Saturday, January 3, 2015

Target Omega

Notice that open and slavish submission to feminism by men produces the exact opposite of the results assumed:
Here’s the thing: I spent my formative years—basically, from the age of 12 until my mid-20s—feeling not “entitled,” not “privileged,” but terrified. I was terrified that one of my female classmates would somehow find out that I sexually desired her, and that the instant she did, I would be scorned, laughed at, called a creep and a weirdo, maybe even expelled from school or sent to prison. You can call that my personal psychological problem if you want, but it was strongly reinforced by everything I picked up from my environment: to take one example, the sexual-assault prevention workshops we had to attend regularly as undergrads, with their endless lists of all the forms of human interaction that “might be” sexual harassment or assault, and their refusal, ever, to specify anything that definitely wouldn’t be sexual harassment or assault. I left each of those workshops with enough fresh paranoia and self-hatred to last me through another year.

My recurring fantasy, through this period, was to have been born a woman, or a gay man, or best of all, completely asexual, so that I could simply devote my life to math, like my hero Paul Erdös did. Anything, really, other than the curse of having been born a heterosexual male, which for me, meant being consumed by desires that one couldn’t act on or even admit without running the risk of becoming an objectifier or a stalker or a harasser or some other creature of the darkness.

Of course, I was smart enough to realize that maybe this was silly, maybe I was overanalyzing things. So I scoured the feminist literature for any statement to the effect that my fears were as silly as I hoped they were. But I didn’t find any. On the contrary: I found reams of text about how even the most ordinary male/female interactions are filled with “microaggressions,” and how even the most “enlightened” males—especially the most “enlightened” males, in fact—are filled with hidden entitlement and privilege and a propensity to sexual violence that could burst forth at any moment.

Because of my fears—my fears of being “outed” as a nerdy heterosexual male, and therefore as a potential creep or sex criminal—I had constant suicidal thoughts. As Bertrand Russell wrote of his own adolescence: “I was put off from suicide only by the desire to learn more mathematics.”

At one point, I actually begged a psychiatrist to prescribe drugs that would chemically castrate me (I had researched which ones), because a life of mathematical asceticism was the only future that I could imagine for myself. The psychiatrist refused to prescribe them, but he also couldn’t suggest any alternative: my case genuinely stumped him.
Now observe the female response to this abject omega male self-flagellation:

Despite all this he remains a feminist, but that’s not the point here.  What Scott Aaronson said got discovered by feminists, and they tarred and feathered him for it.  Despite his clear language to the contrary, he’s accused of everything from being a MRA to being a misogynist just because of his Jewish faith.  Despite his attempts to explain himself over and over again, people on Twitter are saying that female MIT students should be afraid to take his classes.

Never give feminists an inch. Don't agree with them, don't tolerate them, show them no mercy whatsoever. Feminism is a Satanic, anti-Christian, anti-reason, anti-science ideology that destroys literally everything it touches and everyone who embraces it. Reject it and its adherents the way you would reject someone offering you plutonium on their bare hands; to accept it is to begin to die a slow and painful death.

The problem isn't merely that feminists are ugly and hateful, or that their ideology is incoherent and deluded, but that by mere toleration of them, through mere intellectual contact with it, you are permitting your life to be infected and degraded. We've seen this in the Christian churches, which in their attempts to tame the feminist cancer and turn it into a pet, have been mortally stricken.

Reject all of it. Reject their appeals to equality. Reject their pretense to intellectual standing. And most of all, personally reject all of those who subscribe to it in any way, shape, or form. Any man who calls himself a feminist is ideologically transgender and mentally unstable.


Dark Herald said...

Third Wave Feminism combines Maoist show trials with the American tradition of the lynch mob.

However that's not what is going on here or at least not completely. The show-trial/lynch-mob thing has become a galvanic frog-leg spasm response at this point. It doesn't really matter what the stimulus is. If they can go nuts over "man-spreading," they can certainly work themselves into a fury over an Omega parading around in a liberal hair-shirt.

Although this time the stimulus is a little different. It's something they are intimately familiar with but never in this context. Guilt.

"After all one always despises, one whom you have wronged.

Dexter said...

Due process -- the Left hates it.

Harvard Law bows to federal gov't over campus sexual assault policies
By Ashe Schow | December 31, 2014 | 1:28 pm

After four years of fighting the Department of Education over campus sexual assault policies, Harvard Law has lost.

The Department’s Office for Civil Rights announced Tuesday that Harvard had violated Title IX, the provision of the 1972 Education Amendments now being used to justify colleges adjudicating felony charges of sexual assault.

OCR determined that, essentially, Harvard Law was providing its students accused of sexual assault with too many due process rights — which under the new Title IX interpretation must stop.

