The lifecycle of Adria Richards

This one’s for the nerds.

Mindweapons is dead. Long live Mindweapons

Mindweapons in Ragnarok has succumbed to the feminine imperative. Its gracious host (no sarcasm intended) today notified all male commenters that they must treat female commenters as more equal than others.

http://mindweaponsinragnarok.com/2013/03/18/commenting-etiquette-take-note-hipster-and-liberators/

I challenged:

Mindweapons now has its own Overton Window, calibrated to female sensitivities. This is not a win.

Mindweapons responded:

Do you allow men to make sexually insulting remarks to women in your household?

I replied to Mindweapons and to a few other commenters, but my replies have gone down the memory hole. It seems I am banned.

Here is a reconstruction of what I said to MW:

You are equating women you don’t know in real life who comment on your blog to women in my household. This helps my case, not yours.

Your blog, your rules. I do think you are right to ban anyone whose speech you find foul; I worry that this is a dangerous path, that by allowing women to define polite discourse, we invite microaggressions.com. Your goddesses will smother the invaluable discussion on this invaluable blog.

In response to my first comment, Trainspotter said:

We’re here to secure the existence of our people. MW’s actions are entirely consistent with that.

I replied “Presuming you reject the premise that Women Ruin Everything”.

“Liberators”, one of the men targeted by the original post, responded to Trainspotter as well, accusing Mindweapons of AMOGing the rest of us. He signed off with “Fuck you/ban me.” Wish granted. Mindweapons had previously lauded this commenter for his mindweaponry. Alas, it appears the feminine imperative sweeps all before it. The efficacy of white men is nullified by the offense they give to aryan goddesses.

The Female Life Cycle

Decriminalizing rape is the best way to prevent rape

Think of it as privatizing the police. You get 24/7 protection from the only people who actually care if you get raped.

Women are threatened by my bold spot

Here, for your amusement, I present some envious old harpy responding to my old post about how I psychologically abused my wife into losing weight and being happy.

This has got to be one of the funniest, most egotistical things I have read in a long time. Thank you for the laugh!
For the record I am not for obesity as it is unhealthy, but to be so vain about it is just a testament to how small you are as a man. To try and perfect her physical looks, when you are clearly not sexy yourself… LMAO. You should rename this thread “Narcissistic Proof, you can dominate your wife back to the 1950′s!”

All I get from this thread (other than a hearty laugh) is a bunch of Narcissistic men who are brainwashing their wives into being spineless twigs, so that they may have something to brag about. Usually this type of male behavior stems from “Tiny member syndrome” .

Since we are perfecting your wife for your own benefit how about we fix you up for her? I see you have a bold spot, can we get some hair club for men going on? How about a better job? I can see by the house behind you that you live in a somewhat run down area. We need to set up some muscle building exercises for you as well, the stick man look is not attractive, but I am sure your wife loves you enough to tell you it is.

I totally need to make my own Husband perfecting rules to live by…

I hope some day your wife regains her brain and uses her new sexy body to find an equally attractive male who really appreciates her.

“This is what she does. She manipulates people.”

My friend Hump has made a huge decision. He explains:

My parents don’t love me they way they want me to believe they love me. They are toxic. They demand I live they way they want me to. Their love has always been conditional. I’m broken in part because of my relationship with them. Since cutting them off I’ve been able to identify some thoughts as “being theirs” and “not being mine”. I’m not fixed but I see some things more clearly.

My parents have enlisted their friends in telling me stories about how much I will regret cutting my parents off. People I don’t know are friending me on facebook telling me stories and giving me advice. People who don’t like me are texting me and calling me wanting to catch up and see how I’m doing. Bullshit. This is my mother’s work. This is what she does. She manipulates people.

Psychopaths, relatively

Females have a lesser capacity for empathy. This is because they are, relative to men, psychopaths. The Mask of Sanity is foundational reading, here.

Unlike true psychopaths, women do have significant emotions. But these emotions, again relative to men, are so weak and infrequently experienced that women are easily overwhelmed by anything out of the ordinary. They explode at trifles in the same manner as the psychopaths described in Mask. They are similarly surprised when their fabrications are not taken seriously.

Men suffer strong and abiding emotions throughout our lives, from the earliest ages. But we weather the storms; we learn how to sail through.

Self-reported Lies of Lying Liars

Gucci Little Piggy cites a study on lying in which Science Proves that men lie more frequently than women. Examination of the study suggests the opposite of its putative results, if anything. It’s like the old logic puzzles where one of your interlocutors always lies and the other always tells the truth.

Say we have groups P and Q, and that we somehow know that members of group P lie significantly more often than the members of group Q. If you survey these groups on how often they tell lies, which do you expect to report accurately? Unless you expect the liars’ group to refrain from lying on surveys, you should assume that the liars will lie about how often they lie.

