Skip Nav

Plural Marriage in Kirtland and Nauvoo

The psychlotron archive

❶For instance, the statement, "Therefore, the car is red," is clearly dependent on antecedent propositions for its meaning and those propositions would need to be disclosed before one could meaningfully assent. The only noteworthy female character is the black female Uhura?

The Beginnings of Plural Marriage in the Church

Posts navigation
Found what you're looking for?
Navigation menu

Many years more he lived facing the curve of the gulf, the sparkling sea, and the smiles of the earth. A decree of the gods was necessary. Mercury came and seized the impudent man by the collar and, snatching him from his joys, led him forcibly back to the underworld, where his rock was ready for him.

You have already grasped that Sisyphus is the aburd hero. He is, as much through his passions as through his torture.

His scorn of the gods, his hatred of death, and his passion for life won him that unspeakable penalty in which the whole being is exerted toward accomplishing nothing. This is the price that must be paid for the passions of this earth. Nothing is told us about Sisyphus in the underworld. Myths are made for the imagination to breathe life into them. As for this myth, one sees merely the whole effort of a body straining to raise the huge stone, to roll it and push it up a slope a hundred times over; one sees the face screwed up, the cheek tight against the stone, the shoulder bracing the clay-covered mass, the foot wedging it, the fresh start with arms outstretched, the wholly human security of two earth-clotted hands.

At the very end of his long effort measured by skyless space and time without depth, the purpose is achieved.

Then Sisyphus watches the stone rush down in a few moments toward that lower world whence he will have to push it up again toward the summit. He goes back down to the plain. It is during that return, that pause, that Sisyphus interests me. A face that toils so close to stones is already stone itself! I see that man going back down with a heavy yet measured step toward the torment of which he will never know the end.

That hour like a breathing-space which returns as surely as his suffering, that is the hour of consciousness.

At each of those moments when he leaves the heights and gradually sinks toward the lairs of the gods, he is superior to his fate. He is stronger than his rock. If this myth is tragic, that is because its hero is conscious. Where would his torture be, indeed, if at every step the hope of succeeding upheld him?

The workman of today works every day in his life at the same tasks, and this fate is no less absurd. But it is tragic only at the rare moments when it becomes conscious. Sisyphus, proletarian of the gods, powerless and rebellious, knows the whole extent of his wretched condition: The lucidity that was to constitute his torture at the same time crowns his victory. There is no fate that cannot be surmounted by scorn. If the descent is thus sometimes performed in sorrow, it can also take place in joy.

This word is not too much. Again I fancy Sisyphus returning toward his rock, and th sorrow was in the beginning. When the images of earth cling too tightly to memory, when the call of happiness becomes too insistent, it happens that melancholy rises in man's heart: The boundless grief is too heavy to bear. Hence they made one among them king whom all would obey unquestioningly.

For obedience is the test of worship. Obedience is heaven's supreme law. The First man Adam disobeyed God and lost heaven.

Obedience is a spiritual discipline. It is training for the mind. It builds up character. It is the parent of harmony and peace. Therefore, it has been said that he who does not know how to obey does not know how to command. Oftentimes the question is raised - whom should we obey?

Our first duty, of course, is to obey our parents. In their case, obedience is worship. Next, we should obey the rules of any organization that we join. When on the playground -let us obey our captain. Are we members of a club? Let us abide by the rules of the club. Have we joined a school? An equally valuable lesson is to realize when not to take a woman's words at face value. Many statements from her are 'tests' to see if the man can remain congruent in his 'alpha' personality, where the woman is actually hoping the man does not eagerly comply to her wishes.

Far too many men actually take these slurs seriously, to the detriment of male rights and dignity. Most of what they think they know about Game involves strawmen, a lack of basic research, and their own sheer insecurity. For anyone seeking advice on learning the material, there is one rule you must never break.

I believe it is of paramount importance that the knowledge be used ethically, and with the objective of creating mutually satisfying relationships with women. It is not moral to mistreat women, even if they have done the same to countless men.

