Random Xpat Rantings

Contemplative dominance for the modern man

Guys with utopian visions are innefective downers

Posted by xsplat on December 1, 2012

In Jakarta you occasionally see roving bands of beta boys, all dressed in black, carrying sticks. They are the Muslim enforcers of social conduct. They’ll raid discos to shut them down, they’ll scream and pout, and make a lot of noise.

Generally they are seen as an irritant. They aren’t respected. Their antics are not getting them fucked or married. Disco life is more popular than ever.

In my last post I made the point that advocating to others a low socio-sexual score lifestyle doesn’t work. It used to work, when communities were smaller. But even in coconut grove villages in Indonesia, due to the advent of widely available birth control, the internet and easy travel, there are different opportunities and costs and benefits to actions. A girl isn’t bound for life by the gossip of her neighbors, and flying to Bali for the weekend isn’t going to get her pregnant. So it doesn’t matter what the Imam and the boys in black say. She’s going to go to Bali for the weekend.

In the comments section of my last post ASDF and Solomon took offense to my stance. ASDF went so far as to label me with shameful epithets. I’m a nihilist, and a parasite.

One of my responses:

I’m not telling anyone to avoid marriage nor am I denying that some men find purpose and meaning in having kids. Go for it, if that’s what works for you.

I’m talking here about the likelyhood of convincing other people to follow the same path.

I understand that for you it’s important to feel a part in a greater whole, and without that life lacks meaning. I personally believe that it’s a failure of imagination and the resulting arrogance of solipsism that fails to see that other people might find meaning and satisfaction outside of family life. I don’t think it does you or your argument any favors to casually toss around the term nihilist at those who have lifestyles that you don’t want to emulate.

But whether your favorite lifestyle is the best or not has nothing to do with what I’m saying in this post. I’m saying that men and women are barely affected by the shaming tactics such as you are using here. Do you expect me to change my lifestyle because of your comment? Has anyone ever emailed you and said “wow, thank so much, you changed my worldview, and now I’m going to think about settling down and having kids and getting married?”

We can debate it, and I could be wrong – but if we are going to debate something it would be good to at least agree on what we are debating. All I’m saying here is that the effort to get men and women who we are not intimately involved with to conform to social and sexual standards is futile. I’m not making any comment on the value and validity of those standards. I’m just saying making that effort is a useless waste of time.

And at the very least, it won’t give the individual the hand he needs in his relationships. That will only come from individual effort.

I’ll drop this quote from Iknowexactly from the RooshVForum here:

As I’ve mentioned elsewhere, everyone has different proclivity for pair-bonding and it’s important to know your own level, so slobs can find sluts and “betas” like me can find good girls.

Where people go wrong is assuming their own view is the only one.

For instance, some players think no one can be happy in a 1:1 relationship, and some betas think sluts and slobs are monsters.

Back, back, back to the wisdom of the ancient oracle: Know thyself.

Also, you often talk about dopamine. Some of us are more about the oxytocin. You strike me as more of oxytocin kind of a guy. People get oxytocin rushes when they watch close family members get married, or when they perform charity, or when they are with their closest loved ones – be they grandchildren or fresh young lovers.

I think you’ll find you understand what other people are saying with greater comprehension if you allow that your view is not the only possibility – not all of us can find life satisfaction in the way that works best for you. Some of us would be absolutely misearable working towards what you consider is a “greater good”.

People have varied socio-sexual scores, and you can’t argue people out of one tendency towards another. The human condition is a condition of castes, and no matter how much you value the family man caste, evolution says that all niches will be filled, as nature abhors a vacuum.

And again – back to my main point. REGARDLESS of the value of your favored caste, it NO LONGER works to have it as the male strategy to lets-all-band-together-and-promote-lifetime-monogamy-where-the-girls-marry-young. It is not working now, and is not going to start working in the future.

Describing reality as it is is a whole different game than talking about what would be a nice thing to aim for. If the aim is unrealistic, then all the talk of utopia is just a sidetrack from enjoying this real reality the best we can.

And if you are getting in the way of enjoying this real reality, you are diminishing the quality of life for yourself and others. Which is the opposite of what you are trying to accomplish.

Update: I just saw this quote on admiracod’s blog

‘…when something is detestable, and yet inevitable, what one must do is not merely to endure it–a hard task whatever one may do—but find an excuse for loving it. Everything is a matter of points of view, and misfortune is often only the sign of a false interpretation of life.’

