Friday, September 11, 2015

Delta Man: Generations

There’s no doubt about it, society is going through a radical change being driven by the sexual revolution. It’s destructive to the very fabric of our society and destroys health, families, marriages, and children.

So what to do?

You must change your thinking to generations. I’m assuming that whomever you are reading this feel like you have something positive to contribute to society and that your ideas are important however small. Think back at how you got here and you might know a story or two about the terrible hardships your family line went through to get you to where you are today. My own family left a small country in Europe over 100 years ago and lived in poverty in the United States for a generation. My grandmother almost died when she was baby and if she had, well I wouldn’t be writing this.

Perhaps you don’t know a specific story about your family, but I guarantee you that your family tree was down to a few weak branches at some point over the last thousand years. Mothers dying in childbirth, fathers dying of diseases and war, your distant relatives living in poverty and starvation, but yet here you are today. Some were scoundrels and some were saints but they are all part of your family tree. They gave it all so you could be here reading this.

But if you care about restoring Western Civilization, or at least salvaging what can be held on to then checking out isn’t helping and pessimism is worse. If you decide to never have children, never date another woman, never to contribute, that’s your right, but if you choose to give up your family tree only because there are too many women of low moral character running around for your taste I think you are betraying thousands of years of work it took to get you here.

I realize it’s bad and it’s getting worse, but nothing good in life is ever easy. Even if you find a good woman and have children the battle for them will take place for their rest of your life and you might lose one to the culture at large. Sometimes the weeds choke out the plants as they grow, but does that mean one quits?  I won’t and my ancestors didn't either.

You don't have to get married and have children to help either though that is the largest contribution you can make. You can support those who do, or save your money to leave a legacy to good organizations which fight the good fight.

If you decide that it ends with you then at least do it quietly and don’t discourage those who continue to fight even if you don't want to lift a finger to help. Don’t shoot the guys in the back who are trying their best to save what they can, raise families, and to teach traditional religion and values. Don’t tell them all of the ways they will fail, their wives are all adulterers, their daughters will all be sluts, and their sons will be weak men who lick the boots of feminists. Those things might happen, but why trumpet the tragedies? Instead give them a quiet nod of respect for being fighters and then go about your pleasures until your time ends or you change your mind. This is the long war, one of civilization against barbarism.

52 comments:

entropyismygod said...

Women will become better when conditions force them to become that way and not one second before. Ignore them now, in the height of their pride and arrogance and if you so choose take them in when they are starving and thankful for food. Or laugh at them and enjoy the living embodiment of justice.

Laguna Beach Fogey said...

"You can support those who do, or save your money to leave a legacy to good organizations which fight the good fight."

These are good ideas. For a long time I've thought about starting an investment fund or charity fund to assist young White families--and only White families--with expenses or to buy land or a home. There's also a White dating start-up I've been mulling over the past year or so.

Remo - Vile Faceless Minion #99 said...

Can we advise those who do choose to go this route to at least have a second passport and escape plan? If you are going in against these kinds of odds where it is statistically likely you'll end up a slave it seems wise to have an out just in case. Other non U.S. nations are not as brutal with the child maintenance and most don't jail fathers for years on end if they lose their jobs and can't find another one. The U.S. is pretty much a stand alone with this policy and if you only have their passport well... alas for good intentions. I would point out that being able to combo breaker your potential ex's super move of automatically making you a slave is likely to boost your confidence and make you more alpha in dealing with her thus lessening the chance the of the worst happening in the first place.

Res Ipsa said...

Delta Man good post.

Deuteronomy 6

Durandel Almiras said...

Second what Res Ipsa said. Thanks for writting this DM

Matamoros said...

Indeed, we must continue to marry and have children while protecting ourselves as much as possible from modern culture and feminism. Otherwise, there will be no future for Western Man.

Just as the world hates everything good and holy, Western Man is at the top of their list, just after the Church, because Western Man is God's special creature gifted with creativity, curiosity and will to power. These must NOT perish!

Updated; LP999/S.I.G. Burn'in Up! said...

Extremely edifying and grounding. DM reminds me of the good, regardless of personal hurts or losses.

jiffybarracks said...

"There's some good in this world, Mr. Frodo, and it's worth fighting for." -Samwise Gamgee

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k6C8SX0mWP0

One of the last great examples of a high Delta in film was Sean Astin as Samwise Gamgee. Deltas could learn a lot from that (fictional) example.

Jack Amok said...

If you decide that it ends with you then at least do it quietly and don’t discourage those who continue to fight even if you don't want to lift a finger to help.

If you think it's impossible and the forces of darkness are too powerful to be beaten, then perhaps it's not a very good idea to attack a person brave (or crazy) enough to stand and fight against such odds.

The ones who've chosen to fight have chosen to fight against forces far more powerful than you, so if you make yourself a nuisance to them, don't be surprised if they turn around and flatten you. After all, a small victory now and then is good for morale.

ray said...

You don't have to get married and have children to help either though that is the largest contribution you can make."


That could come as a surprise to God! considering Christ, prophets etc.


"If you decide that it ends with you then at least do it quietly and don’t discourage those who continue to fight even if you don't want to lift a finger to help"



Man up and get married, or be useless? :O) Civilization vs barbarism in the West isn't where the war started.


Man up and oppose the powers that oppress you, that demean fatherhood and sonship, that set females in rulership over your families and nations. So that others after you can have real families, and boys can have dads, and most important, so Jesus might be less upset.