We, as men, have to take the high road even if women are not, and this is my firm belief. Nice guys can finish first if they have Game. The golden rule of human interactions is to judge a person, or a group, by their actions rather than their words. The actions of 'feminists' reveal their ideology to be one that seeks to secure equality for women in the few areas where they lag, while distracting observers from the vast array of areas where women are in a more favorable position relative to men the judicial system, hiring and admissions quotas, media portrayals, social settings, etc.

They will concoct any number of bogus statistics to maintain an increasingly ridiculous narrative of female oppression. But once these goals were met and even exceeded, the activists did not want to lose relevance.

Not satisfied with that, they continue to lobby for social programs designed to devalue the roles of husbands and fathers, replacing them with taxpayer-funded handouts. We know that what Rev. Jeremiah Wright said about whites could not be said by a white pastor about blacks, and we see even more of a double standard regarding what women and men can say about each other in America today. Go to any major 'feminist' website, such as feministing.

You will quickly be called a 'misogynist' and banned from commenting. The same is not true for any major men's site , where even heated arguments and blatant misandry are tolerated in the spirit of free speech and human dignity. The word 'misogynist' has expanded to such an extreme that it is the Pavlovian response to anything a 'feminist' feels bad about, but cannot articulate in an adult-like manner. This reveals the projected gender bigotry of the 'feminist' in question, which in her case is misandry.

For example, an older man dating women 10 years younger than him is also referred to as a 'misogynist' by the older bitterati. Not an ageist , mind you, but a misogynist. A man who refuses to find obese women attractive is also a 'misogynist', as are gay men who do not spend money on women. Kick a friendly dog enough times, and you get a nasty dog. VAWA is very different from ordinary assault laws, because under VAWA, a man can be removed from his home at gunpoint if the woman makes a single phonecall.

No due process is permitted, and the man's Constitutional rights are jettisoned. At the same time, half of all domestic violence is by the woman against the man. Tiger Woods' wife beat him with a blunt weapon and scratched his face, only to be applauded by 'feminists' in a 'you go girl' manner.

Projection can normalize barbarism. Rape legislation has also bypassed the US Constitution, leaving a man guilty until he proves himself innocent , while the accusing woman faces no penalty for falsely sending a man to prison for 15 years, where he himsef will get raped. The Duke Lacrosse case was a prominent example of such abuse, but hundreds of others occur in America each year. The laws have been changed so that a victim has 1 month to 'decide' if she has been raped, and such flexibility predicatably leads to instances of a woman reporting rape just so that she does not have to tell her husband that she cheated on him until it becomes profitable to divorce him.

But, unimaginably, it gets even worse. Polls of men have shown that there is one thing men fear even more than being raped themselves, and that is being cuckolded. Men see cuckolding as the ultimate violation and betrayal, yet there is an entire movement among 'feminists' to enshrine a woman's right to commit adultery and use the resources of her husband to dupe him into thinking the child is his. These misandrists even want to outlaw the right of a man to test the paternity of a child.

So, to review, if a woman has second thoughts about a tryst a few days later, she can, without penalty, ruin a man financially and send him to prison for 15 years. At the same time, even though men consider being cuckolded a worse fate than being raped, 'feminists' want to make this easier for a woman to do, by preventing paternity testing. This is pure evil, ranking right up there with the worst tyrannies of the last century.

Modern misandry masking itself as 'feminism' is, without equal, the most hypocritical ideology in the world today. The laws of a society are the DNA of that society. Once the laws are tainted, the DNA is effectively corrupted, and mutations to the society soon follow. Men have been killed due to 'feminism'. Children and fathers have been forcibly separated for financial gain via 'feminism'.

Slavery has returned to the West via 'feminism'. With all these misandric laws, one can fairly say that misandry is the new Jim Crow.

As discussed previously, any legitimate and polite questions about the fairness of anti-male realities in the legal system and media are quickly met with Pavlovian retorts of 'misogynist' and 'loser'. Let us deconstruct these oft-used examples of shaming language, and why misandrists are so afraid of legitimate debate.

Every day, we see men willing to defend women or do favors for them. There is infinitely more chivalry than misogyny exhibited by the male population.

On the other hand, we routinely see anti-male statements uttered by 'feminists', and a presumption that all men are monsters guilty of crimes committed by a small number of people of the same gender. On the second charge of being a 'loser who cannot get laid', any observation of the real world quickly makes it obvious that men who have had little experience with women are the ones placing women on pedestals, while those men who have had substantial sexual experience with women are not.