OCR found that Harvard Law was not adjudicating sexual harassment and sexual assault claims in a “prompt and equitable” fashion.

“In one instance, the Law School took over a year to make its final determination and the complainant was not allowed to participate in this extended appeal process, which ultimately resulted in the reversal of the initial decision to dismiss the accused student and dismissal of the complainant's complaint,” the OCR announcement said.

Basically, a student appealed Harvard Law’s “guilty” decision and won — and under the current climate of how sexual assault must be handled (i.e., accused must be found guilty) this was wrong.

So now, Harvard Law must adopt new policies, including lowering the burden of proof to “preponderance of the evidence,” meaning faculty members only have to be 50.01 percent sure an accuser is telling the truth in order to convict the accused student and ruin his or her life.

Harvard Law must also reopen all sexual harassment accusations filed during the 2012-13 and 2013-14 school years to “carefully scrutinize whether the Law School investigated the complaints consistent with Title IX and provide any additional remedies necessary for the complainants.” This means that students who may have been acquitted will now be retried under new policies designed to find them guilty. In a criminal court, we would call this “double jeopardy.”

These new policies, despite the promise of being “equitable” to students.

In October, 28 current and former Harvard Law faculty members — including President Obama’s mentor Charles Ogletree — denounced the changes already taken by the university in reforming its campus sexual assault policies. At the time, the faculty members wrote that the new policies lacked even “the most basic elements of fairness and due process.”

Alan Dershowitz, a self-identified liberal who signed that letter, later told the Boston Globe that the new policies “are written to preclude a defense.”

Now, Harvard Law students will be forced to live under a different set of rules than the ones they are being taught.

Krul said...

It's telling, the brutal indifference and outright contempt of the feminists for the suffering of anyone who isn't in one of the preferred victim groups. They are determined that some groups (women in this case) should always be perceived as suffering "victims" while others should always be perceived as "privileged" oppressors. It's the "Damsel in Distress" strategy of controlling others through their compassion and pity.

So when Aaronson described his pathetic experience in an actual attempt to reasonably explain his perspective, they took it as a plea for sympathy. In other words, an attempt to "muscle in on the racket", the pity-racket that feminists and leftists have always used to manipulate others. Hence, their unsympathetic and angry reactions that emphasize how much more women suffer and how much worse they have it than men like Aaronson, and how their suffering is a bigger deal because it's "structural".

Laguna Beach Fogey said...

"My recurring fantasy, through this period, was to have been born a woman, or a gay man, or best of all, completely asexual, so that I could simply devote my life to math, like my hero Paul Erdös did..."

"At one point, I actually begged a psychiatrist to prescribe drugs that would chemically castrate me (I had researched which ones), because a life of mathematical asceticism was the only future that I could imagine for myself."

That seems pretty extreme, though I can somewhat see the logic in it. I wonder how common this is? At least Aaronson didn't imitate that character mentioned in one of Hemingway's novels who severed his own cock because it offended his moral sense.

With feminism and feminists, only Total War will do.

Old Harry said...

That's why Game is important - the doctrine that there is am abundance of women is critical. If Aaronson had believed that there were other available and attainable women out there that would have been willing, let's not say partners, but even companions, he would have been okay. It doesn't even look like he made it to anyone's friend zone.

When I was in college, the biggest concerns guys had centered around getting their girlfriend pregnant or getting a girlfriend. These rules of conduct were several years into the future as was red pill knowledge. But I knew that if I were in a place where the women were not interested, then I would have to look elesewhere. So I over came my introversion and went to different activities and groups until I met someone. And I did not limit my quest to campus organizations.

Having been to Boston many times, it seems like a big college campus, so I wonder if poor Aaronson was unable to escape the feminist rule book there or if he simply was unable to bring himself to see a way out? Did his love for mathematics prevent him from developing these relationships and he used the feminist code of conduct as an excuse or was he merely a smart omega who is retconning his reasons for being alone? Without the rules, would he be just as lonely as he is now?

Kallmunz said...

Aaronson's story is heart rendering but this story is one I will keep. Let this serve as a warning to all young men, stop serving a lie or stay on your knees and grovel for the rest of your miserable life.

Unknown said...

Just like the Baptismal vows where you reject Satan and embrace God.

Do you reject feminism, and all their works, and all their empty promises? And do you believe in God the father and all that goes with the patriarchy?

bw said...

The Psychotic Left, by Kerry Bolton

Explains it all quite well, using the same psych that Collectivists have attacked Individualists with for over a Century.
Even to the point of the merger of Freud/Marxism (both Jewish) with the French Communist Althusser as a perfect example (you know you're onto something when his autobio is named The Future is Forever):

..Althusser was later to remark about the burden of sexual organs..