God may or may not call a man to husbandry. Scripture doesn't say we save Civilization. It says we have only a little power, the nations and peoples get worse, and then Jeshua returns. He says well I am going to trample you, however those nations and individuals that restored fathers to families, not so much.

Those are among the ones he'll take for his Kingdom, I'd think.

As he showed, fatherhood is more than biology. It assumes leadership, including leadership of the nuclear and extended family. Not subjection to wife and state. Fatherhood is incompatible with modern matriarchies, especially in America. Hopefully some individual families are resisting the powers and culture. But mother-right is the norm, at least in US.

You advise men to marry and procreate in secular gynarchies. You want to be in a Healthy Civilization but instead you're in a War Zone. The Fifties were an oasis, not a continent.

Boys need dads and healthy (non-feminist) nations and environments. Christians and Hebrews, work towards the Kingdom.

Jennie WDrake said...

Clearly identified based planes like this and these are also very important for quality assurance project management and so on so we'll speak in details a boat the waterfall model we'll 70-412 see what our troops physic what are the different steps in what sequence that carried out and what are the deliverance that mean clearly define this important process of.

http://www.testkiz.com/exam-70-412

Jack Amok said...

That could come as a surprise to God! considering Christ, prophets etc.

That's some impressive snowflaking there ray. But let's go with it - the only people who get to argue against Delta Man's advice are Messiahs and Prophets.

Which one are you?

Robert What? said...

All very valid points. As an older married guy I chuckle when I read comments about how marriage really works from guys who sound like they've never even been in a LTR

But I think that if a man does decide to go down the road of wife and family, he should do so with his eyes open. Otherwise modern life may roll over him like a tank. I went into marriage and family with eyes wide shut and have suffered for it.

julix12 said...

Download DomiNations Hack free Here:

http://www.soulgaminghacks.com/dragon-mania-legends-hack/

http://www.soulgaminghacks.com/dragon-mania-legends-hack/

http://www.soulgaminghacks.com/dragon-mania-legends-hack/

Laramie Hirsch said...

@ Laguna Beach Fogey

So, I take it you don't like us fellas who marry Asians and have a bunch of kids?

I've enjoyed your posts over at Heartiste (and the occasional one at Aurini's), by the way.

rumpole5 said...

Good post. I have been doing up a family tree, and I am amazed at how many children my mother's Anabaptist forebearers produced, generation after generation. Every couple had 6 to ten children for 150-200 years. I also noticed that this spirit seemed to drain out these folks around the turn of the century (1900). I wonder what happened? I didn't produce my one son until age 38, and although he has done well (devout Christian, National Merit Scholar, now 3rd year Med Schl), I often feel that I could and should have done more. If you are young, consider now your connection to the future. It belongs to those who show up.

ray said...


"Which one are you?"


I'm your daddy, Jack. You know, the one who doesn't wear kneepads for the site owner?

. . . whose latest Command was that manning up, marrying, and having kids was the 'largest contribution we could make'. I pointed out persons who didn't marry and procreate, yet made large contributions anyway. Apparently the truth enrages you.

Neither you nor Vox chose to refute my point, nor attempted to argue Vox's point, which can't be argued from the looks of it. So all a little bitch like you has left is personal attack/destruction -- very much the SJW tactic, but but but, Jack Amok is on the RIGHT SIDE, he's the GOOD GUY . . . so being a punk coward is o.k.

Jack Amok said...

Yes Ray, and I asked which of those categories you fell into. You don't fall into any of them, so Delta Man's advice is for regular, run of the mill guys like you. You're not a messiah, you're not a prophet, you're not a George Washington. You're not going to make any of the contributions those guys could make, so you fall squarely into the category of guys Delta Man was writing for. Raising a few decent kids is a far bigger contribution that you - Ray - could make any other way. Certainly a bigger contribution that whinny bitching at better men or courageously making a stand by taking your balls and going home.

tacticaltoolbox said...

Well, considering I'm just a nobody, I was still able to manage keeping a daughter from any relationships with boys until I got her married off. It took me four years to find her a husband. And it was an arranged marriage in that the groom's father and I worked out most of the details before the couple were approached and assented. They had no romantic relationship at the time of the wedding, knew of each other for about five months prior to proposal, and had met about six or seven times. I had only met with the family three or four times before the father and I started talking.

If I can do it, I think a lot of you guys can, too. God is faithful.

Karren WSisco said...

This device seemed to be presented in a low price in exchange pertaining to my own trustworthy and also third Addium party assessment. This is a really awesome supplement pertaining to target and total clarity.

http://www.optimalstackfacts.org/addium/

Artisanal Toad said...

Deltaman, if you’re out to save Western Civilization you need a family, a clan and a tribe. If you’re like most, you don’t have a family, much less a clan or a tribe. It will not be nationstates that “fix” western civilization, it will be people who govern themselves making decisions based on what is in the best interests of the people, not the rulers and their sycophants. The nation of Israel was made up of 12 tribes, and they came from one family. It was Jacob (Israel) who with his two wives and two concubines fathered the tribes. He lived in a lawless time when the local ‘government’ could be as much a threat as any gang of bandits. It was not for no reason that his grandfather Abraham had 318 men of his household trained with the sword and spear.
Western Civilization will not be saved until the foundation is restored. That foundation rests on two levels. The core is family, clan and tribe while the cover and seal is the church. I’m talking about a real church- the body of believers –not a trumped up corporation masquerading as a church. Faithful families receive their support and protection from clan and tribe. In return they are to properly teach and train their children, funneling them into the church.