Again, this charge of 'loserdom' is merely the psychosexual frustration of 'feminists' projected outwards, who express surprise that unrelenting hatred by them towards men is not magically metabolized into love for these particular 'feminists'.

That misandrists are so unchallenged is the reason that they have had no reason to expand their arsenal of venom beyond these two types of projection.

Despite my explanation of this predictable Pavlovian response, the comments section will feature misandrists use these same two slurs nonetheless, proving the very point that they seek to shout down, and the very exposure they seek to avoid. My pre-emption will not deter them from revealing their limitations by indulging in it anyway. They simply cannot help themselves, and are far from being capable of discussing actual points of disagreement in a rational manner.

Men, of course, have to be savvy about the real reason their debate skills are limited to these two paths of shaming language, and not be deterred.

Once again, remember that this should be taken no more seriously than if uttered by a year-old, and there is no reason to let a 'feminist' get away with anything you would not let a man get away with. They wanted equality, didn't they?

The greatest real misogyny, of course, has been unwittingly done by the 'feminists' themselves. By encouraging false rape claims, they devalue the credibility of all claims, and genuine victims will suffer. By making baseless accusations of 'misogyny' without sufficient cause, they cause resentment among formerly friendly men where there previously was none. By trying to excuse cuckolding and female domestic violence, they invite formerly docile men to lash out in desperation.

Monogamous marriage not only masked the gap between 'alpha' and 'beta' men, but also masked the gap between attractiveness of women before and after their Wile E.

By seducing women with the myth that a promiscuous single life after the age of 35 is a worthy goal, many women in their late 30s are left to find that they command far less male attention than women just a decade younger than them.

So how did the state of affairs manage to get so bad? Surely 'feminists' are not so powerful? It would be inaccurate to deduce that misandrists were capable of creating this state of affairs on their own, despite their vigor and skill in sidestepping both the US Constitution and voter scrutiny. Chivalry has existed in most human cultures for many centuries, and is seen in literature from all major civilizations.

Chivalry greatly increased a man's prospects of marriage, but the reasons for this have been forgotten. Prior to the modern era, securing a young woman's hand in marriage usually involved going through her parents.

The approval of the girl's father was a non-negotiable channel in the process. If a young man could show the girl's parents that he would place her on a pedestal, they could be convinced to sanction the union. Whether such men are religious and called 'social conservatives', or effete leftists and called 'girlie men', they are effectively the same , and the term 'White Knights' can apply to the entire group.

Their form of chivalry when exposed to 'feminist' histrionics results in these men harming other men at the behest of women who will never be attracted to them. This is why we see peculiar agreement between supposedly opposed 'social conservatives' and 'feminists' whenever the craving to punish men arises. No woman feels attraction for a needy man.

The average woman is not obsessively plotting new schemes to denigrate and swindle men, she merely wants to side with whoever is winning which presently is the side of misandry. But pedestalizing men actually carry out many dirty deeds against other men in the hopes of receiving a pat on the head from 'feminists'. Hence, the hierarchy of misandric zeal is thus: For reasons described earlier, even a declaration that many men are bigger contributors to misandry than the average woman will not deter 'feminists' from their Pavlovian tendency to call articles such as this one 'misogynist'.

What they claim to be of utmost importance to them has been destroyed right under their noses, and they still are too dimwitted to comprehend why. No other interest group in America has been such a total failure at their own stated mission. To be duped into believing that a side-issue like 'gay marriage' is a mortal threat to traditional marriage, yet miss the legal changes that correlate to a rise in divorce rates by creating incentives for divorce divorce being what destroys marriage, rather than a tiny number of gays , is about as egregious an oversight as an astronomer failing to be aware of the existence of the Moon.

Aren't conservatives the people who are supposed to grasp that incentives drive behavior? At this point, readers may be wondering "If things are this bad, why don't we hear anything about it? Indeed, this is a valid question, and the answer lies within the fundamentals of male psychology.

Most beta men would rather die than be called a 'loser' by women alpha men, of course, know better than to take this at face value. White Knights also join in the chorus of shaming other men since they blunderously believe that this is a pathway to the satiation of their lust.