It was truly a form of rape and castration. I had been raped and castrated by my mother, who felt she had been raped by my father, but that was her affair, not mine. Family fate was indeed inescapable. But the horror of what happened was intensified by the fact that my mother pattered this obscenity (having discovered and congratulated him on his first wet dream at 13 y/o) and behaved so unnaturally in considering it to be her duty, whereas it should have been my father who did it
Proper male/female relations are the building blocks of sanity, and the house fire of the perpetually insane and childish, revenge murderers. The "projection of a conflict between parents and their children rationalised into an ideology of class, gender, and racial struggle.

Anonymous said...

Vox you should have checked out the original source. It contains what could very well be AG's quote of the day:

"That I managed to climb out of the pit with my feminist beliefs mostly intact, you might call a triumph of abstract reason over experience."

Ghost said...

"But feminism is just about fighting for equal rights!" Biggest damn lie on the planet right now.

Xmas said...

From Instapundit:

It's an interesting read, with lots of good points, lots of not so good points, and he ruins it at the very end.

From the post: "Laurie Penny has an easy answer to any claims that any of this is feminists’ fault:
Feminism, however, is not to blame for making life hell for “shy, nerdy men”. Patriarchy is to blame for that.

I say: why can’t it be both?

Patriarchy is yet another motte and bailey trick.

The motte is that patriarchy is the existence of different gender roles in our society and the ways in which they are treated differently.

The bailey is that patriarchy is men having power over women."

deti said...

What I found interesting (H/T Hollenhund) was the furious blogswarm response. Who the fuck cares what some obscure computer science professor says about what happened to him in seventh grade on some thread on an obscure blog in an even more obscure comment? Amanda Marcotte does. Jessica Valenti does. Laurie Penny does.

So feminists now have to go digging and scraping, looking for ideological enemies under every rock, in every nook and cranny and crevice?

Every last bit of opposition to feminism must be stamped out. What should be clear, though, is that rejection of it will come at a cost. Who knows what will happen professionally and academically to Scott Aaronson because he talked about his experience on his blog? Yeah. Ask Larry Summers about that.

Dexter said...

Every last bit of opposition to feminism must be stamped out.

This process will never end, because where opposition does not actually exist, it will be invented.

grendel said...

Because Marxism is about the struggle. Like the amoeba dividing again and again, Marxists can divide any group into victims and abusers over and over again. So the struggle can never end, comrade.

toadbile said...

I thought it was a satire of the usual whine of gay folks:
"I cannot be myself and must hide my desires and the doctor cannot help me."

Anonymous said...


learn the pattern. it's a another variant of entryism; the feminazis long since took over what was once a legitimate struggle for legal personhood, i.e. the right to equal protection under law, and have flogged it for all it is worth. but people are generally still fair-minded enough to think that feminism in its historical garb is simply fair play and therefore they remain sympathetic.

The reality is that the horse is long dead, and nothing now but a maggot-riddled corpse.

Sanne said...

They deleted all the responses to the original thread at some feminist outlet which didn´t toe the party line. Can´t tolerate anyone disagreeing, obviously. It´s a pity, because some of the responses were truly hilarious.

Doom said...

Don't debate it, or even really attack it. I simply ignore it and say what I believe. I've heard gasps from women who seemingly disapprove. Most remain to... hear more. Every time they bring something stupid up, just ignore it and talk right over it, not even arguing. "Women are just as valuable to the workplace as men.", you might hear, for example. Just say women are only valuable as wives and mothers, anything else is pretty much a waste of their social and cultural value. Do so with a smile. Tell them, perhaps, that... yeah... reality may seem to suck. But the workplace sucks more, since it is filled with mostly men, and women who can't find a man who will give them a kingdom of their own. Bitter place for real women, the workplace. Still, if that's all they can do, perhaps you have some sympathy for them.

Yes, that was a pre-recorded conversation... with a female biology professor, and her husband. The looks and gasps and such. He ended up being a rather decent friend, and she ended up quite enthralled. Not that I cared, I was just... talking. Oh, I suggested that for women who honestly can't get that... that is, historically... what nunneries are for. Women, I do believe and have said, are a net drain on productivity. *gasp*

If you debate, or attack, you give them room to grab a position, a defense, and offer up resistance. If you just go, there is no room to hide or set up a defense. Nowhere to run. If done right, they can't run fast enough because you have owned well beyond their little debate and fallback positions they reserve for weak men and each other. If you realize, and you should, that you are correct, there is no need to give anything. It's like talking to a child who believes in unicorns. Don't feed into it at all. You know... if I were still in the business, and back when I was more crude, I think I could have got some of that. She wasn't bad, for her age, either. They like bulls, perhaps especially ones who know their own power, see no need to negotiate, double talk, or surrender anything.

Anonymous said...

"At one point, I actually begged a psychiatrist to prescribe drugs that would chemically castrate me (I had researched which ones), because a life of mathematical asceticism was the only future that I could imagine for myself."