1. You need the right marriage. Yes, people can make a contribution in other areas but the maximum impact will come through the process of raising children and inculcating your values in their minds. I know for a fact there are pretty, young, conservative Christian, homeschooled virgins out there that grew up in a homesteading environment in which their mother trained them well. These women do exist and we even have a special term to describe them: unicorns. The problem is being forced to accept a woman’s word with respect to her sexual history, among other things. Fortunately there is a unicorn test available, it’s a book called “Created To Be His Helpmeet” by Debi Pearl. The book needs to be handed to the prospect by a neutral third party (female) who would be able to solicit opinions, comments and impressions later.

2. I’m sure plenty will disagree with me (I don’t agree with everything in the book) but it comes closer to nailing the Bible’s instructions for women and laying them out in a thoughtful and helpful manner than any I’ve ever seen. It is guaranteed to have feminists and SJW’s shrieking in horror and any young woman who can embrace what that book has to say is worthy of serious consideration. Likewise, any woman who disagrees “I don’t think that’s right” and “I don’t interpret it that way” is telling you in no uncertain terms to hit the next button. Marriage is a serious business. The book received a firestorm of criticism from feminists and some pastors went so far as to tell their congregation not to read the book.

3. The purpose of marriage is procreation and I speak from experience when I say that it’s easier to raise eight kids than to raise two. It sounds counter-intuitive but it’s a fact because in the process of civilizing the little monsters diligent parents engage in a three-part process that can be described as training, discipline and tying heartstrings. As the older children are trained they help train and supervise the younger ones. “Traditional” people think only of discipline, would spend far more time engaged in training their dog than their child and tying heartstrings happens (if it happens) accidently if at all.

4. The greatest influence any person will ever have over anyone else is the influence you will with your own children, but that’s a long, hard struggle and the cost must be considered well before stepping up to the plate on this one. There is a dearth of helpful information out there on raising children because liberals and progressives have perverted the truth and watered it down with pablum. I can think of only a few good books out there that are helpful to parents in teaching them how to do a good job raising children.

Artisanal Toad said...

Response to Deltaman, continued.

5. The number one resource for raising children is a little book called "To Train Up A Child" by Michael and Debi Pearl, along with the follow-up books "No Greater Joy" I, II, and III. You'd be amazed at how much resentment you can cause by having happy, cheerfully obedient children. Most parents are raising spoiled brats but they don't realize how bad a job they're doing until they get around kids that have been raised right.

6. Homeschool your children. Two words: Robinson Curriculum. Go to their website and read their story (link is on the left side) robinsoncurriculum.com Read "The Underground History of American Education" by John Taylor Gatto (free on his website johntaylorgatto.com ) to find out what both public and private schools do to children. Get over being angry at what they did to you and then vow to ensure it never happens to your children.

7. Teach life skills as an integrated part of the homeschool curriculum, starting with communication. Start with Spanish and the entire family learn how to speak Spanish. After that I'd go with either German or Russian. There's no reason not to raise tri-lingual kids. Every child should learn to play a musical instrument. I suggest guitar for the boys and piano for the girls to start with. Get together with some other homeschooling families and hire a ballroom dance instructor.

8. Teach the kids how to sell. There are lots of great courses in salesmanship and it's a critical skill in any business.

9. Commit to taking control of your food supply. Grow a garden and can your produce. Raise livestock. Watch some of Joel Salidin's UTube videos and get inspired. Plant and animal husbandry is one area in which the children can learn as they grow up and get exercise too.

10. Instead of consumer sports, focus on cycling, swimming, weight training, BJJ and boxing. All this crap about how sports teaches teamwork is a bunch of hokum, a useful lie that people want to believe. Cycling, swimming and weight training are exercise regimens that can be done at virtually all ages, have an extremely low likelihood of causing injury and are also activities that can be done as a family. You’ll do more for your teenage boys by teaching them how to fight and win than encouraging them to suit up and see how many times the leather ball can be stuffed through a hoop or carried over a goal line.

11. Teach the kids to shoot and get them started in competitions with rifle, shotgun and pistol. It's a good life skill and if they have some talent there's money in it. Shooting is part skill (learned) and part talent (innate) but as time passes the number of people with real talent never learn they have a talent for it because they never get involved. Different classes of shooting attract different groups of people. Rifle, pistol and tactical shotgun attract military, LEO and thrill junkies. Trap and Skeet, OTOH, is dominated by a far more genteel and wealthy cadre of shooters. Those ranges and competitions are an excellent place to round out your rolodex with very useful contacts. I know a guy that got dragged around to competitions as a kid and started competing in the 28 gauge sets when he was 12 years old. Quite a few of the regulars literally watched him grow up as he showed up at the competitions every three to six months. Given that everyone else was double or triple his age, everyone knew who he was and he was able to walk up to anyone on the range, start a conversation and they were pleased to answer his questions. People who would never be approachable under any other circumstance, like the president of the Olin corporation.

Artisanal Toad said...

Response to Deltaman, continued

12. Philosophy, part 1. Education, not entertainment. Get rid of the television. Take a hard look at computer activity. How a man spends his time says a lot about his priorities in life and children learn by osmosis. By homeschooling the children you have lots of options "normal" parents don't. One of them is control. There is no reason any reasonably intelligent child can't have a bachelors degree by the time they're 18. Check out the University of the People, which charges $100 to grade the final exam for each course. They offer degrees in Computer Science and Business. http://uopeople.edu/

13. Philosophy, part 2. Tools, not toys. An example: I once bought a house that didn't have any trimwork on the inside. After getting some bids I decided I'd learn finish carpentry. The first thing I did was buy some books and after a month of reading I decided on an arts and craft style. I had a couple of long conversations with a friend who was a cabinet maker and took his advice on what tools to buy and how to set up a workshop in the basement. I bought rough-sawn wood and went to work. I invested about $8k and a year later had a nice woodworking shop, a trim and finish package that would have cost a minimum of $20k and a new skill, finish carpentry. OTOH, I could have spent $4k and had a crew come out and trim the house out in a week with the crappy-looking Home Depot type molding.

