Tuesday, August 21, 2018

MATING RITUALS: TRADITION IS COMMON SENSE

    One of the most difficult things about being a single man today is the bombardment we receive with terrible advice. The male feminists, the homo lobby, and the cultish Game gurus on the Web are among the worst. Many of the latter---the 'Red Pilled' self-appointed experts on gender relations---cloak their absurdities with appeals to religion. Incidentally, that's a subject upon which they know nothing either. 

    A Texas-based blogger called Dalrock is probably the most widely read of that type; and he's spawned several imitators, among whom is one writing under the name Cane Caldo. These two worthies contributed to an article on Dalrock titled A Challenge to Traditionalists.* The article is fairly short, so we'll reproduce it here.

    "According to traditionalists (and others): Men are supposed to chase, and women are supposed to be caught. Or they might say: Men are to initiate, and women are to respond. Imagine a party. There are single men and women. The traditionalist wants the men to pick a woman, and then woo her. Then he (the trad) wants her to respond with a Yes, or No, or Show me more. That traditional mating ritual is wrong and foolish. Roissy/Heartiste’s maxim that “Men display, women choose” is much more true. Go to a party and see for yourself.
      "The traditionalist might counter, “Well, that’s not how it’s supposed to work. A real man pursues what he wants.” I say that is half-assed crossdressing. It is the man acting like a woman while the woman smirks and presides.
       "If you fancy yourself a traditionalist and disagree, then here is an exercise for you: Search your Bible for a story about a man who woos a woman directly. If it’s traditional it should be easy to do, right?If or when you find it put it in the comments and let’s see how that story plays out, and how it compares to the others. Let us discover what is the real tradition."
    Well, as far as the last paragraph goes, the Bible doesn't contain a large number of romantic incidents; but I do seem to recall that the stories of Jacob and Rachel; Boaz and Ruth; and Moses and Zipporah were examples of men wooing women directly. But religious tradition aside, what Dalrock and Caldo argue here is also against both science and nature. 

    Females are programmed both by biology and psychology to display themselves and attract men daring enough to claim them. If we look at tribal cultures, we see this play out in some rather charming and quaint courtship rituals. Among some of the American Indians, a girl who wanted a husband would dress herself prettily and go alone into the woods on the pretext of gathering flowers, berries, etc. An interested Brave would then stalk and a fun game of 'pursuit and capture' ensued. If he captured and subdued her, she was his. In the Middle East and parts of Asia, men pick out a girl they like and pay a dowry to her family. You don't get much more direct than that. 

     It should be noted that, in those cultures mentioned, the man's actions are related to his ability to be a provider and protector; e.g., the Indian proves himself a hunter and warrior, the Asian a strong negotiator. In our own cultures, it's again the girls and young women who put effort into their appearance and typically attract the men who has the courage and intelligence to conquer her. 

     If these Manosphere nutcases really live by the maxim, "Men display, women choose," it's no wonder that they're all bitter incels. But they live by the notion that they are the 'Alphas' and are really irresistible to women---or would be if women weren't too weak and stupid to realize what great catches they all are. 

      In real life, men who display and get chosen by women are typically men who get used. Flash a lot of money around, for example, and see if gold-diggers and whores don't choose you rather quickly. 

     Don't pay attention to these dunces. Their animosity towards women comes from their sexual frustrations and that's a better sermon to heed than any words coming out of their mouths. 


  (* As a matter of policy here, we do not link to certain Manosphere sites. This is because several have a notorious reputation for doxxing and trolling their critics.)

No comments:

Post a Comment