I have to admit I was remiss in my previous post on how to find a husband. Luckily, reader A. a lady, asked a very valid question in a manner so forthright it matched the style of my post.
Here is the comment from that post:
All great information and thank you. Never had any problem getting attention. “Be a slut” sounds effective, but how can a woman tell she’s with a good guy?
This is a valid point. In fact a very valid one. Let us attempt to answer it in a rather detailed fashion then.
First of all, we need to define what is a “good guy”, and since women have more or less the ethics and understanding of concepts like honour and honesty of feral ferrets,* we will define what a “good guy” is by the more objective and universal male standard first, then add in some truth about what women really want too.
- A good guy is, above all, a man who can keep his word. If he gives it out officially very rarely that’s even better. But generally it’s a guy who says what he means and means what he says and STICKS TO IT. No matter how hard things get.
- A good guy is loyal to the right people. He’s the kind who dies trying to get his wounded buddy out of a foxhole. He’s the guy who comes to your place at 3 am to help you get rid of the bodies of the intruders you just killed and don’t feel like spending 20 years in jail for. Now, a man can, in fact, be loyal to the wrong people. And that can be a serious problem. A woman he loves can at times make him see this, but generally not by ultimatums. IF it works, it is usually only by holding true to her own values, and for the sake of her own and her children’s futures, letting him know she can’t let what are essentially strangers endanger her life and family. So if your guy is loyal to his good friends who are also loyal to him, great. But if he is loyal to the local pimp, not so great.
- He’s also the guy who has an intrinsic, instinctive, sense of justice. Which often has little to do with the law of the land. And because everyone has been brainwashed for 70 years non-stop that “all violence is bad” now only the thugs that call themselves government tend to have the monopoly on it. And actual nothing-to-lose type criminals. Violence is unfortunate, but it absolutely can be a force for good. But a good guy is not going to step aside if someone tries to harm people he cares about.
- A good guy is not a fool, and above all, he will not put up with any of your female bullshit. Your attempts to emotionally manipulate him, change him, nag him to become a “better version of himself” and whatever other nonsense you might come up with, will be checked. You will be told in various ways to leave off. If the offence is large, he will show you the door and that will be the end of that. If it is small and maybe cute, he may let you “get your way” with it, or laugh it off, or tease you about it. Or maybe, more dangerously for your relationship, say nothing and let you think you got away with it; all while he observes what you do next. If it is some gaslighting rubbish he will simply tell you to stop lying and leave. And he might not come back. He will not tolerate disrespectful behaviour from you, his potential wife, nor should he. Now, this does not mean he is a completely rigid puritan that can’t smile. A man has to be able to laugh at the world and take some of the female nonsense, half-truths, wild and unfounded accusations, hysterics, and general drama they bring with them, with a smile and a laugh, a pinch of salt, some patience, and the occasional light smack on the ass that is sexy instead of violent.
- All of the above can be somewhat faked by men, at least for a time, but one thing that cannot be faked is a certain level of success. Some women require him to be a “provider” and in America especially, the female delusion bubble about what a man should earn before he can be with them is truly astonishing. Besides, women are fully capable of earning their own money too now, so that gap has certainly closed and in some ways is actually in reverse. So the point is not so much that he has to have a set amount of money, but he has to be capable. At least capable in general or capable at something specifically, or a few somethings.
Those are the basic points, but now let’s also dispel some of the myths that both men and also some women have about women in general.
I hear constantly how these days all women are just gold-digging whores, and if you are not a millionaire, you can’t even get laid, never mind engaged and married and so on.
Well, I am here to tell you: that is simply not true. Let me get specific.
Are there plenty of gold-digging whores out there? Sure. Just like there are plenty of lazy, drug-addled, loser men that will accomplish nothing in their entire life. Most humans suck. That’s just how things are in this fallen world. But assuming you are not an NPC, which is why you read my blog regularly, you both aspire to a bit more than an NPC wife or husband, and in order to be with a Player Character level husband or wife, guess what YOU have to be? That’s right, player character material. If you don’t know what an NPC or PC is, read this first.
As readers here know, I had a rather scandalous past before becoming a good, well, ok, devout, Catholic. And I assure you, that money was never a function of why women came home with me. There is no easy short way to say this other than crudely, but it transmits best perhaps what is even more powerful than money for most women and for almost all genuine women who just want a good guy: Balls.
Especially in my native language, the idea of “having balls” encompasses a great many things. It means being your own man, not taking shit from people, regardless of if they are powerful, rich or famous, or not. It means treating even bad guys fairly, because sometimes even a bad guy is not the real bad guy. It means doing the right thing even when it’s very hard to do. It means justice and your personal code of honour (which has to be rooted in real justice for it not to become something obscene) take precedence over even the (corrupt and fake) law.