So an unfairly ruined man is faced with the prospect of being shamed by women and a large cohort of men if he protests about the injustice, and this keeps him suffering in silence, leading to an early death. We have millions of fine young men willing to die on the battlefield to defend the values enshrined in the US Constitution, but we don't see protests of even divorced men against the shamefully unconstitutional treatment they have received.

Alpha men have no incentive beyond altruism to act as they benefit from the current climate, and thus my altruism will be limited to putting forth these ideas.

In this age of Web 2. Instead, all that exists are Men's Rights Authors MRAs that run a few websites and exchange information on their blogs. Hence, there will be no real Men's Rights Movement in the near future. The misandry bubble will instead be punctured through the sum of millions of individual market forces. The Faultline of Civilization: These two legal areas are a the treatment of paternity rights, and b the treatment of due process in rape accusations.

The human brain is wired to value the well-being of women far higher than that of men for reasons that were once valid, but no longer are today , which is why extending due process to a man falsely accused of rape is not of particular interest to people who otherwise value due process.

Similarly, there is little resistance to 'feminist' laws that have stripped away all types of paternity rights from fathers. The father is not seen as valuable nor as worthy of rights, as we have seen above. These two areas of law are precisely where our society will decide if it ascends or declines. All other political sideshows, like immigration, race relations, and even terrorism are simply not as important as none of those can destroy an entire society the way these laws can.

Ceilings and Floors of Glass: If these outcomes are the results of the actions or choices of men who suffer from them, then is that not the same reason that determines who rises above the 'glass ceiling'? The inability of misandrists to address these realities in good faith tells us something but not everything about the irrational sense of entitlement they have.

Let me dispense of this myth, in the process of which we will see why it is profitable and seductive for them to broadcast this bogus belief.

It is true that women, on average, earn less per year than men do. It is also true that year-olds earn less, on average, than year-olds. Why is the latter not an example of age discrimination, while the former is seized upon as an example of gender discrimination? That a nun congregation pays a recession-proof salary to someone as a 'Director of Corporate Social Responsibility' is itself an example of a pampered existence, and I was unaware that convents were now advancing secular Marxist beliefs.

Market forces would correct such mispricings in female compensation, if they actually existed. But they do not, and those who claim that they do are not just advertising an extreme economic illiteracy, but are quite happy to make similarly illiterate women angry about an injustice that does not exist.

The 'Mancession' and the 'Sheconomy': I would be the first to be happy if the economic success of women were solely on the basis of pure merit. For many of them, it is. But far too much has been the result of not market forces or meritocracy, but political graft and ideology-driven corruption.

In the recent recession and ongoing jobless recovery, the male unemployment rate continues to be much higher than the female unemployment rate. If this was simply due to market forces, that would be fine. The leftist Obama administration was more than eager to comply, and a forcible transfer of wealth was enacted, even though it may not have been the best deployment of money for the economy.

Maria Shriver, a woman who has the most fortunate of lives from the vast wealth earned first by her grandfather and then by her husband, recently published 'A Woman's Nation: The Shriver Report', consisting of gloating about how women were now outperforming men economically. The entire research report is full of all the standard bogus feminist myths and flawed statistics, as thoroughly debunked here , as well as the outright sexism of statements like 'women are better managers' imagine a man saying the reverse.

As of today, the male unemployment rate is worse than the female unemployment rate by an unprecedented chasm. The 'mancession' continues as the US transitions to a 'sheconomy', and among the millions of unemployed men, some owe prohibitive levels of 'child support' despite not being the ones wanting to deprive their children of a two-parent household, landing in prison for lack of funds.

Beyond the tyranny of this, it also costs a lot of taxpayer money to jail a growing pool of unemployed men. Clearly, moving more and more men out of a tax-generating capacity and into a tax-consuming capacity is certainly going to do two-fold damage to governmental budgets.

The next time you hear someone say that 'the US has the largest prison population in the world', be sure to mention that many of these men merely lost their jobs, and were divorced against their will. The women, in the meantime, are having a blast. While public sector vs. Has the productivity of the typical government employee risen so much more than that of the private worker, that the government employee is now paid twice as much? Are taxpayers receiving value for their money? The vast majority of social security taxes are paid by men, but are collected by women due to women living 7 years longer than men on average.