Henry de Montherlant

About these ads

22 Responses to “Guys with utopian visions are innefective downers”

  1. asdf said

    Some lifestyles are worse then others. How your lifestyle affects the community and the world matters in judging its worth. I don’t believe in moral relativism. I believe there are absolute objective goods in this world.

    “I’m just saying making that effort is a useless waste of time.”

    This could apply to any great thing anyone has ever done.

    Don’t fight for civil rights, its a waste of time.

    Don’t fight for independence, its a waste of time.

    Don’t fight for X, you will likely lose and it definitely won’t increase your personal standing at all.

    “Describing reality as it is a whole different game than talking about what would be a nice thing to aim for. If the aim is unrealistic, then all the talk of utopia is just a sidetrack from enjoying this real reality the best we can.”

    There is more then atoms though. The “real” world as you put it, the world of materialism and nothing more, is a dark, depressing, evil place. Everything you consider good in this world would not exist if people really where just atoms and there was nothing more. Everything you take happiness from would vanish. There is no evolutionary psychology reason why civilization even exists. It exists, and you have the rights and opportunities you have, because there is something more. Because there are people who believe in something more and make sacrifices for it.

    Dreams save us. Dreams lift us up and transform us into something better.

    I don’t know if we can change the world before us. However, there is value in trying. When you get to the pearly gates your not going to get in with the line, “Satan was pretty much running the place down there so I joined in because there was no point in fighting.”

    “And if you are getting in the way of enjoying this real reality, you are diminishing the quality of life for yourself and others. Which is the opposite of what you are trying to accomplish.”

    There is more to live that maximizing pleasurable distractions for yourself.

    • xsplat said

      At what age did you put on your purity ring?

    • Tilted said

      I understand the argument you’re trying to make, but if you take a close look at all of the examples you use, they’re based on violent oppression, or depriving people of liberty. What young males are experiencing today is a reaction to female’s voluntary choices. Fighting to civil rights and independence is not the same as fighting to restrain hypergamy. You’re trying to force your values on millions of women who do not want them, and in many cases, would not benefit from them in the real world. They’re pursing mating strategies that work for them, given the circumstances, and we need to do the same.

      • asdf said

        It applies to a wide variety of scenarios. It could apply just as easily to when I was working on wall street and bankers were ripping off people’s pension funds and crashing the world economy (all of that was done voluntarily BTW, sometimes voluntary actions are bad). Or it could apply to my last girlfriend who it turned out was cheating on a dude in the suburbs and her three kids to sneak up and fuck me ten times a week. That was voluntary. It made her happy. It was wrong, it hurt a lot of people (including her).

        Voluntary doesn’t equal good. Sometimes voluntary is wrong. It hurts people, societies, etc. There is this thing called morality where we do things because they are right even if they involve sacrifice and we don’t know if it will work.

        I don’t know what the best policy prescription is. Sometimes you just need to accept sin on the government level. Drugs are bad for most people that use them. Yet, the drug war is a disaster. However, I don’t go from, “I don’t support the drug war as a policy choice,” to, “there is nothing wrong with doing drugs and I’m not going to judge anyone or attempt to keep them out of my family and community as best as I can.”

        Similarly I don’t know what the best policy choice is for marriage. My guess is we can do better then we are doing now, but it will never be ideal or like it was. Policy isn’t what I’m talking about here though. I’m talking about morality. Moral decisions don’t change based on policy. They are what they are. Getting married is good. Being a good parent and neighbor is good. Having self control is good. All of that traditional morality they taught you is good.

        The OPs claim goes way beyond policy. It’s a claim on morality. It’s a claim that there is no morality. Just competing “strategies” to get the most for yourself. Don’t judge dude, its all relative. Yes, I take issue with that. That’s an attitude that applies far beyond marriage or any one issue. It’s a metaphysical claim on reality itself. It can be used to justify any immorality one chooses. It’s nihilism.

  2. Tilted said

    I’m not saying voluntary choice is inherently good (it’s not, clearly). I’m saying there is a huge world of difference between convincing people to join together to end oppression, and asking men to band together to shame women or control men who fuck them. That’s just a waste of your time, which could be better spent controlling your own life. To recognize the limits of your circle of influence is not nihilism. To find value in manhood outside of marriage and family is not nihilism. Re-read that post about masculinity not being a socialist movement, or the No Ma’am blog on why you never see a herd of bulls.

    • asdf said

      Right is right. Whether its effective at getting earthly results in any particular time and place doesn’t really change that.