I have known women that betrayed their multi-millionaire husband (who was not exactly a weak or beta type either) for the chance to be with someone that had that intrinsic sense of simply being a man who will go where he wants and do what he wants (not in a way that harms other innocent people) and not let fear or the narrative of lesser men get in his way.
In the course of my life, at least twice, and this was after my days working in close protection in South Africa, I ran into cases of corruption and fraud so extensive that my life was honestly potentially in danger. In one case the lawyer I hired to make my case warned me that it would be cheaper to have me killed than have any of the information I had become aware of get out publicly.
In the other case, my now wife, who was not even my girlfriend at the time, very reasonably pointed out that my taking down a giant machine of theft and corruption on a grand scale where millions were involved and would be lost by the people doing the stealing, was reason enough to have me have some kind of accident. In both cases, while I took various precautions (some of which remain in place) in the event I ever do have a suspicious accident, the idea of NOT doing the right thing, didn’t even cross my mind. The only thought that did, was: fuck these guys. And I did what I did and their corrupt enterprises suffered for it. These were not just the usual slightly “dodgy” business deals, these were people that were ruining families of honest people just trying to do their job properly so as to pocket millions on the back of their misery. So, yeah, fuck them.
Now, a genuine woman, will tend to be attracted and more than just superficially if she gets in any way invested, in a man of that sort, far more than a white collar banker that would crap his pants if faced with an aggressive drunk.
Money, and political power, and fame are certainly attractive to most women, but like most men, most women are kind of dumb, and superficial, because Law n.1. And who wants to get stuck with one of those. For a woman that is worth being with, at least in my personal opinion, money, power, and fame can all be attractive, but balls trump all of them. And if you have all four aspects, well, great, then you are the unicorn they seek and you can have a whole harem, if that is your fancy. If it is, by the way, congratulations, you are part of law 1. Any sane non-stupid man is aware that a harem is a bad, bad, bad, choice. Some of us find out the hard way, but believe me, it’s much better as a fantasy than a reality.
And this is where the concept that women liking bastards comes in. Now, it is true, I was born a bastard, but that’s my parent’s fault, not mine. I also go into this in a lot more depth in Caveman Theory, which by the way is useful for women too even if it is mostly addressed at men, but the point is that biologically, humans are still pretty much with the same wiring we had a couple or ten thousand years ago. Modern life has made us all weak pansies, that whine if the internet goes out for an hour, but we still have a lot of wiring that is not too far removed from apes.**
Which means that a man that genuinely acts without fear of other men, takes things on, is competent, and doesn’t put up with a lot of female nonsense, gets evaluated by a woman’t instinctive biology as a “mover and shaker”. Because back in cave times for the last 2 million years, that is the ONLY reason he would act that way. He was a genuine badass. Today, of course, he may be a drug-dealing pimp with the IQ of a lemur, and the unsophisticated woman who has not evolved past her base instincts will still “choose him” even if it’s a terrible choice, because her biology erroneously is still living in the year 10,000 BC instead of 2024 AD.
That biology is more powerful than you think. And just as I always said, that the most valuable material in a crisis is not gold, but rather copper-jacketed lead, in a crisis, a woman will drop her multi-millionaire banker for a Hell’s Angels criminal with a gun that can get her through the zombielands safely.
The infestation of gold-digging whores, is simply a reaction to the infestation of metrosexual half-fags that now populate the Earth, pretending to be men.
Now, in order for a man to have all the qualities identified above, he also does to need to be a bit of a bastard at times. Because humans, professor Cipolla, and a fallen world. If you prefer it in proper Catholic parlance, a man also needs to be as wise as a serpent, not just as innocent as a dove. And really, he needs to really be both. Have the curiosity and wonder of a child, but the wisdom and reason of an adult man.
Now, ladies, if you have become even just a little aware of how truly deluded some of your expectations are, that’s great, but now pay attention: Finding a guy that fits the above criteria is a LOT more important and better for your long term prospects of having a decent life, a good family and happy children. Like so much more so, that you have no idea. And the lucky thing is that while they too are rare, there are certainly more of them than there are billionaires willing to marry your 38 year-old, 7 in a good light, ass.
I hope this clarifies things for you and if not, A. I would welcome any further questions or comments you have.
* I cover this in a lot more detail in Caveman Theory, but in essence, these concepts work entirely differently for a woman, for reasons that are essentially part of her biology, so despite my rhetoric (they can after all modulate things more than they pretend they can in most cases) in a lot of instances, their inability to see these concepts as men do is simply unavoidable, and if you get upset by that reality as a man, you will only corrode your liver at that inevitable reality. you may as well get upset the sun rises in the East.
** Yes, yes, I know evolution as they tried to tell us about is complete nonsense, because it doesn’t work mathematically, I have known that since my 20s, that’s not the point.
Loading ...