14. Philosophy, part 3. A job is a stepping stone to being a business owner. I had a neighbor with 6 kids and they liked deer hunting. He and his boys would get 5 or 6 deer every season and fill the freezer. They had the butchering process down to a science but they always heard lots of complaints from other hunters about cleaning and butchering the deer. He talked it over with his boys and then spent about $15k installing a small building, a couple of old 40 foot reefer trailers and a bunch of industrial meat processing equipment. He takes his vacation during deer season and they charge $75 to $150 to turn a deer into sausage, depending on what the customer wants done. His boys raise 25-30 hogs and a few steers every year. The hogs get butchered during deer season and the pork is added to the venison for the premium sausage deals. He built an addition onto his shop and his oldest daughter has a taxidermy business running out of that. Last I heard he was processing about 400 deer every season and has a waiting list of people who want to be customers. The only reason he keeps his regular job is for the health insurance and because he likes it.

15. These are the kinds of decisions/commitments that will cause friction but if you combine that with a red-pill frame, you and your children will *really* stand apart, which brings us back to the family / clan / tribe perspective. For most people a "commitment to excellence" is just a BS business slogan. If you live it as a lifestyle and demand it from your family the effect will be noticeable. Your family will be respected by some (usually senior citizens) but mostly resented by others because you make them look bad.

16. Unfortunately, the weak link is usually the wife and even if you find a unicorn she will be under constant attack and it’s a fact that over time people change. There aren't a lot of women out there that are willing to embrace having lots of children, living a homesteader lifestyle, homeschooling the children. You can go right down the list I just wrote and if your wife isn't seriously committed to accomplishing those goals she will find innumerable ways to undermine your efforts. Her solipsism is telling her "it's all about me, me, me" and the herd will reinforce that, telling her she should be "doing something" with her life instead of managing the home and raising children. If she’s even the slightest bit resentful of the family being “different” then her hypergamy will tear that up.

Artisanal Toad said...

Comment to Deltaman, continued

17. A man is known by the company he keeps but a woman's behavior can be predicted by the company she keeps. If her friends are all homeschooling SAHM's a lot of the attacks will be avoided, but marital problems and divorce are contagious. The worst influence will probably come from the church, which is filled with feminists and gamma white knights. This is a catch-22 situation.

18. Women are creatures of the herd and the closer the relationship she has with other women the more influence they will have on her. By taking a radically different lifestyle direction being different from the herd will be profoundly uncomfortable and your unicorn will be more susceptible to attack. That will translate to resentment of the husband leading the family in a different direction, which will lead to marital discord, which will her to become more emotionally aligned with the herd and more vulnerable to their attacks. It's a death spiral and attempts to mitigate the problem will make it worse.

19. Attempts to isolate her from the herd will be perceived as controlling and interpreted by everyone around her as a warning flag that she's in an abusive relationship. At that point the attacks will seriously increase. If your wife is a homeschooling SAHM she's got two groups of women to deal with: the other moms in the homeschool group and the women in church. I know a couple of guys who stopped going to church in favor of worship at home because . I know one guy that started his own church in order to control the influence of the herd and another guy that switched churches and essentially browbeat and argued his way into the position of pastor (Pentecostal church). But there’s another way.

20. Ideally what you want is for the herd to support your marriage. We know the existing herd (unless it’s a herd of unicorns) will be actively opposed to a patriarchal marriage. So, one solution is to segregate her from the herd and provide her with a herd that’s supportive of a patriarchal marriage. The Amish do this by ostracizing everyone that’s not Amish because the Amish understand the concept of family, clan and tribe. They’re successful with this model because they enforce the rules. Step out of line and they’ll shun you. But we have to learn this stuff all over again.

21. There’s one other way to create a herd for your wife that will support her marriage because it’s in their best interests to do so, and it’s fairly simple: marry multiple women. An old Rabbi was once asked what the ideal number of wives was. He thought about it, then said

One is insufficient,
Two and they fight.
Three, they take sides,
So four is just right.

22. From the standpoint of creating a herd for her that supports the marriage, this is the ideal way to do so. But, if you’re like most people, you’re thinking that having more than one wife is immoral. No, it isn’t. You’re probably thinking it’s illegal. Depending on how you do it, it could be, but if done correctly it isn’t illegal at all. Depending on how much the opinions of others impact your decisions and choices, the most significant objection may be that it’s weird, that people just don’t do that. In that respect, you’re right. People don’t like to change and people don’t want to feel like they’re different, because most people have a desire/need for acceptance and validation.

23. Every faithful defender of monogamy will follow that script. First comes the claim of immorality, then illegality, then the appeal to the tradition of monogamy. It’s like clockwork. After that come the rationalizations of why polygyny would be bad and the first strawman created is the assumption that everyone will do it and that will exclude a buttload of gammas and omegas who will not have a shred of a chance to find a wife. Then comes the conflation of capitalism, Christianity and monogamy as if these are the three legs of the stool upon which western civilization was founded and by which it flourished.

Artisanal Toad said...