It may be 'natural' for women to require more healthcare, since they are the ones who give birth. But it was also 'natural' for men to finance this for only their wives, not for the broader community of women. The healthcare profession also employs an immense number of women, and not just in value-added roles such as nursing, but even in administrative and bureaucratic positions.

In fact, virtually all government spending except for defense and infrastructure, from Medicare to Obamacare to welfare to public sector jobs for women to the expansion of the prison population, is either a net transfer of wealth from men to women, or a byproduct of the destruction of Marriage 1. In either case, 'feminism' is the culprit. This Cato Institute chart of Federal Government spending click to enlarge shows how non-defense expenditures have steadily risen since The decline in defense spending, far from being a 'peace dividend' repatriated back to taxpayers, was used to fund more social programs.

No one can seriously claim that the American public receives better non-defense governance in than in despite the higher price, and as discussed earlier, most of this increase is a direct or indirect result of 'feminism'.

When men are severed from their children with no right to obstruct divorce, when they are excluded from the labor market not by market forces but rather by social engineering, and when they learn that the society they once believed in and in some cases joined the military to protect, has no respect for their aspirations, these men have no reason to sustain such a society.

The Contract Between the Sexes: A single man does not require much in order to survive. Most single men could eke out an adequate existence by working for two months out of the year. The reason that a man might work hard to earn much more than he needs for himself is to attract a wife amidst a competitive field, finance a home and a couple of children, and ultimately achieve status as a pillar of the community.

Young men who exhibited high economic potential and favorable compatibility with the social fabric would impress a girl's parents effectively enough to win her hand in marriage. The Four Sirens changed this, which enabled women to pursue alpha males despite the mathematical improbability of marrying one, while totally ignoring beta males.

Beta males who were told to follow a responsible, productive life of conformity found that they were swindled. Men who excelled under the societal rules of just two decades ago are often left totally betrayed by the rules of today, and results in them refusing to sustain a society heavily dependent on their productivity and ingenuity.

To see what happens when the role of the husband and father is devalued, and the state steps in as a replacement, look no further than the African American community. The auto industry moved jobs out of Detroit long before , so the decline cannot be attributed to just industrial migration, and cities like Baltimore, Oakland, Cleveland, and Philadelphia are in scarcely better shape.

For those who believe that this cannot happen in white communities, have a look at the white underclass in Britain. Additionally, people seem to have forgotten that the physical safety of society, particularly of women, is entirely dependent on ratio of 'aggressor' men to 'protector' men staying below a certain critical threshold. As more men get shut out of the labor market, crime becomes an alternative.

Even highly educated men who feel betrayed can lash out, and just about every shooting spree and every recent terrorist attempt in the West was by men who were educated and had good career prospects, but were unloved.

More men will simply lose interest in being rescuers, and this includes policemen who may also feel mistreated by the prevailing misandry. Safety is like air - it is only noticed when it is gone. Women have a tremendous amount to lose by creating a lot of indifferent men. Patriarchy works because it induces men and women to cooperate under their complementary strengths.

It is no secret that single motherhood is heavily subsidized, but it is less understood that single spinsterhood is also heavily subsidized through a variety of unsustainable and unreciprocated means. So exactly what has society received from this population of women who are the most privileged class of humans ever to have lived?

Now, let me be clear; I believe a woman should get to decide how many children she bears, or even whether or not to have any children at all. However, a childless old woman should not then be able to extract resources from the children of other women. Fair is fair, and the obligation of working-age people to support the elderly should not be socialized in order to subsidize women who chose not to reproduce.

Let us take a hypothetical example of three year-old single women, one who is an urban lefto-'feminist', one who is a rural conservative, and one who is a devout Muslim. The following table charts the parallel timelines of their lives as their ages progress in tandem, with realistic estimates of typical life events.

When people talk about falling birth rates in the West, they often fail to account for the additional gap caused by having children at age 23 vs. As the table shows, a 1: Consider, also, that we are already 20 years into this year process, so each of these women are 40 years old today.

