| Natural Freedom http://naturalfreedom.info/ |
|
| few web findings http://naturalfreedom.info/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=3253 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | rekieter [ Wed May 22, 2013 8:48 am ] |
| Post subject: | few web findings |
So here are some sites I found, that go in line with this forum (more or less) and are quite a good read. http://taoofdirt.wordpress.com/ http://mattforney.com/ http://therationalmale.com/ Here's whole book for free 'No Ma'am': http://no-maam.blogspot.ca/ and yes, Kidd was right the tide is changing - these are the ones I checked, but there's hundreds more, didn't expected to find so many of them. I guess more and more people are fer up with so called 'alpha female' |
|
| Author: | roark [ Wed May 22, 2013 8:45 pm ] | |
| Post subject: | Re: few web findings | |
Interesting finds, rekeiter. One of them (http://therationalmale.com/2011/08/19/plate-theory-2/) led me to something that relates to the 'Be Honest' section in Kidd!!'s Pimposophies quite well:
What Plate Theory is not
My critics will often take a binary stance in their arguments with this idea stting that “they could never be with more than one woman at a time out of respect for her” or “so I should just lie to her and see other girls on the side?” To which I’d argue that these are feminized social conventions that attempt to thwart a man’s options in order to establish women as the prime selectors in intersexual relations. If it can be conditioned into a boy/man to ‘feel bad’ about seeing more than one woman at a time, it only better serves the female-as-chooser dynamic. To be sure, women are naturally the filters for their own intimacies, but it is essentially men who do the sexual selection. These convention’s latent purpose are designed to put selection of intimacy on a conditional basis that favors women, and as long as men will internalize this women will have a preconstructed social high-ground. The way to circumvent this dynamic is brutal honesty and a committment to truthful, non-exclusivity with the plates you’re spinning. If you keep your options above board and are honest with any one girl and yourself about your choice to be non-exclusive, you not only remove the teeth from this convention, but you also reinforce yourself as a man with options (or at least perceived options). Further, critics will offer “well gee, if I did that with any woman she’d push off and dump me” to which I’ll refute – not if you establish this honestly from the outset. Most guys who’ve swallowed the ‘female power’ convention are too afraid or to preconditioned to even consider this as an option for seeing women. Letting a woman know, or covertly perceive, that you wont be exclusive to her pushes your commodity level up and implies options and potential success she’ll compete with other women to be associated with. |
||
| Author: | roark [ Wed May 22, 2013 8:56 pm ] | |
| Post subject: | Re: few web findings | |
Also interesting, from (http://no-maam.blogspot.ca/2007/06/when ... -soap.html):
There is no Patriarchy, but women readily believe that it should exist somewhere, because it is a projection of what they know about being part of the "Girl's Club - the Sisterhood!" And after decades of women (and men) searching for the Loch Ness Patriarchy, the only conclusion that the fembots can come up with to explain why they can't expose it is because it is "institutionalized." Yes indeed, the Patriarchy is civilization itself. Hmmm.
Mind you, this shit is just hilarious to me now, whereas it used to inspire anger. In case you still take this kind of stuff seriously, that's ok, but also be open to the very likely possibility that you'll get to a place where you're just aware of it but it doesn't affect you.
|
||
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC+01:00 |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited https://www.phpbb.com/ |
|