Comment to Deltaman, continued

24. There is (not surprisingly) a word to describe such arguments: Twaddle.

25. In order for monogamy to be a successful and beneficial model for marriage, certain conditions must be present and you could say these are the assumptions on which monogamy as a concept is based.

The first is a patriarchal system and by that I mean the social, cultural and legal systems must recognize and support the legitimacy of the Biblical instruction that the husband is the head of the wife and the wife is to submit to her husband.
The second is the incentive system has to reward staying married and punish leaving (abandoning) the marriage. That incentive system must function and must have the real ability to reward and punish.
The third is a moral framework that states not only is marriage beneficial to those married, but also speaks for the innocent children who were not given a choice about joining the family and arguably have the right to an intact family within which to grow up.

26. So, where are we today?
Strike 1. Today, the patriarchal view that the husband is the head of the wife and she is to submit to him in everything has been utterly rejected socially, culturally and legally.
Strike 2. The incentive system surrounding marriage has been reversed and now rewards (women) leaving the marriage and penalizes (men) for entering marriage.
Strike 3. The current moral framework says marriage is unnecessary, as are fathers. Thus, marriage can legitimately be seen as harmful to men and the conversion of the marriage system into a child support system identified as a scheme to transfer wealth from men to women by destroying the family using the children as an excuse.

27. Given that the term “marriage” denotes a sense of permanence and commitment, it could reasonably be said that marriage as it was traditionally known no longer exists and the current state of affairs is designed to benefit women at the expense of men and their children. Without a rather violent period of civil unrest and/or civil war in which women are placed in real and imminent danger, thereby needing the protective strength of men, it is not politically conceivable that any of these three current conditions will change because women have the right to vote.

28. Ergo, there are no political solutions, there are only personal solutions. The one personal solution I have found that meets all the parameters of the problem, solves them in the most basic way and does not create further problems is known as polygyny (many wives).

29. Polygyny is a patriarchal structure, by design, placing the husband in the dominant position and forcing the wives to compete for his attention by giving him what he wants. Polygyny negates the tools women use in monogamous marriage to manipulate their husbands, such as withholding sex, nagging, passive-aggressive manipulation and bratty, childish behavior. In doing so it drastically reduces the power of women in the relationship. Given the thorough rejection of patriarchy in our modern society, culture and legal system polygyny is an ideal way to reintroduce the patriarchy or at least preserve a vestige for some future time.

Artisanal Toad said...

Comment to Deltaman, continued

30. Of particular interest to Christian men, polygyny is a legitimate Biblical form of marriage not recognizable as a marriage by the state. Not recognizable as a marriage means there can be no divorce and thus no cash and prizes for Cupcake on the way out. The written marital contract is a binding contract that nails down a lot of stuff that would normally be left up to the court and believe it or not, people can waive their rights in equitable contract and be required to perform under those circumstances. The incentive for men to remain in such a marriage is a reasonable assurance he will get all the sex he wants, won’t be divorce raped and will have the best chance of getting custody of the children if one of the women decides she wants to leave. The man who chose to leave the marriage would legitimately be the target of child support actions by all the mothers of his children with disastrous financial consequences.

31. The benefits to wives in a polygynous marriage are multiple. First, one wife can work full time in the home caring for children and the home. Food is cooked, laundry and cleaning are taken care of so no chores to catch up on when the others get home. Other wives would be free to work outside the home and with multiple wage earners the household income would be much higher than any one of the women could hope to achieve as a single mother or as a wife in a monogamous marriage. The women can have their emotional needs met by their fellow wives (friends, confidants, drama partners) while the husband stays aloof and dominant (more attractive). The wives are forced to compete for their husband’s attention (women love to chase and compete) and that too makes him more attractive.

32. With children by all the wives, any particular wife who desired to leave would have the problem that courts frown upon separating siblings and in leaving she would be a single mom while the husband is still presiding over an intact household with a SAHM and a much higher standard of living than a single mom could provide. This means the husband will probably get custody and the mom ordered to pay child support. In addition to the likelihood of losing custody of her children she also faces losing contact with the other children of the marriage with whom she has probably bonded. With much to lose and little or nothing to gain, the motivation for frivolous divorce disappears.

33. From a moral perspective, polygyny reinstitutes a durable framework of marriage that resists the effort to convert it to a child support system. It gives the women what they want, which is an attractive alpha husband (even if he is only situational alpha because of the structure), a high standard of living and far more likelihood of achieving a higher quality of life than as a single mother. The issue of female emotional support must not be discounted here because the women in question have their incentives aligned with each other because they are all married to the same man. Thus, they become their own herd with its own goals and objectives.

34. Lest this sound too good to be true, there are dangers and only certain men can realistically be cat herders. At least in the beginning. Rock solid frame and state control are required along with a thorough understanding of the dual FI mating strategy, female solipsism, hypergamy and their endless craving for attention and drama. Tight game and the ability to effortlessly pass shit-tests is an absolute requirement. After that a great deal of importance must be placed on the written contract of marriage, because if it ever starts to fall apart that contract is the safety net.

Artisanal Toad said...

Comment to Deltaman, continued

35. No blue-pill, supplicating, pedestalizing, feminist man can possibly handle multiple wives, but fortunately very few women would desire to give up their monogamish power and enter into an overtly patriarchal marriage with such a wimp. The ideal candidate is a man that’s put in his time maximizing his value. He’s strong, healthy, fit, masculine, financially established and possessed of a plan with a future. I know a bunch of poly families and the men are mostly lower beta or high delta with a good number of sigmas thrown in as well, but what they’ve all got in common is they’re rock solid. I’ve yet to meet a guy I’d term a natural alpha with more than one wife.