That seems pretty extreme, though I can somewhat see the logic in it. I wonder how common this is?

Speaking as an ex-Omega, I'd say yes, especially if the Omega in question is a feminist, which I imagine would be sure to close off the Way of Sigma and nail the door shut. I was never feminist myself, simply clueless and confused, but sometimes when I was more depressed I would flirt with the idea. I was also involved for a while with MGTOW, which is another reason I insist that MGTOWs are almost always Gammas and Omegas.

Robert What? said...

I think we need to thank shrill harpies like Marcotte for inadvertently waking up more and more men.

JimH said...

I, too, used to pray to be 'relieved' of my natural urges, because I had no way whatever of satisfying them, though I never went as far as to ask for it from pills. I was an Omega's Omega, and feminism had little if anything to do with it - more a question of being utterly out of it right from the beginning. A therapist suspects ritual abuse, with the prime suspects being Rosicrucians who called themselves 'white witches'. Doesn't solve anything, but it does explain a bit.

I was lucky - I had a love-at-first-sight event, and haven't looked back since (though learning about Game, and praying together, has helped my marriage no end).

Anonymous said...

Ditto the bit about Omega preference for castration, but weakly because I've always been pretty asexual so it seems to bother me less.

Anonymous said...

Interestingly, this doesn't seem to preclude me from Omega rage sessions, but I don't hate women because they are more or less invisible to me outside of anthropological study.

Retrenched said...

Feminists: "Hitting on girls is objectification! Putting your arm around them at the movies is sexual assault! Trying to steal a kiss from them is rape!"

15-year old beta nerd: "Okay, I won't do any of those things."


Feminists: "Check it out, this guy is 25 and still a virgin! LOL what a loser"

Cybro said...

Men and the Church should never tolerate Feminism or Feminists? Hmm... Sounds very much like MGTOW.

Markku said...

No, that wouldn't be men going their own way, it would be men kicking bad people out. Harder to do? Yes. Impossible? Could be. I don't know. But it's NOT the same strategy.

To get started, however, you could find a feminist and make him/her feel unwelcome today. Do your good deed of the day, let God worry about everyone else doing theirs. If they don't, well, at least your hands are clean.

CostelloM said...

This broadcasts to everyone loud and clear that it is pointless to placate this beast. Just like in prison you *WILL* have to fight. It doesn't matter if you win or lose, whether you're right or wrong, eloquent or not, approach it like a honey badger around a lion and his kill. Walk right up and start eating and stand your f***ing ground regardless. You'll get bit but that's going to happen anyway. Spin round and bite back. If you have a dick your in this fight and either you get slaughtered cowering in the corner or you get slaughtered on the battlefield. Die standing up. Look them in the eyes and admit proudly that you want to f**k women and wear it like a badge of honor - you do no good for yourself removing this badge at all, ever.

On a completely different topic I'm proud? to say I did put one of our hosts posts into practice. Recently was given the "lets be friends" speech. Severe language barrier present so I'll stroke my ego about this being the the reason but my response was as advised "Not looking for a friend - good luck finding someone you think is better suited to you".in my best Mandarin over text. Delete WeChat contact so no back peddling on my part possible. The journey away from betadom is long....

Retrenched said...

Remember when Ezra Klein of said he wanted a world in which men were afraid? These are the kinds of men such a world creates.

Markku said...

Here's my thinking on the prison thing.

What I should do is find the biggest, baddest, most evil guys there, point to them and say "I will win you, you and you to Christ."

But what if I didn't believe it? Well, then I'd deserve what comes next, due to my unbelief. I wouldn't have been the Christian I needed to be - that was required of me, and which I knew about in advance.

BUT, that is a problem in the here and now. It merely realizes itself in that moment. But realize or not, the sin of unbelief was there. So, come prison or not, I have to concentrate on the faith issue, right here, right now. Prison is totally irrelevant to that fact. Either way, I will end up paying for the sin, though the payment may look different.

Unknown said...

The perception of women here is so skewed; the lack of empathy is mind boggling. Has it ever occurred to men who feel this way that young girls experience the same sort of shame over their sexual desires? Most girls long to explore their sexuality just as boys do, but they too are afraid. They are afraid of giving in and becoming a "slut" and they are just as afraid of resisting and being a "tease" or a "prude".

The answer to all of this angst is simple. If you are a man making advances towards a woman and she says no then you stop. Honestly, when was the last time an everyday, ordinary woman accused you of "microaggressions"? And if you really want sexual politics to end then you should do everything in your power to stop the shaming of women for simply being the sexual creatures we all are.

Markku said...

...and a *woosh* was heard, from thousands of ears suddenly perking up.

"I can haz field day?"

Post a Comment