Such a survey may result in three general outcomes:

1) Group P claims more lies than Group Q
2) P == Q
3) P < Q

I think these assumptions are warranted:

A) Group P under-reports the amount of lying
B) P’s motive in doing so is to lay claim to socially acceptable behavior, not merely to mitigate a high lie-frequency

On those assumptions, Outcome 1 would require Group P to have an upwardly-skewed perception of how much lying is considered acceptable. Now, liars may believe that others lie as much as themselves, but I think they are quite aware of the extent to which lying is socially tolerated. Call that assumption C. Thus if A, B, and C hold, Outcome 1 is not plausible.

Outcomes 2 and 3 are plausible by these assumptions. With a further assumption, Outcome 3 becomes the most likely:

D) Liars who lie about their lying will claim greater honesty than necessary

The short version is that liars may be expected to claim to be more honest than the honest will claim for themselves.

Now, if groups P and Q lie with the same frequency, you might see a difference in their self-reported frequency based on differing calibrations of social acceptability. Another variable here could be a difference in the proclivity of each group to lie when anonymous, which I suppose to be related to the extent to which the members of the group lie to convince themselves.

Therefore, if a survey shows that Group Q lies significantly more often than Group P, these are plausible causes:

* P & Q have similar frequencies, but P has a lower assessment of what is socially acceptable
* P & Q have similar frequencies, but Q is more willing to accurately self-report in anonymous situations
* P actually lies more frequently than Q, and P lies about lying

I reject as a plausible cause the linear explanation: that Q lies more than P. We are discussing relative rates of lying about lying, after all.

The aforementioned Science Proves It! survey, however, reports that men lie 3 times a day, and women only 2. Statistical significance be damned; a difference of two or three lies per day is trivial and uninteresting. We are, thank Odysseus, free to continue with the prejudice that women lie more than men.

I have refrained from introducing some further factors until now because they pertain to the sanity of the individuals.

1) the person is not aware of consciously and intentionally lying, while still perpetrating falsehoods.
2) the person consciously and intentionally lies, but has an extremely poor model of social norms.
3) the person consciously and intentionally lies, understands and can imitate social normality, and simply does not care. This is psychopathy as depicted in The Mask of Sanity.

In my experience, (1) is the base experience of most females. Even fairly well-tamed women do this. The subconscious has some sort of interrupt routine whereby it can pause the consciousness, emit an egregious falsehood, and yield control back to the consciousness, which does not recognize that anything out of the ordinary has occurred.

(2) is characterized more by the extreme poverty of the social model than by the willingness to lie. In Vox Day’s socio-sexual hierarchy, (2) is the experience of the Sigma or Omega when practicing to deceive.

(3) is outright freakishly weird. You should read the case studies in The Mask of Sanity. The author’s tentative attempt at explaining the behavior of the subjects is interesting, but not necessary, and I recommend skipping over any of his attempts to elucidate until after you’ve read all the case studies.

Why she wanted to keep her last name

My wife’s sister, Camille, is a self-absorbed, self-righteous, snowflaking feminist with embarrassing tattoos. There are sick stories I could tell about Camille, my friends. A vignette: my wife once overheard Camille and one of her slightly less unattractive (phys. and ment.) friends discussing how shocking it was that their other (attractive and pleasant) friend had “only slept with ten guys”. Imagine a 4 and a 5 expressing dismay and pity for an 8 because she had such a low dick-count. Ten is the new zero.

Katie recently recounted to me a conversation she had a few years ago with this sister. They were talking about the western custom of a woman taking her husband’s name when they marry. Both sisters did, in fact, take their husband’s names. This was never a question for Katie, and she offered some sort of defense for the practice. Camille did not respond with her typical feminist screechies, which is what I was expecting from the story (and which is why I hadn’t really been paying attention up until this point).

Instead, my wife recalled, Camille said, “If I could do it again, I would keep my last name. I really liked who I was when I was single. I had a lot of fun.”

I made Katie repeat that part so I could write it down. Camille’s reason for regretting that she took her husband’s name was that she remembered how much fun it was to be single. Warped, pathetic, and spectacularly revealing when you know what “fun” is code for in female-speak.

Screwflake objects

I’m not insulting your wife: she GENUINELY looks sick. You said yourself you felt she had lost too much weight.

Does anyone else at all agree that my wife looks like she has an eating disorder? SHE’S EATING IN THE PICTURE.

My concern is this: as her Husband You are supposed to COVER her; to be a strong tower for her… and yet, you expose her. Publicly. When you sin against your wife you do so against your OWN body. Making her the object of observation [perhaps even lust] for other men is immodest – doing so without her knowledge [perhaps] or choice [she didn't post the pics] goes beyond immodesty into something I will not say.