This world map click to enlarge shows how many children under the age of 15 existed in the major countries of the world in i. While developing countries are seeing their fertility rates converge to Western levels, the births already seal certain realities. Lefto-'feminists' will be outbred and replaced very quickly, not by the conservatives that they hate, but by other cultures antithetical to 'feminism'.

If they thought having obligations to a husband was such an awful prospect, wait until they have obligations to the husband-substitute state. The Fabric of Humanity Will Tear. Humans like ourselves have been around for about , years, and earlier hominids similar to us for another million years before that. For the first Females are the scarcer reproductive resource, since the number of babies that can be produced does not fall even if most men die, but it does fall for each woman that dies humans did not live much past age in the past, as mentioned earlier.

For this reason, the human brain continued the evolutionary hardwiring of our ancestors, placing female well-being at a premium while males remain expendable. Since funneling any and all resources to women closely correlated with the survival of children, both men and women evolved to see this status quo as normal.

The Female Imperative FI was the human imperative. As human society progressed, priorities adjusted. Secondly, as humans moved away from agriculture into a knowledge-based economy, the number of children desired fell, and almost all high and middle-income countries have birth rates lower than 2 as of today, with many women producing zero children.

Thirdly, it has become evident that humans are now the first species to produce something more than just offspring; humans now produce technology.

As a result, the former direct correlation between funneling resources to women and the survival of children, which was true for Yet, our hardwired brains have not adapted to this very recent transformation, and perhaps cannot adapt. Women are programmed to extract resources endlessly, and most men are programmed to oblige. For this once-valid but now obsolete biological reason, society still unquestioningly funnels the vast majority of resources to women. But instead of reaching children, this money now finds its way into consumer products geared towards women, and a shadow state designed to transfer all costs and consequences away from women.

Most people consider our existing society to be normal, but they have failed to observe how diverting money to women is now obsolete. In the 21st century, there is no reason for any resource distribution, if there must be one at all, to be distributed in any manner other than Go to any department store or mall.

Yet, they occupy valuable shelf space, which is evidence that those products do sell in volume. Look around in any prosperous country, and we see products geared towards women, paid for by money that society diverted to women. From department store products, to the proliferation of take-out restaurants, to mortgage interest, to a court system rigged to subsidize female hypergamy, all represent the end product of resources funneled to women, for a function women have greatly scaled back.

This is the greatest resource misallocation ever, and such malinvestment always results in a correction as the bubble pops. This is not to suggest that we should go back to birth rates of 12, for that is neither desirable nor necessary. The bigger picture here is that a major aspect of the human psyche is quite obsolete, with men and women both culpable.

When this situation corrects, it will be the most disruptive event humanity has ever faced. Some call this a variant of the 'Technological Singularity', which will happen much later than more like , but even prominent thinkers steer clear of any mention of the obvious correction in gender-tilted resource flows that will occur. The Four Horsemen of Male Emancipation. We earlier examined how the Four Sirens of Feminism unexpectedly combined and provided women with choices they never could have dreamed of before.

Some women made positive contributions to society, but quite a few let misandry and unrestrained greed consume them, and have caused the disastrous situation we presently see.

Technology always causes disruption in the status quo, always creating new winners and losers with each wave. It is 'The Misandry Bubble', because the forces that will ensure the demise of the present mistreatment of men are already on the horizon.

So allow me to introduce the Four Horsemen of Male Emancipation as a coalescence of many of the forces we have discussed, which will shred the present, unsustainable hierarchal order by Learning the truth about how the female mind works is a precious and transcendant body of knowledge for any man.

Won't they be condemned to live a life of frustration, humiliation, and near-slavery as second class citizens? For a number of reasons, Internet pornography is substantially more addictive to the male brain than the VHS cassette or 'Skinimax' content of the s.

When yet another generation of technology diffuses into the market, the implications will be profound enough to tear the current sexual market asunder. This site has written in the past about how haptic, motion sensing, and graphical technologies would elevate video games to the premier form of entertainment by A substantial portion of the male population will drift into addiction to virtual sex without even realizing it.

The brains of these men will warp to the extent that they can no longer muster any libido for the majority of real women. This will cause a massive devaluation in the sexual market value of most women, resulting in 8s being treated like 5s, and year-old women unable to attract the interest of even year-old men.

