog

“Jim’s Blog” is interesting for a number of reasons, among them a somewhat extremist, but maybe difficult to refute, take on relations with women.

Female Sexual Preferences
Make Women Property Again
Three Magic Words

Here is a recent take:

I attempt to control my wife’s social environment so that the women in her environment are good influences – that the social environment is such that a woman may not be permanently on the prowl for an upgrade.

Patriarchs take their families to church for the social environment – for the backing of God and man to maintain good behavior in wife and children, and also to obtain virgin wives for sons, and suitable husbands for daughters.

Synthesizing A Moral Code

This is a good description of what is happening today. It can never work.

“Synthesizing a moral code out of whole cloth” is not a bad thing to do. It is, more or less, what we are doing here at this website. Admittedly, I am basically taking old forms verbatim. But, that is because, on inspecting them, I can find little that needs to be changed, and also, no convincing alternatives. We could debate whether these old forms are viable or sustainable in an age of contraception and social media. But, still there are no convincing alternatives.

This is best done by older people — basically, parents — over Age 40. They have the experience, the memories of past “moral codes,” the insight, and also the time to do this. I myself have spent — let’s say — the past eight or ten years, doing this. Young people don’t have the time. It might take them eight or ten years. But, then they are 28 or 30, and discover that they did everything wrong. They also discover that it is very hard to come back from doing everything wrong for ten years.

Here’s pornstar and single mom Lana Rhoades, apparently having some second thoughts.

Meanwhile, for those girls who do actually wait, things aren’t going so well for them either.

Helen Roy, our example TradBabe subcategory BigBrain, and also new mother, said recently that she was able to avoid all this because she “got lucky” and was “young and retarded.”

So, it will basically come down to parents. This pattern of parents abandoning their children to “figure it out for themselves” won’t work, and can never work. Parents will not only have to express certain principles, but also do most of the work, as parents did in the past. Parents will have to establish contexts where their sons and daughters can make connections with the sorts of young men and women that they would like to have as sons-and-daughters-in-law.

When girls reached age 16, they were “debuted into society.” Basically, they were officially available for marriage. This was celebrated in a “debutante ball.”

Do you think that sixteen year old girls organized and paid for this? They did not. It was all done by parents. But, there was more to it than just a party. Girls and boys both had to be trained how to dance, and wear nice clothes. They often attended dance classes for years, boys and girls both. And who did that, and paid for all that? Parents did.

Marriage and Family in India

When a woman is merely a woman-when she winds herself round and round men’s hearts with her smiles and sobs and services and caressing endearments-then she is happy. Of what use to her are learning and great achievements?

A description of marriage and family life in India, from the ancient era to the early 20th century. From the Story of Civilization (vol 1), by Will Durant.

Men In College

There’s a lot of wheezing these days that men are underrepresented in universities. Time to man up! But, actually, the percentage of men completing bachelor’s degrees is the highest ever.

Probably, this is way too high. Many of these men would probably be better off with more of a vocational training. The lower 50% of college education today is mostly a scam.

The fraction of women vs. men getting bachelor’s degrees has actually been pretty stable for two decades.

We see that the rate of men graduating from college with a bachelor’s degree had been about flat since the early 1970s, around 23%. There was a burst higher in the late 1960s and early 1970s, possibly related to draft exclusions from the Vietnam War. Then, male graduation rates ramp higher beginning around 2010. This is related to the student loan scam that also began around the same time. (Actually there is some lag, since this measures 25-29yos.) Rather than “not enough men in college,” it looks to me like there are too many.

The recent levels — around 35% of men getting a bachelor’s degree — are about 50% higher than the previous long-term standard, around 23%.

Men should bail out from today’s colleges. For one thing, they have become viciously anti-male institutions in recent years. Why give them your money? Many men would be better off getting more vocational training. Some men could just start their own businesses. A few men could take four years off and read a lot of books, and then get a job.

For those remaining men, who are well suited for the traditional four-year college education, these men would be best off, I think, in new male-only colleges. There will be a lot of college campuses for sale, which someone can buy and set up a new male-only college.


Going forward, post-high-school education is likely to be more overtly vocational. Most of the worthwhile college programs are basically vocational. This includes all math, science and engineering; plus common programs such as nursing, accounting, hotel management, marketing and business. These could be done at more overtly polytechnic universities, leaving aside any pretend “liberal arts” element which we all know is pure horseshit today. Probably, this could be done in two years, instead of four. Let people learn the Liberal Arts on their own, outside of an institution of Marxist indoctrination. This is what working Americans used to do.

For men, there can be a much smaller element (let’s say it is under 5%) that pursue an actual Liberal Arts education, in government, history, economics, arts and literature. This will have to be done basically at new institutions, since, with a few exceptions like Hillsdale College, all institutions today are corrupt.

Susanna Hoffs

Today, as we marvel at whatever Madonna has become, we will give a thumbs up to 1980s rock babe Susanna Hoffs, who is now 64.

She has been married to the same guy for nearly 30 years, and has two children.

Unlike Paulina Porizkova, who is apparently playing on Expert Mode without plastic surgery, makeup, filters or even colored hair, Hoffs is suspected of having a (talented) plastic surgeon.

For women who have a 20 to 45-year advantage to Susanna Hoffs but still don’t look this good: You might want to do something about that.

Political Action

Today, we have our periodic exhortation for men to become politically active. This means: Take some kind of action that can lead to changes in the legal framework surrounding marriage and other male/female interactions (“sexual harrassment,” “sexual assault,” “domestic violence,” etc.) No woman is going to do this, so complaining to women won’t work. This is mostly State and even Local (Municipal) law, and also law enforcement (that is, how the law is administered).

Get up off your ass and donate some small amount — I suggest $25 — to some group that is acting in your interests. I’ve suggested the National Coalition For Men (ncfm.org). Go there and donate some money. Don’t just “think about donating.” You have to take action.

If you want to take a step further, then establish a similar organization, for your State and Municipality. You can do this in your free time. It would be, for example, the “Ohio Association for Men’s Rights.” You just call yourself that. You can set up a little organization, through an LLC. This would probably include:

  1. Defining the problem. Statistics and anecdotes, probably made available on a website.
  2. Defining a solution. You might want to talk to lawyers who are involved in these matters, such as divorce lawyers.
  3. Informing legislators. State congressmen, city council members. Write them a letter, and maybe meet them in person. It is easy to meet with State congresspeople. Plus, they are probably nearby.
  4. Informing “law enforcement administrators.” Police chiefs, sheriffs, public prosecutors, judges.

To take one example, child support apparently did not exist before 1975. Its imposition since then (with a lot of Conservative support) has led to the “child support model of marriage,” where a father and husband is disposable except for a monthly check.

Dalrock on the “child support model of marriage.”

Today, child support is perhaps the only financial obligation that can land a man in jail. You can default on your credit cards and mortgage. You can even fail to pay your taxes. These will lead to consequences, but not debtors’ prison. But if a man doesn’t pay child support — even if, due to a loss of a job, he can’t — then off to the slammer. This didn’t even exist before 1975. In one study, one-eighth of all prison inmates in South Carolina were there for missing child support payments.

Then, of course, you can ask other men to pay you to support these activities. And, these other men should do so, at least in small amounts, if they have any sense of self-preservation. We have a whole legislative system (democratic republicanism) set up exactly for this purpose — to be sensitive to the needs of the people. Make use of it!