TMOS Concepts – Part 2 – Reality is Based on Spiritual Underpinnings
If you understood part 1, then you know that the spiritual necessarily comes before the physical, but the physical too, is required. As always: The intro Paragraph:
This is the second in the Theoretical Models of Society series of Posts. Use the category of the same name or the Search Me function on the right-hand sidebar to find all related posts in the series.
It is generally helpful to a reader if they are already familiar with some of my other work, in order for this stuff to have the most useful effect on your life. In particular, The Face on Mars and Believe! would be the top reads to have done to have the generic global perspective of reality well in hand. Systema and Reclaiming the Catholic Church would have the most impact on a more personal level. On health/security/self-protection, and on the reality of Catholicism as it was (and remains with Sedevacantists) before Vatican II and why the Novus Ordo Church is not only not Catholic, but Satanic at its core. I will repeat this little paragraph on each new part, as I think it is important to have a general foundation if one is really interested in more than skim-reading before returning to the general slumber we are all being attempted to be forced into.
If your spiritual cohesion is weak, your physical one will be non-existent. If your spiritual cohesion is based on something real but partial (non-violence, do no harm, meditation on the abstract realities, communion with nature), that is lacking the other side of reality (violence is at times required so you better be good at it, a little harm early sometimes prevent a bigger harm later, practical considerations, dealing with humans as they are not as you wish they were) then our physical cohesion will only last while there are no real stressors to it. MS-13 gangs have it good… until an active government or group of vigilante citizens large and equipped enough decide they had enough. Then MS-13 gangs disappear or become the new government if they win. The Amish are fine… until the MS-13 gangs decide they want the Amish compound.
Only if the spiritual is holistic does the physical become resilient.
You may disagree with it, but like it or not, Islam is holistic. Suicidal zealots on one end and devout prayer on the other end. Because of it, it is resilient. Judaism is complex, because its spiritual aspect reflects both the concept of a higher power, but also the idea that you can circumvent its laws by clever rules-lawyering, and this translates to a physical cohesion that is founded on deception of anyone not part of the club to a great extent. It is resilient and successful… until the deception is understood and seen on a scale that tips the balance, then its exponents tend to get exiled and removed from polite society en masse.
China as an entity is resilient, and its people hard to counter in terms of work ethic or perseverance, but from a spiritual perspective their way of doing things, with mass subjugation to the state, is not sustainable for Western style civilisations. So they are insular and non-integrating. More of a slow rolling behemoth than an instant threat to survival.
Fake religions that only have veneers of ideologies, but are really just the equivalent of a spiritual fake meal and physical cardboard cutout, will have inconsequential physical manifestations beyond the zombie horde. Protestants, Novus Orco “Catholics” the millions and millions of agnostics and atheists, none of them make any difference. At most they are a brainless zombie horde that might be manipulated to stumble this or that way for a brief period of time; and yes, in that time they can make a lot of damage, but they don’t decide anything.
Eastern Orthodox are currently the pre-eminent resistors of clown world, but they tend to be isolationist (which is good but means you as a Westerner are not of them really) and stagnant spiritually. Physically they are solid and generally reliable and they have large enough numbers to make a difference. That said, the failure of their societies is built in: they are essentially tribal. Even the Mongol Empire collapsed when Genghis Khan died. And their own internal stresses prevent them from ever becoming a truly civilising force.
Tiny, low-numbers as it is Catholicism (Sedevacantism) is actually the only perspective that has a real chance. The spiritual element is solid and factual and has no problem pushing back as hard as required, right up to taking on even the fanatical elements of their enemies with calm and determination. Physically this too translates. Their weakness for now is numbers. But given each woman we know that is Sede has (or intends to) at least 5 or more children, we will become a larger force over time.
Pacifist in intent but not afraid to defend as hard as required, also makes us resilient. Building up Sede communities is the aim and process currently happening in real time. Organisation and forming economic communities is the next step. And after that, political and civil defence will come rapidly.
Regardless of if you heed my thoughts on what the best spiritual practice to provide a deep coherence is or not, the fact is that you need to create a physical coherence too. That is, a community of people in the flesh, that can stand united against whatever horror they may have to face, together, as a real community that shares pains and glories as required.
You can have all the best ideas in the world (I have several myself!) but if you don’t learn to create and be a part of a community of men that are willing and able to become warriors on the spot if events require it, you will not survive any SHTF events, nor the more likely constant and progressive squeezing you with taxes, laws, rules and increasing costs for everything.
You need to surround yourself with people that will work well together inside foxholes, instead of panic and crap themselves. And then you need to lead them if you can, and follow the leader if you cannot.
You simply will not achieve anything, no matter what type of “revolution” you might want to have, peaceful, educational, economical, or even outright war, if you do not have something prepared to replace whatever it is you are trying to do away with.
So build it first.
No related posts.
By G | 16 September 2024 | Posted in Social Commentary, Theoretical Models of Society