36. One of the critical points of the marriage (cohabitation) contract is the checks and balances. By creating a structure that falls outside the system there must be methods of dispute resolution that are fair and explicitly spelled out in the contract. There must be some authority that can be appealed to in case of need but the goal of the structure and the contract is to keep that authority out of the hands of the state. This is where the tragic lack of churches will become apparent. Scripture explicitly lays out the authority of the church leadership to function in the capacity of an ecclesiastical court but given what I know of most churches, the leadership consists of blue-pill feminist SJW’s. Even if they can’t admit it, all one has to do is scratch the surface and the stench oozes out.

37. Polygyny is the ultimate in black-knighting the domestic violence, divorce and child-support industry because it turns the “rules” on their head. Currently the idea is the women are right and the men are wrong. What happens if a wife turns out to be a bit bat-shit crazy and foolishly dials 911? The cops are trained to favor the women in DV situations, but how do they handle a situation in which one woman is claiming abuse and the husband and two other female inhabitants of the home all say she’s lying? Family courts have been able to develop useful metrics in deciding cases. Often it’s as simple as looking down from the bench at the parties involved. “You have the tits? You win. You have the penis? You pay. Next!” Faced with a man and multiple women the entire process bogs down due to the complexity of the situation.

38. The marital contract can easily be arranged to have all parties to the marriage contribute all their property to a trust with the husband the chief trustee assisted by the wives and the children are the beneficiaries. The terms of the contract state that property granted into the trust cannot be removed from the trust in the event a party to the marriage decides to leave. We know that courts routinely invade trusts and seize assets but this situation is more analogous to a commune than a marriage. The desire of a family court to give custody of the children to the woman would be confronted with the fact that it really is in the best interests of the child to remain with their father and their other moms. Violating a husbands’ rights is nothing new for family courts but breaking a complex polygynous marital trust would involve balancing the rights of the husband as well as the other women and children in the marriage. In the end the path of least resistance would be the woman walking away without her children or anything else. That may sound rough but incentives matter.

Artisanal Toad said...

Comment to Deltaman, final:

39. It may sound counter-intuitive, but I believe a large part of the success the poly families I’m acquainted with have achieved is as a result of their social ostracism, especially by the church. Being rejected and in some cases shunned stimulates a powerful group cohesion, an “us against the world” mentality. This could degenerate into pathology and become co-dependency, but for the ability to meet with and communicate with others who are in the same situation. As the family grows (and with multiple fertile wives it will grow fast) the focus becomes more on family, but also outward as the result of the children and their activities. Still, in the final analysis the social ostracism by the church is a good thing because it insulates the wives from the pressure to conform to the feminist herd.

40. Western Civilization will not be saved until the political will to save it is regenerated. At this point there are no political solutions, only individual solutions. The state and social institutions have been overrun by rabid feminist SJW’s, the church has all but disappeared, replaced by corporations created by and responsible to the state and the foundational supports of traditional marriage are gone.

The first covenant entity God created was the family and the governance model was family, clan and tribe before the people foolishly decided they wanted a king like the nations around them. Before the state can be subdued and put back in its place there must be a rebuilding of the family, clan and tribe structure and that starts with family, to whom God said “Be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it, take dominion over it.”

ray said...

Jack Shit: Apparently you are obsessed with me being The Messiah, though nobody ever has mentioned that except. . . well you, J.S.

All this stalking, all this obsession about me. And here, I don't even know who (or what, beyond a homo) you are. Do you keep a dossier on me, too, boy? In your, uh, Special Room? ;O)


What'd I say that sent you over the edge? The part where I wouldn't condemn the Evil Joos to Holocaust II? (That generated a LOT of rancor! lol). Or the part where I wouldn't go along with hating all the Blacks? Or is it just that I ridicule you boys and your Alpha-Beta Supermarket nonsense? Am I taking teddy bear away from Widdle Jackie? Waaaaaaah!!

If you really think I'm your bitch, well I live in the PNW, and apparently so do you. No need to follow me around and accuse me anonymously. You're a big mouthy stud! You can just drive on over and knock on my door, Jack, and then you can tell me to my face about what a bitch I am. You know. Actually confront someone (and some real danger) for the first time in your life?

Go Hawks! :O)

SirHamster (#201) said...

Deltaman, if you’re out to save Western Civilization you need a family, a clan and a tribe. If you’re like most, you don’t have a family, much less a clan or a tribe.

So you start your walls of text with a false prediction about Deltaman's familial status, demonstrating you 1.) did not care enough to read the series before chiming in; 2.) are a poor predictor.

Why does anyone else care what you say?

Jack Amok said...

Actually confront someone (and some real danger) for the first time in your life?


Tell you what Ray. Do you know where the Aloha Tavern is? It's in Gray's Harbor, about 45 minutes from the nearest police station of any sort. I'll be the 6'4", 250 lb guy wearing a Seahawks #12 jersey. Ask me to buy you a drink.

Delta Man said...

Artisanal Toad,

How did you ever come to the conclusion that dumping a 40+ paragraph stream of consciousness on this blog would be a good idea? Do you do this in person as well to your friends and family?

Artisanal Toad said...

@Deltaman

You obviously asked the question. I provided the answer.

You got a 40 point summary of a presentation I give that deals with the problem you're facing. If your goal is resuscitating western civilization, you need to pay attention. Look at what I wrote line by line and think about it. I gave you the answer. Whether you can accept that is up to you. Yes, it's a lot of information, but this isn't an easy problem to solve. If you think this can be solved with sound bytes on twitter then think again.