Coyote moment for women will move a few years ahead, and the alphas with Game competence will find an even easier field of desperate women to enjoy. Another technology making advancements in Japan is that of lifelike female robots. Such bans will not be possible, of course, as VR sex technologies are inseparable from broader video game and home theater technologies. Their attempts to lobby for such bans will be instructive, however.

Another positive ramification of advanced adult entertainment technologies is that women will have to sharpen the sole remaining attribute which technology cannot substitute - the capacity to make a man feel loved. Modern women will be forced to reacquaint themselves with this ancient concept in order to generate a competitive advantage.

The common theme is that market forces across the world eventually find a way around legislative fences constructed in any one country: Aside from the higher birthrates of Muslims living in the same Western cities that 'feminists' reside in, an Achilles heel of leftists in general and misandrists in particular is their unwillingess to confront other cultures that actually do place restrictions on women.

In Britain, Islamic courts are now in operation, deciding cases through Sharia principles. British divorce laws are even more misandric than US divorce laws, and so many British men, in desperation, are turning to Sharia courts in order to avoid the ruin that British law would inflict on them.

The Islamic courts are more than happy to accomodate these men, and 'feminists' dare not protest too loudly. By driving British men to Sharia courts, misandry is beautifully self-defeating. The irony is that the group that was our enemy in the crisis of the prior decade are now de-facto allies in the crisis of this decade. I do not say this simply because I am a Muslim myself.

While America continues to attract the greatest merit and volume of legal immigrants, almost every American man who relocates to Asia or Latin America gives a glowing testimonial about the quality of his new life. A man who leaves to a more male-friendly country and marries a local woman is effectively cutting off a total of three parasites in the US - the state that received his taxes, the potential wife who would take his livelihood, and the industries he is required to spend money on wedding, diamond, real estate, divorce attorney.

The misandrists who project their pathology outward by calling such men 'misogynists' are curiously troubled that these same men are leaving the US. Shouldn't 'feminists' be happy if 'misogynists' are leaving? We thus see yet another example of 'feminists' seeking to steal from men while not providing them any benefit in return.

The more unfair a place becomes, the more we see talented people go elsewhere. When word of US divorce laws becomes common in India and China, this might even deter some future taxpayers from immigrating to America, which is yet another reason the government is losing money to misandry. While most customers of Indian fertility clinics are couples, there have been quite a few single men opting to create their own biological babies this way. The poor surrogate mother in India earns more than she could earn in 10 years in her prior vocation of construction or housecleaning.

It is a win-win for everyone involved, except for the Western woman who was priced out of the market for marriage to this man. Medical tourism also prices the US healthcare system out of contention for certain procedures , and the US healthcare system employs a large number of women, particularly in administrative and bureaucratic roles that pay them over twice what they could make in the private sector.

Such women will experience what male manufacturing workers did a generation earlier, despite the increasinglly expensive government bubble that has kept these women's inflated salaries safe for so long.

So as we can see, the forces of globalization are far bigger than those propping up the current lop-sided status quo. Earlier passages have highlighted how even the most stridently egomaniacal 'feminist' is heavily dependent on male endeavors. I will repeat again that there will never, ever be a successful human society where men have no incentive to aspire to the full maximum of their productive and entrepreneurial capabilities.

The contract between the sexes has been broken in urban America although is still in some effect in rural America. The 'progressive' income tax scale in the US was levied under the assumption that men who could earn 10 times more than they needed for themselves would always do so, for their families.

Less tax revenue not just means fewer subsidies for single mothers and government jobs for women, but less money for law enforcement. Less tax revenue also means fewer police officers, and fewer court resources through which to imprison men.

Misandry is thus mathematically impossible to finance for any extended period of time. See the gangster capitalism that dominates contemporary Russia. For those who dispute the Four Horsemen I'd like to see their track record of predictions to compare against my own , women had their Four Sirens, and now the pendulum has to swing at the same amplitude in the other direction.

Keep the Four Horsemen in mind throughout this decade, and remember what you read here on the first day of As we leave a decade where the prime threat to US safety and prosperity was Islamic terrorism and enter a decade where the prime threat is misandry, anyone concerned with any of the following topics should take heed: I could list even more reasons to care, but the point is clear. But now that these ideas have become more mainstream, I can include a simple poll on the subject of whether we are indeed in a Misandry Bubble poll closed after 60 days.