Anybody get a chubby looking at the pics? Does anyone not a feral female think I have exposed my wife in any way? I’m not playing No True Feral here. There are a few women in this community whose opinion I would not discount.

I hope in time you will understand my motivation behind writing you.

I and most of my readers do. As Lewis said, “You can understand the nature of drunkenness when you are sober, not when you are drunk.” Or to paraphrase, “bitches be trippin”.

I also pray she is a woman of strong enough faith to forgive you this

I’m pretty sure she’ll never forgive me for you being offended.

… but since you [or just Ferd if you don't join his banter] seem to think that God cannot forgive me my past – perhaps you will feel condemned rather than convicted of your present.

Neither Ferdinand nor I care whether God will forgive you “your past”. Excellent euphemism, by the way. We will not forgive you, because you did not sin against us. Unless you cockblocked FB at some point.

This is the point you self-justifying Churchians fail to understand. You can murder and steal, and God will forgive you, but that does not give you a Get Out of Jail card. Do the crime, do the time. When you whore yourself out, you become a harlot.

I hear God occasionally has a use for harlots. I don’t. In point of fact, I’m pretty sure God expects me not to have a use for harlots.

All things will be revealed in the coming time of judgment… are you ready? Since your brothers are not willing to confront you I will as a sister

You are not, as a woman, authorized to do so.

I’d rather embarrass myself and make myself the subject of your mockery than see you hurting yourself and your wife with a post like this.

Bullshit. You’re spotlighting.

How can this POSSIBLY strengthen your marriage?

Katie was pleased I wanted to show her off. She was only worried when she heard that someone thought she looked sick. I said, “Eh. Come on.”

Would you let someone do this to your own daughter?

Well, yeah. If she porked up after getting married, I’d flat out demand the fool take her in hand.

Gentlemen, how many of you would crush someone if they did this to YOUR wife or your daughter, but feel fine enjoying someone else doing this to his own wife?

We’re none of us gentlemen here.

Dismiss Me, insult me, anything you will.

You are so noble. May I wash your feet with my hair?

But if you deny Christ…. He will deny you.

Offending a harlot means I’m denying Christ. Yep. That’s what she do.

Snowflake doesn’t want me to talk trash about church girls.

A faux-tame female (likely Church of Christ, else why so serious?) responded to one of my previous posts.

I lament the feminization of the churches, however…

However, it’s convenient for you. I get it. Say no more.

rejection of men occurred long before feminism, and in all sectors of society.

People died in fires long before the auto da fe lit up Lisbon.

Working with young men I’ve noticed that this seems to hit men harder than it does women:

Antecedent check: Working with young men, you’ve noticed that rejection of men seems to hit men harder than it does women. I am positively undone with astonishment.

they are almost entirely paranoid of it

Why are men so sensitive?

both from men and from others. Mostly? They fear rejection from male role models, their Dads, etc.

Cunning snowflake. You thought you could blind us with conjured daddy issues. Here’s a free clue: men do not fear that other men will reject us. We fear that we will deserve it.

Women are TOLD from birth by society that we’re here to be measured [on a scale from 1-10, for example].

Bald falsehood. Women are told they are precious snowflakes who are good enough and smart enough to do whatever they want to do.

When men find out they are also to be found inadequate

Note the passive voice.

they may be surprised and become paranoid

More shaming tactics.

that they are being ‘hate hate hated’ whether that is or is not, in fact, the case.

Sadly, the men of whom I spoke don’t perceive or understand this contempt on the part of good church girls. I, the successful wooer and breeder, am the one accusing you of hate, not the creepy guy who you know is probably going to become a missionary and marry some pathetic foreign girl. The animus I bear against you is on behalf of my friends.

The hate you feel may be projection [you hate them for rejecting you, so it's easier to imagine the women hate you, justifying your own emotions].

Robin: Holy unintended irony, Batman!

Batman: How fast do you estimate that hamster is running, Robin?

Robin: I don’t know, Batman, but that wheel needs some lubrication, or she’s gonna blow.

Perhaps the most productive thing to do when we are rejected [male or female] is to look at ourselves and change our own behavior.

Yes. Hence “Game”. Are you new here?

Far be it from me to suggest a specific change

Good then. Glad you know your place.

but

What? I thought you knew your place. Don’t you know what words mean?

clearly trying to control others [with their faith, or otherwise] is not something the strong old church men we all admire so much ever engaged in…

Pay close attention, fellow servants of the Christ: that’s what she do. This is how females destroy your church, your city, your nation. It makes one want to slap a bitch. I hardly know how to continue; how can you approach such a reeking wad of Screwtapian poison?

“Trying to control others with their faith”: what in Hell does that mean?