      “To recognize the limits of your circle of influence is not nihilism.”

      Sometimes you have to do the right thing even when you know its futile. I read a story once about a man that worked for the German government during the Nazi regime. He wasn’t asked to do anything that hurt anyone. He didn’t work on any of the bad Nazi stuff even indirectly. He was simply asked to fill out a form detailing his ethnic history and political beliefs. The form wouldn’t be used to hurt him or anyone else. It wasn’t even late enough in the regime where they had started doing really bad stuff yet.

      The only thing that was at stake was that by filling out the form he was acknowledging that the Nazi’s had the right to ask him to fill out the form. The only thing at stake was a tiny acknowledgement of the regime’s legitimacy. His refusal would accomplish nothing. All that would happen is another would be given his job and he’d lose his pension.

      He kept the form on his desk for weeks until the day it was due. Then he sat at the desk at stared at it for an hour. Finally he filled out the form and mailed it. Upon returning home he threw up. Six months later he died of an intestinal problem he never had before signing the form.

      Doing evil damages the soul. Even when that evil is simply not doing good. It doesn’t matter if that good will “accomplish” anything or not. The evil damages the soul regardless. It can tear a man apart.

      I’ve seen a lot of big time evil happen in my life. And its always happened because people said, “well I can’t change anything.” The actual number of psychopaths is way lower then the number of psychopathic enablers. They couldn’t do what they do without consent.

      “To find value in manhood outside of marriage and family is not nihilism.”

      What value are you finding though? It’s not like your joining the monastery or something. Your just pursuing a strategy to maximize earthly pleasure and feed your own narcissism. If civilization and other men have to take it on the chin for that to happen, so be it.

      • Tilted said

        “Your just pursuing a strategy to maximize earthly pleasure and feed your own narcissism.”

        As opposed to marriage? Men become husbands and fathers to maximize earthly pleasure (wife = in-house sexual partner) and feed their narcissism (kids = legacy/spreading ones’ genes). Your religion convinces you that this is somehow more righteous than other forms of pleasure and narcissism, because that’s what benefits society. There is no evidence whatsoever that it inherently benefits your soul. Tens of millions of unhappily married men and divorced fathers are proof of this. If you’re on this corner of the internet, you’re no stranger to these men.

        “Do whatever makes you happy” is not nihilism, nor is it an admission that “nothing really matters.” It’s just sound advice.

      • asdf said

        They become husbands and fathers because its good. Every happiness study shows that it doesn’t make people happy. It does give them meaning though. It is an existential need. It is a need for something not of this world.

        “There is no evidence whatsoever that it inherently benefits your soul.”

        There is all of tradition and practically every culture and religion.

        “Tens of millions of unhappily married men and divorced fathers are proof of this.”

        And how many fewer would there be if we valued marriage instead of constantly trying to pick it apart. The destruction of marriage is part and parcel with its not being defended.

        “Do whatever makes you happy” is not nihilism, nor is it an admission that “nothing really matters.” It’s just sound advice.

        Happiness is like ice cream. You wouldn’t eat it for every meal. And too much of it without self control ruins you. Some impulses that make us happy are not good impulses.

      • John Holiday said

        What value, you ask?
        I will be the the best uncle I can be. I will draw my satisfaction from a job well done.

        [platitude]
        Happiness is vastly overrated. Rather, focus on contentment balanced with ambition. There may be large parts of life that suck gorilla balls but even in the midst of them, contentment may survive.
        [platitude/]

  3. Rum said

    Good Stuff.

  4. Rum said

    I mean, Xplat is making sense. Men/women will not act contrary to their deep sexual wiring without compelling reasons. Mewing about right and wrong is never going to be very compelling in this arena. Indeed, it never was. If your mom was a virtuous woman, it was not simply and narrowly because of a choice she made for abstract righteousness.
    Life is short. Pick your fights carefully.

  5. xsplat said

    Once upon a time I was having a horrendous rough patch. I was stuck in a hellish and abusive marriage, but felt it was my duty to remain and make the best of it.

    My father advised me “What we have to offer each other is our happiness. If you aren’t happy in your life, then you can’t offer much to people.”

    I think the idea of sacrificing for the common good is terribly dangerous. Where does the buck stop? Being happy is important. It is nihilistic to think that being happy is not of value. Being happy is a value – a point of life. If you sacrifice your happiness for the sake of your children, you lead by example, and increase the risk of raising unhappy children. Which totally missed the point – we are sacrificing so that our children can be happy!