But if your complaint is that I provided too much information... what does that say about your argument?

Delta Man said...

Your answer is pure Gamma. The inability to spot a rhetorical question, not noticing it was answered in the same post, the massive dump of info so people think you are oh so intelligent, and finally the smug posturing of superiority that is without warrant. Even your Google+ profile includes horrible misplaced humor at the end which undermines whatever sort of pious genius you want to present yourself as, example: "I like chipmunks but I hate squirels." You didn't spell check squirrels? It's not even funny anyways, but I'm sure you think you are the cleverest person in the room.

See here on the blog about being a Gamma.

Your pontificating and posturing says nothing about my argument, it's irrelevant.

MycroftJones said...

Yeah, polygamy is totally Gamma. Real men love them and leave them. The Bible was written by Gammas, for Gammas. All those righteous men practicing polygamy. God must be a Gamma too, look at the way he forces his beloved servants into polygamy: 2 Samuel 12:8

Artisanal Toad, may I take your 40 points and add them as a chapter in the "Polygamy Handbook". Second edition will be out soon.

MycroftJones said...

Also Artisanal Toad, sounds like we think the exact same way about the logistics of a successful patriarchal marriage. How can we get in touch. I've been mulling over various methods of herd formation. Could use a second brain to bounce ideas off of. Collaborate with.

Artisanal Toad said...

Oh child... you have so much to learn.

You pose the question of saving western civilization and don't like it when you get an answer? If saving western civilization depends on such as you it's already lost. Fortunately, it doesn't.

Your response is indicative of your inability to face reality. Pick any theme out of what I wrote and argue the point... you can't and you didn't . You're left with buthurt. Two months ago I sent a young man into the Marine Corps with an enlistment guarantee. I've been training him for the past 5 years. His folks don't have a lot of money, but a few years ago they paid for the parts and I built him a rifle. I trained him and spotted for him and he won a couple of regional matches. He now has leg points toward his distinguished marksmanship badge. I spoke to a Gunner out at Pendleton and he's got a spot for him at the 1st Mar Div MTU.

But, he's the last. I've got 5 in the pipeline that I don't know what I'm going to do with. This internet thing is pretty wild. Turns out there's a bunch of us out there and we've been talking. You can mark this down as a talking point, but of all the the guys I know that are training kids, none of us are now willing to send them into the armed forces. We're talking about a sea change here, because the united states armed forces are no longer worthy of our trust.

Your desire to save western civilization is laudable, but you're going to need another Charles Martel and I'm here to tell you, the supply line is broken. Pat Tillman was your best hope there but he was murdered. You've probably never been in a firefight, much less a firefight that had blue on blue casualties. In war there are always casualties but three head shots at close range is murder.

And you tell me I'm gamma. Step up to the plate and lets see your creds

ray said...

"It's in Gray's Harbor, about 45 minutes from the nearest police station of any sort."

No, fatboy, I'm not driving hundreds of miles to your titty-bar to kick your cowardly ass.

I will probably head to the OR coast soon, and you can put your heavily muscled, gym-toned, butt-buttered 6' 4", 245 lbs. in your truck and drive down to receive your bitchslapping. It won't be in any public place, either. Genius.

Yeah I was sure terrified to read what a Big Strong He-Man you are, Jack Off! Heck that right there was enough to cow me, oh noes, he says he's Really Really Big. LOL!!! :O)

Delta Man said...

Artisanal Toad,

You are a hopeless idiot. You actually think that dropping 40 points on someone else's blog, insulting one of the writers, demanding engagement on your ideas, and when you don't get it you are winning anything proves you are a Gamma.

You're a crackpot and in no position to demand anything from me, much less my "cred".

Jack Amok said...

Artisana Toad,

Delta Man is right, you're a hopeless idiot, or at least doing a fine impersonation of one.

if you want engagement on something, try this: distill your 40 point list down to the most important two things. What - in your opinion - has to be tackled first. If you can't focus your own thinking, or if you don't think you should, you won't persuade anyone.

And of course I'm not really talking to Toad, because I doubt he's capable of hearing. But the audience might benefit.

Oh, and for Run-away-Ray, of course you're all talk. Just as well, I'm backpacking this weekend so I won't be at the Aloha. If you do somehow make it, ask Buzz to give you a drink on me. He won't, but ask him anyway. And have fun with the hipsters in Lincoln City. Let me know if Kimmie at The Snug still remembers me.

ray said...

I don't know Kimmie because I don't while away my days and nights in titty bars. Like a certain pathetic someone. No wonder you spend all day reading about deltas and gammas. You are one.

I'll be seeing you down the road just the same, Jack. I always do. Better keep that buff-puffing up!

MycroftJones said...

Jack Amok, you are wrong, Artisanal Toad is right. I and many others have tried the "two point summary" in the past. Falls on deaf ears. It is so contrary to what people want to hear, they dismiss it.

Even now, you don't dare critique the actual content of his 40 point post, because it is solid and well thought out. And many others of us have been thinking and reading our Bibles and coming to the same conclusions.

Delta Man: you are being overly defensive. Artisanal Toad's post wasn't an attack on you. It was a continuation and contribution, to develop and add to your post. His 40 point summary is an excellent condensation of much research. Demanding he reduce it to 2 points is stupid. Also, it has been tried before and is useless. Some information is so alien that you just can't spread it with sound bites.

Jack Amok said...