“Strong old church men we all admire”: This is a disgusting attempt to co-opt my affection for the silverbacks in my church. The strong old men I’m thinking of, you wouldn’t admire, Snowflake. They’d tell you to cover yourself and leave the building. I knew strong old men, I served with strong old men, and you, tart, had better cover yourself and leave the building.

Listen, it gets worse. Here’s what little content is actually in your statement.

“Trying to control others is not something the strong old men ever engaged in.”

Da fuck? Ambrose, Augustine, Luther, Calvin, Wesley, Smith, Campbell, and Stone want to have a word with you. Did I miss some names? Oh, yeah, ALL MEN UP UNTIL THE LAST CENTURY.

Just food for thought. :)

Do you think if Eve had used a smiley, Jehovah would have let her slide?

Church girls don’t hate hate hate Betas

Are there any men at your church who you think are creepy? You thinking a man is creepy is what I’m talking about.

but we don’t want to marry a guy whose self concept is primarily determined by what women ‘supposedly’ think of him

I believe this without reservation. Hence “Game”.

rather, one whose self concept rests in what God thinks of Him and whose attitude reflects this confident self understanding in Christ.

This is THE problem with women. Always worrying about what others think of you. Stop worrying about what God thinks of you. You’re a woman. What is woman, that God is mindful of you?

I do not fret about what my liege lord thinks of me. I have pledged my allegiance, and I have work to do.

UPDATE OF AWESOMENESS:

Screwflake is now insulting me and my wife in other posts:

Your wife looks like she is very sick and has an eating disorder :(
I hope she managed to gain some weight: you were right to encourage her to ease up a bit.

But hey, if not, you could re-title this to Visual Proof of How Game Drives Wife to Mental Illness [eating disorders = mental illness].

Curious: How is your weight-gain project coming along? You look like an episode of survivor: “will he pass out before the deck is complete? stay tuned to find out!” [see, it hurts, doesn't it?....why are you doing this to her?]

Rapprochement

Solomon II dropped an epic post recently, Women Can Age Beautifully. Nestled amongst the predictable comment-dung was this confession from “Sid”, which is so significant an event I quote it in full:

I’ve read this post three times now.

The first time, I was fuming. “How dare you talk about women like that? Especially when you’re doing the same fucking thing?!?”

The second time I reminisced. “I used to be like that. That was me in my early twenties, minus the texts and digital pictures of course (damn, am I that old??)”

The third time, I became thoughtful.

I’m thinking about my marriage. About my children. And about myself.

I’m thinking about how I’m contemplating a divorce because I feel like we’re no longer communicating. We’re no longer working together. Because I feel like he no longer appreciates the wrinkles on my hands that nurture his children. Then I realize, is it him? Is it all him? No, of course not.

Then I think “Do I want to go back to this time in my life where I saw men as disposable? Back to MY harem of boys?” It sounds dreamy at first, but like you describe above, it’s cheap, it’s ugly, it’s so meaningless.

Just like men use women and see them as worthless trash, worth nothing more than a fuck, us women often see men just the same. I used men, I had a few on speed dial. I knew they were not in any way, shape or form marriage material. Which was fine, I didn’t want them for marriage. Did they see me the same way? I’m not delusional.

According to your definition above, I was a whore. But so were the men I fucked. I was ugly and so were they.

What you describe above is not about women. It’s about people.

Then I grew up. Just because I was an ugly whore then, doesn’t mean I’m one now. I also know boys who have since turned into men, beautiful men. For me, much of what you describe above is about where we are in life, and just because one is there at one point in their lives, doesn’t mean that person will always be there.

What you wrote above reminds me of who I really am in my husband’s eyes, and who I want to be. Even though I feel forgotten at times, I know he loves me. I know he loves these saggy tits that feed his children. I know he loves me for me and who I once was. He’s beautiful and so am I.

Now I think about my children and how we can help them see the value of meaningful long lasting relationships. How do we teach both our son and daughter that people, love and sex should not be cheap, quick nor easy. I hope we can teach my daughter to never see a man the way I once viewed men. And I hope we can teach my son to never see women they way you view women. But first and foremost, I hope we can teach them to never see THEMSELVES as cheap, meaningless and disposable in the first place. That they are worth the effort, time and energy.

So thank you. Thank you for making me think. Thank you for your perspective. And thank you for reminding me that what I have is worth saving.

Brava, Sid. Terribile dictu, I must call you out on one point:

“Just because I was an ugly whore then, doesn’t mean I’m one now.”

That you realize you were–and that you wish not to be–an ugly whore does you credit. Paul certainly wished that he had not held the garments of the murderers of Stephen. But he did what he did, and you did what you did. Accept what you are, so that you may warn others not to be so.