I am just an observer, and will not become an activist of any sort, although, as described earlier, being an 'inactivist' in the spirit of Mahatma Gandhi is also powerful. As a Futurist, I have to predict things before they become obvious to everyone else.

So here, on the first day of the 'x' decade, I am unveiling the article that will spawn a thousand other articles. As mentioned at the top, what you have just finished reading is the equivalent of someone in predicting the entire War on Terror in vivid detail.

I know a bubble when I see one, and misandry is the premier one of this age. Bet against my predictions at your own risk. It remains to be seen which society can create economic prosperity while still making sure both genders are treated well, and the US is currently not on the right path in this regard. Deflate it will, but it could be a turbulent hurricane. Only rural America can guide the rest of the nation into a more peaceful transition.

Britain, however, may be beyond rescue. I want to extend my thanks to Instapundit, Dr. The Sixteen Commandments of Game. No Country for Burly Men. The Medicalization of Maleness. The Feminist War on Everything Civilized. F Roger Devlin articles. Just because I linked to a particular blog does NOT mean that I endorse all of the other views of that author.

Are 'feminists' all willing to be responsible for all of the extremism that any other feminist utters note that I have provided links to 'feminists' openly calling for slavery, castration, and murder of men without proving him guilty of anything? Eumaios January 01, at The cultural portion is a bit iffy I know what you were getting at but cable programming makes what looks like a loss of manliness in entertainment a bit muddier.

Perhaps the difference is in how we "officially" respond to what feminists call "hyper-masculinity" in entertainment, in terms of reviews, education and public discourse. Jack Donovan January 01, at A very comprehensive summation.

One part I thought you didn't cover as fully as needed although I may have missed it is the link between feminist enabled single motherhood, and the rise in violent crime and subsequent quadrupling of the level of incarceration since in your country.

IMO they are very closely linked, and yet another way in which the fruits and cost of feminism and leftist values are crippling to even the largest of economies.

I have long thought the feminist agenda was counterproductive to the long term best interests of women Jilly January 01, at The Futurist January 01, at I second the comment regarding a request for expanding on the topic of feminist-enabled single motherhood. It's not strictly the same thing, given the current bubble popping largely due to technology e. But the past is instructive nevertheless. Thucydides January 01, at You covered nearly every point I could think of I am a bit afraid of what will happen when the bubble actually pops, but it's going to be an interesting time to be sure Natural One January 01, at It benefits some men and some women, but not society as a whole.

Gamists enable and encourage bad women i. Game is deceptive and manipulative social engineering, and inherently unethical.

Game does not work against the forces that are disintegrating Western civilization, it work WITH them. Game is an adaptive response to the bad behavior of women.

Instead of leading by example and refusing to enable bad women, gamists work around the clock to satisfy their every whim and approve of their behavior. How is any of this good for society? For someone who's supposedly worried about society, you seem awfully quick to align yourself with forces that are seeking to destroy it. The whole reason why these men claim they fear cuckoldry more than rape is because they seek to trivialize rape.

The difference between cuckoldry and rape is like the difference between a small cut and an amputated limb.

Importance

Main Topics

Privacy Policy

Obedience means 'to do ones duty' and 'to obey the command of elders or superiors or authorities whose authority is normally not questioned'.

Privacy FAQs

Men live together in society in harmony with each other. There are so many different types of men that want to live in peace. This means, each must give up something for the sake of others and for the sake of the common good.

About Our Ads

Free obedience papers, essays, and research papers. The Perils of Obedience, by Stanley Milgram - If a person of authority ordered you inflict a 15 to volt electrical shock on another innocent human being, would you follow your direct orders. Free Essay: Obedience is the process by which individuals comply with the instructions given by an authority figure not to be confused with conformity. There.

Cookie Info

Essay on Obedience Words | 4 Pages. Obedience is the process by which individuals comply with the instructions given by an authority figure not to . Obedience to Authority essaysA person obeys another person because he is influenced by a stronger power, whether it being wealth, intellect, experience, or a higher position. Human beings have been obeying and disobeying since the beginning. They have been thought that obedience is a virtue and diso.