    Sacrifice works when it is balanced, and overall we all want the balance to increase both personal and group happiness. If you only focus on the group, but ignore the need for personal happiness, then it doesn’t work. The buck stops personally.

    As a metaphor, I’ve heard feminists blather on about what sex is appropriate for other feminists. Should they allow themselves to get into submissive roles? They talk as if they need the borg to condone what is appropriate or not. I say, whoever is having the best, most enjoyable sex has the most to teach about sex. Never mind what it “means” for the political agenda of freedom of women and women’s “greater good”. The greater good is often just another excuse for the jackbooted thugs to come knocking on your door. How we want to be happy is our own business, and extending happiness to others is good business.

    Fundamentalists freak me out. Not only because they are so eager to invest authority with scary powers, or even because they tend to have an excessive need for “purity”, but because they have shadow and projection issues. They have not made friends with their inner demons, and so when confronted with them project them out onto the outside world. “my last girlfriend was cheating on a dude in the suburbs and her three kids to sneak up and fuck me ten times a week and YOU guys shouldn’t have sex outside of committed marriage! YOU guys are nihilists! And narcissistic parasites!”

    The internal empathy and compassion is so lacking that the hatred gets misdirected onto everyone else. Instead of just making friends with the human condition and not holding unreasonable standards, they have to compartmentalize good and evil, and then project out the evil onto others. “Do not forgive them Father, for it was not I that sinned, it was them!”

    Fundamentalists view more porn than other groups. The hypocrasy is scary. I mean really scary. These people will scape goat anything that reminds them of their own inner natures.

    Then all the while they are shitting and pissing on the world, think that they are holier than thou, and are actually being benevolent and helpful.

    A bunch of downers.

    I can imagine ASDF at a Disco. If he isn’t trying to convert the sexy girl to the ways of Christ, and otherwise being an asshole, he’ll be trying to get her to suck him off. And then repent in the morning. And then go on some town crusade in the name of St. Peter. “Beware the fire and the brimstone! Live not for today – invest in the time after your death! People! Why aren’t you listening to me! I’m not a madman, honestly!”

    • asdf said

      I don’t know what the correct move in your marriage was xsplat. Maybe what you did was the right move. I do know the correct move to a bad situation isn’t to say fuck it to anything in life having any meaning. I’ve seen untold evil down that path.

      What happened with me and the girl was one of many experiences with evil I’ve had. When I finally learned what was going on I was horrified. And when the husband learned it caused a lot of pain. It wasn’t the first time either. It ended up hurting everyone, even the girl. Things we do that make us “happy” aren’t always good.

      Should I never sleep with anyone because they might be lying to me, no. However, I’m more cautious about banging any chick I come across as a result. Morality is complicated. Because morality is complicated you’ve rejected the very concept. And anyone who tries to act morally is a hypocrite, or a chump, or unrealistic, or some other derogative. Simply put you’ve given up, and the sight of anyone else that hasn’t given up offends. There must be some angle! Someone else can’t really believe in something more then I do. It’s sad.

      I’ve seen your posts about the devastation you’ve wreaked on your “lovers” (the poor desperate SE Asian chicks you trick into bed and inevitably discard when they wise up).

      “I’ve been in a police car under the threat of years in prison unless I capitulated to some girls ownership claims. I’ve faced extortion, suicide threats and threats to my body by women demanding commitment and fidelity.”

      “I have video cameras set to permanent record all throughout my apartment. I have some contacts who have relatives who are police.”

      “Eleven. Eleven pregnancies so far. Many times the girls were adamant that they were going to keep it.”

      “Almost two years ago a girl I was living with had a psychotic break brought on by me refusing to stop seeing my 2nd girlfriend, and then her manipulation tactics such as suicide threats or threats against me failing.”

      I’m sure your wife hurt you bad, but how many women do you need to destroy to get even? Will it ever be enough? Are you ever going to let yourself heal?

      That girl I talked about never had a father. She carried it around her whole life. Ruined a good marriage over it. Destroyed the life of her kids. All for daddy issues. At some age you just have to admit your an adult and deal with the pain in your life. Not just embrace nihilism and fuck over everyone around you to get back at them.

    • xsplat said

      I got to this point in your reply “I don’t know what the correct move in your marriage was xsplat. Maybe what you did was the right move. I do know the correct move to a bad situation isn’t to say fuck it to anything in life having any meaning.” and then stopped reading.