Jack Amok, you are wrong, Artisanal Toad is right. I and many others have tried the "two point summary" in the past. Falls on deaf ears. It is so contrary to what people want to hear, they dismiss it.


No, you are wrong. If you can make a compelling two or three point summary, then someone might be willing to listen to your 40 point thesis. But if you launch into a doorstopper sized manifesto right out of the gate, nobody with any sense has time to listen to it.

The summary doesn't replace the longer argument, it introduces it. And it validates the author. If AT cannot distill his argument, then it's very likely his own thinking is muddled and undeveloped. He needs to spend more time on it so he can distill it.

SirHamster (#201) said...

Even now, you don't dare critique the actual content of his 40 point post, because it is solid and well thought out. And many others of us have been thinking and reading our Bibles and coming to the same conclusions.

Dare? It's noise. It got ignored. The wall of text started off with a false prediction.


It was a continuation and contribution, to develop and add to your post. His 40 point summary is an excellent condensation of much research.

I'm sure the Gammas and Omegas and low Deltas aspiring to develop to the point they can have a single wife are going to be prime candidates for collecting handfuls of wives.

It's an interesting topic and thought experiment, but mostly irrelevant to the daily living of the vast majority of Christians. Given roughly even sex ratios, you're going to build up a social system for polygamy for one generation, and then forced to dispose of excess males or jettison the system in the very next generation.

If we end up in a system where male life expectency is low enough to make it inevitable and continuous ... the males who "win" are going to be the ones who focused on developing into strong men, not the ones fantaisizing about their future harem.

Conscientia Republicae said...

Toad, tell me more about the young man you mentored on marksmanship and now has leg points for his distinguished marksman badge AND is headed straight for the MTU at Pendleton. I think you're full of shit.

MycroftJones said...

Jack Amok, AT wasn't muddled. His first 2 paragraphs summarized the topic pretty well. It looked to me like his opening sentence was a hypothetical "if you have no family, as most people don't", but was taken as direct personal attack on Delta Man. I don't think AT intended it to be. Since "Saving Western Civ by building families" was the topic, I think AT's 40 point thesis was on topic. If the article was aimed at Deltas, then ok, wrong audience. But still, I'm glad AT posted it; now there is another chapter for the Polygamy Handbook version 2.0.

SirHamster: your presumptions about the practice of polygamy would take a lot of words to correct. In short, the problems you see with polygamy don't exist in practice. And there are a lot of hidden benefits and positive social effects that you'd never predict. In polygamous societies (not Mormon) more men get married, and there are more women to marry. Higher birthrate. And other side effects. Only firsthand experience and practice reveals them. I've known men and women from Africa and Arabia and China, all polygamous societies, and made observations, asked relevant questions. I have training in direct and cross examination. If you were interested, I can go over your concerns one item at a time in private, since this is apparently not the venue for it.

As for the Gammas Omegas and Low-Deltas, I think a monogamy mindset doesn't help them. It just keeps them pointing toward the pedestalization of women. Biblical polygamy and divorce resets the man/woman balance to something sane. And that would benefit Gammas and Low-Deltas. I think Gammas are grandiose enough they can grasp the benefits of polygamy, even if they don't have much hope of achieving it. Monogamists are Omega and Low-Delta. Frankly, monogamy is just a way for attractive men to shirk responsibility, and for attractive women to stab their lesser sisters in the back.

SirHamster (#201) said...

@Mycroft:
If you were interested, I can go over your concerns one item at a time in private, since this is apparently not the venue for it.

You could bring it over to this thread. There's an existing residual discussion on the same topic from another blogpost, but just keep it focused and this conversation can coexist.

Jack Amok said...

Jack Amok, AT wasn't muddled. His first 2 paragraphs summarized the topic pretty well.

2 paragraphs followed by a 40 point manifesto before anyone had indicated they were interested in his position. You are simply not understanding the mechanics of persuasive argument. If someone dumps a wall of text (spanning multiple posts) as their introduction to the topic, the vast majority of thinking people are going to automatically dismiss them as loons. If nothing else, AT was profoundly disrespectful of his reader's time and his host's blog. Why should I assume someone who doesn't have the social awareness not to shit a brick of text like that on someone else's blog will have anything useful to say about interpersonal relationships?

Make a concise, compelling introduction and earn your audiences attention. AT did nothing of the sort.

MycroftJones said...

Whatever, Jack. I have a decade of experience dealing with this topic, and its a frikkin rhinocerous. The tactic you prescribe, although nice, is a nut noone has cracked yet. Two millenia of baggage are fighting against the Biblical viewpoint on this; two millenia of the church being corrupted and molested by people who just can't quite go all the way there and just accept the Word on faith.

Jack Amok said...

A decade of experience dealing with what topic, Mycroft? Polygamy? Debate? What are you arguing for and against here?

MycroftJones said...

Polygamy, and Biblical living in general. I have come to realize that Christians love the Bible, but are very uncomfortable with the words in it.

Jack Amok said...

Well, I'm an agnostic so somewhat orthogonal to your thesis. As far as polygamy goes, I think polygamists make incredibly lousy neighbors because they produce large numbers of angry young men who have to go outside their borders to find women, causing unceasing problems for the neighborhood. I consider it a dis-civic institution and support ruthless suppression of it for the good of everybody else.

But that's not my complaint about ATs post. I don't care what his thesis was, the way he introduced it was rude and ineffective. If he (or you) would like to sell your theory, you need to go about it differently.

Post a Comment

NO ANONYMOUS COMMENTS.