      I have no idea why you insist on keeping up this assumption that I feel no meaning in my life. Frankly you are starting to come across as an anti-social dickhead. Next you’ll be insulting the affectionate bonds between me and my mates.

      • t said

        I think I understand what he is saying, but I think its futile in this type of blog.

        For example, the whole incident you, xsplat, had with that girl who had the psychotic breakdown and ended up in an institution. You often mention it with pride, that she loved you so much that she went crazy. That she cried to sleep everyday. Although you never make that point overtly, it almost seems like you are encouraging others to do the same. But many men cannot live with the idea that they may have ruined someone’s life like that. Of course, this often balances out with the other stories of you paying a girls expenses even after breaking up until she can stand on her feet.

        There are two things happening here, you are talking about making a girl fall for you, whereas this asdf guy is asking, at what cost to everyone else.

        Like I said, it is hard to make that kind of argument in this blog because the blog itself is intended at a hedonistic mindset, whereas the argument comes from an altruistic one.

      • xsplat said

        I hear what you are saying that sometimes girls get heart broken. I’m not sure if I’ve broken hearts more than my heart has been broken. Often times there is little heartbreak. Sometimes it is very deep. That’s just an inevitable part of dating, as far as I can see it.

        And when dating is replaced by marriage, it usually winds up that you either merely delay the heartbreak, or replace it with boredom, frustration, and quiet desparation.

        I understand that I’m likely to be biased, and would prefer not to see my actions as detrimental, so I’d accept the data of what the girls say. Do they regret having been close with me? Mostly not. Only one girl later had misgivings. Mostly I hear a lot of gratitude, even so much as “just to know that there is someone in the world like you”. Or that I opened up their sex life, and thus vastly improved their life. They say good things, years after. They thank me.

        So I don’t see that the heartbreak that I receive or give is a negative. That’s just how dating works, and overall, dating is a positive. At least the way I do it feels that way, and I’m told that it is.

        I can see how the me-first approach to dating might come across as a me-only approach. But the style of dating that I put forth has a large element of romance to it. There is love, affection, appreciation. But all on the mans terms. So you have to pay closer attention to notice that there is a difference between a me-only approach and a me-first approach. The woman is the daughter, the man the Daddy – care is built into the dynamic.

  6. avd said

    Truth: “if you allow that your view is not the only possibility”

    • xsplat said

      My aimed meaning was something closer to “if you allow that your way of experiencing meaning and finding fulfillment in the world isn’t the only way that people experience meaning and purpose and find life satisfaction”.

      Your sparse comment left it uncertain if you wanted to imply something more.

      • avd said

        That’s how I interpreted your meaning; no further implication, hence “truth.” I appreciate your non-dogmatic views on things. Conversations taking place elsewhere are often heckled by self-professed atheists who are religiously dogmatic in their chosen faith. A map is not the terrain.

  7. [...] Guys with utopian visions are innefective downers « Random Xpat Rantings [...]

  8. Snoeperd said

    To me all people who try to get other people to conform to some preconceived standards are the same people: people that can’t come to terms with the fact that their own individual lives aren’t that important and try to gain power by threatening others with unhappiness so that they act, not in accord with own interests but with the interests of the “condemner”.

    I always think of this parallel: – a catholic priests visited my grandparents home a long time ago to casually mention that there was more then enough space left for a couple more children (right after they had their 6th child)
    - a feminist claptrap speaks out about other people’s relationships and somehow feels compelled to influence the private living arrangements of other people; a remarkable similar situation the priest got himself into.

    I just had the thought that previous waves of feminism were more an extension of the ideal of individualism, giving women more choices on how they should lead their lives, versus the current wave where i see a bunch of lobbyists trying to get most of the zero-sum societal money-pie by meddling in personal relationships and vilifying certain (primarily masculine) pleasures.

  9. xsplat said

    I think I’ve finally realized why for ASDF opposing viewpoints MUST be nihilistic.

    He’s a fundamentalist who believes in absolute morality and the true rule of God’s word. He apparently believes in a literal St. Peter who presides over literal gates to a literal after-life.

    So for him, anything that does not agree with these tenets, with these presumptions, means that all knowledge is “relative”, and therefore that there is no absolute truth, and therefore no absolute meaning.

    For him, to change ones viewpoint means that there is no one true viewpoint. So it’s a terrifying prospect. “I can’t change my mind! That would mean there is no meaning in the universe!”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 110 other followers

%d bloggers like this: