[Editor: This is the first in a series of articles on overcoming escapism by Brother Jason, a soldier in the Salvation Army. Jason doesn’t have a blog, but you should show him some love here in this shithole.]

I have been clean and sober now for 13 years. January 2005 I snorted my last line of cocaine, drank my last drop of alcohol and took my last puff of marijuana. It was in San Francisco. My life had been in a downward spiral for a few years at this point…..it accelerated after 9-11-01 but there had been problems with me beneath the surface for quite a few years before that. I just turned 34 about one month prior to deciding to become sober.

This won’t be some butthurt empathy winning testimony about “if a woman just gave me a chance” or how “my parents didn’t love me enough” then I would not have drifted into these problems. I made the choices in the end. They are my choices to live with, bear and hang my head in “shame” with. There are a few people I have tried to make “amends” with who still have not forgiven me. I can’t really blame them for not forgiving me if truth be told. Towards the end of my addiction……I became a nasty sort of fellow. Ruder, meaner, nastier and badder. Not in a violent sense…but in many ways the worse kind……….the pure “evil” kind. Hoping misfortune on others. Wishing harm and reveling in it when someone got housed, busted, or lost something important to them. It made me smile inside……..thinking that “they might know now how I feel most of the time”. The reality was, most…heck….all could care less about what I felt. My addiction was evil in the end. Very evil. Sneaky. Loving it when a woman got cheated on. Thinking it great when someone didn’t get that promotion. I loved watching people in emotional pain. It almost alliviated mine…..albiet briefly.

If I had been “good looking” on a cultural standard, I could have pulled it off a bit longer and perhaps even gotten away with it. That is a discussion for another time.

My drinking didn’t make me confident. I suddenly didn’t become suave, or cool in a club / party / bar scene because I was drinking. Neither did the cocaine. What it did do was just make me “forget” how useless I felt on the inside. How I was always ignored, or invisible to women. How I was always that guy in a peer group who was “just not with it” like the rest. The times I was flying high or drunk or both on those fog-soaked San Francisco streets……..being in this state constantly helped me cope with my strong but solitary nature. Something I always was. The guy picked last for any team sport. The kid who somehow “messed it up” or “didn’t do it right”

Now, this situation just didn’t start with me taking a line of cocaine, and suddenly I lost everything a week later. Nor did I take a drink in high school while living in West Germany as an American exchange-student and suddenly “had a drinking problem”

It slowly, slowly accelerated. After 9-11-01, like I said above it kicked into overdrive. I kept my haircut. I shaved. I dressed well. I still took vacations (usually to Seattle in those days). I still served on the Board of Trustees of my beloved undergraduate, I was one of the top donars to my college (25K a year from 1998-2002). I suppose I looked okay for my age……but obviously to women and others, I wasn’t. Alcohol and drugs did help me cope in this area. I had an advanced degree from one of the top polytechnics in the USA (Rensselaer Poly). I worked for freakin’ IBM Corporation! I pulled over 135K a year in 2001. I had three patents. I was leading a huge project for their new and innovation Enterprise Storage Server at that time……….a multi billion dollar project in storage technology. I was living in San Francisco, a place so many would want to live in……….my parents of course were proud of me. My college was grateful for my patronage……….and yet……………………………….and yet

A failure with women. Total failure. I was (and am) still a virgin. Never kissed a woman. Never even had a date. I won’t blame, nor lay my drinking and drugs at the feet of women……and I did for awhile. Looking back….ughhhh….THAT was so pathetic. It probably fed into the vicious circle thing…..and just made everything worse for myself and my outward portrayal to women.

This combined with being shy, solitary……alone……..seeing my friends from college and grad school date, get sex, date, get sex, date…….get married…….combined with the lies I had heard since I hit puberty that “women only want a really nice guy” and facing the reality of this not really being the truth. I also was not happy with my job. Sure, I did it and did it well. I didn’t really enjoy the corporate office culture. Forget the “suit and tie” thing……I dealt with that. I hated the politics, the phoniness, the “air family” of fakeness. I hated working in a skyscraper. I wanted to be the guy who BUILT the skyscraper.

This combined with a varity of other things led to 9-11……and my core finally was shaken. Not that I was some “pillar of stability” at that point, but all I had faith in……was shaken hard. Conspiracy theories aside……we had been attacked, and the people who were supposed to protect us didn’t. It became politicized almost immediately and add to the fact…….I was supposed to be there. Two weeks before that fateful day, I returned form a boring business trip from the Tucsan, Az facility. At the Monday morning staffie….I was told to go help configure the new servers that were just intalled in the bowels of the World Trade Center. A coworker, and co-developer Doug asked me if he could go instead. He was from NYC, and he would do the job…………and then take some vacation time to spend with his mom and dad….sister. I agreed. Anything to keep me out of New York City was fine by me. I told my manager Doug was going in my place…and he agreed to this.

Well…..as you can figure out……..Doug obviously died in the attack. No, I was not buddies or pals with him. We worked well together. He was my age (31 at the time), married for a few years. Had the cute wife. A little baby boy. He went to NYC and never came home……….everyone in my department KNEW I was the one asked to go…….and he ended up going….and no, it wasn’t on purpose and maybe it was paranoia……..but I “felt” like everyone in my department wished Doug was still around and I had not returned from a fateful trip to NYC. Doug was popular on the team.

This pushed me into a downward spiral……tailspin………..and anytime I wasn’t at work I was drinking, snorting up enough cocaine that would have even made Kieth Richards raise an eyebrow and say “whoa there Welshman! your puttin’ me to shame!”

I wanted to die. I kicked my feet up and jumped head first down the slide while telling myself “I’ll be dead in a few years….none of this is gonna matter”

Read Part 2!

An interesting video for Monday…

Years ago, I wandered down to my local (back then it was west coast USA) divorce courts. On occasion I’d see some poor bastard trying in vain to enforce his agreement. On one occasion, I saw the judge not bat an eye, when he declared that: “in accord with the agreement signed prior to the marriage, petitioner will keep the house which was bequeathed him by his parents.” He then immediately declared: “Petitioner will buy respondent a house of equal or greater value within the next thirty days.”

This is a rebuttal from BDMG about my Jordan Peterson post. Visit the BDMG blog here.

I wasn’t really that impressed with his debate, to be honest.

It’s interesting that this comes shortly after seeing Jordan Peterson calling MGTOW “pathetic weasles”, then later qualifying it. I didn’t expect him to go straight for the tradcon single shaming right off the bat here… He has had some good material throughout the years; I hope he’s not becoming a gynocentric one-trick pony of anti-MGTOW now…

The world will always be anti-MGTOW, in the same way the world will always be anti-ginger. MGTOW will always be a tiny minority of men. Moreover, MGTOW are a justifiably hated minority. We can whine about the unfairness of this, but it’s due in large part to the antics of scum like Rob Fedders. It is the natural consequence of our own inability to police our spokesmen.

He says they need to “grow up” because “they have something to offer”… Male utility, male disposability, nothing more. These tradcons think that we’re supposed to be worker bees and nothing more.

Men are hard-wired to compete and succeed. The typical MGTOW who insists this isn’t true inevitably spends all day becoming the best possible player of World of Warcraft that he can be.

I remember arguing with one of these types, who wailed endlessly about his state in life as an incel. He interspersed his complaints with the casual admission that he taught himself multilinear algebra, with the help of MIT Open Courseware. Eventually, he showed me his latest software development project.

“Gee,” I remember saying, at the end of this weird conversation, “I did some of that in graduate school… I could never do it as well as you, and I couldn’t do it at all now…”

Feminists will insist that finding a wimminz and spending the rest of one’s life jumping through her hoops is the pinnacle of masculinity. Who are we to deny this, given what we see around us? It’s better to just admit that most men enjoy being unhappy. It’s also to our advantage to leave such men alone. They fund our society, giving us the opportunity to read books, go out to eat at nice restaurants, and screw trashy women. We also have the opportunity to excel in the field of our choice, without a woman to support. Why should we bother the traditional types, in context?

See here’s the thing: he is seeing part of the problem, he’s accurately seeing a lot of the effects, but he’s acting like a Protestant pastor and putting all of the responsibility on the men for things that have gone wrong. Women are the ones that have changed; this attitude is putting the onus on men to accept women under unacceptable terms, instead of changing the terms back to something acceptable.

The men who accept responsibility for female misbehavior are freeing us up, so that we don’t have to. Do you want to get married to some ball-busting whore? I didn’t think so. Let Joe Blow marry her. He’ll find happiness in slavery, and we’ll be able to have peace in our lives without a wife.

Make no mistake: Joe Blow is Dr. Peterson’s target audience. We’re not ever going to listen to his “man up” calls, and he knows that.

As for the arguments about “trans” shit and the “pay gap”, he knows his material well but he’s not the best debater. He doesn’t seem to know to cut her off a the knees with her sophistry and bullshit. He fought a good defensive fight, but he stayed on defense and she came out without a scratch, in the eyes of someone who doesn’t watch a video, made by and MRA, explaining to them that she lost and why. Not that this is saying much, but for someone who spat out nothing but sophistry, she did a much better job at it than, say, Piers Morgan.

You’re missing the larger point in this debate. This surprises me, given the quality of your contributions.

You can be sure that Mizz Newman did not miss the point. Manginas and male-feminists are born out of a sense of purposelessness and anomie.

Feminism is largely motivated, in men, by a sense of powerlessness. Such men fill their psychic vacuum with “edgy” feminist politics (which has, as a side-attraction, the illusory promise of some third-rate poon with a bluehair.) By telling kids to grow up and assume responsibility, Peterson is denying Newman, and those like her, the male footsoldiers who enforce her mandates.

I think that the reason he is getting so many accolades for this is because its the first time that many people have seen someone even TRY to argue against the gynocracy. It’s better than nothing, but it’s still not worthy of a ringing endorsement, from me anyway.

I can’t really disagree with this. On the upside, he seems to be the only “alt-lite” figurehead who isn’t a total charlatan.

So over on Dalrock, people are agog at the attention paid to the Jordan Peterson interview. Same as here, I suppose. This is a fair example.

I have the impression that BDMG and Novaseeker are very different people; though, they’re both people I respect. They agree on at least one thing, which is their lack of a favorable impression of Peterson’s performance. They join a great number of other people, throughout the sphere, in expressing these opinions.

There are two points I ought to make here.

1. Peterson’s Revelations Aren’t Revelatory

They aren’t revelatory to us, because we’re grown men with developed psychic lives, goals and jobs. In short, they aren’t revelatory to us because they aren’t meant to be.

The people Peterson is trying to reach are young brothers, and he reaches them by symbolically occupying the psychic space that a father or grandfather would occupy in the development of a normal adolescent. People like BDMG and Novaseeker spend a lot of time in the ‘sphere, so I don’t know exactly why they don’t understand the inherent problem. We all seem to talk about young men growing up without fathers. Peterson is applying a solution, with the help of youtube.

If you’re an 18-year old man, whose life consists of internet pr0n, World of Warcraft, and pizza-flavored microwaveable meals, then Peterson’s act is revelatory. Peterson is probably the first person who has consistently told these young brothers to get up off their ass, go out and enjoy living in the world, and make something of themselves. That is a novel position, for a young man who has grown up in a single-mom house, with female public school teachers. The numbers suggest that our younger brothers have a definite need, and he’s filling it.

As Novaseeker cynically points out: He’s making a few bucks while doling out the sort of advice fathers and grandfathers used to give for free. So, what? Sue him.

2. Peterson is Adept at Pushing the Overton Window

He’s doing it at least as well as Donald Trump, in a country with no Trump equivalent.

The Ontario Provincial Government didn’t declare itself the Feminist Republic forty years ago, because it couldn’t. It has been a very long, slow slide into degeneracy, which has been accomplished over a period of decades, through a coordinated action which included both political figures, academia, and the mass-media. Our feminist overlords were very clever and careful to ease Canadians into the national gay bath house slowly, so as not to stir up any uncontrolled or organized opposition.

Peterson is singlehandedly pushing the narrative back toward sanity, and he’s doing it without the screeching or caterwauling that feminists have traditionally used. No normal person, who gives him a fair listen, is able to question his reason or motives. In this regard, he’s changing the way that Canadians, even the most pozzed out feminists among them, think about society and their place in it.

There is little doubt that I am one of the most progressive people in the ‘sphere when it comes to the abortion topic. I have absolutely no problem with a woman choosing to abort her pregnancy, in the first trimester, in a number of different scenarios. For example:

• In the case where carrying the child to term would kill her.
• In the case where carrying the child to term would disable her.
• In the case where carrying the child to term would make her sick for a year or more (e.g. Lupus).
• In the case where the child will not survive outside the womb (e.g. Anencephaly).
• In the case where the child will be born disabled (Down’s Syndrome).
• In the case where conception was due to rape (i.e. violent forcible rape, not “I regret having sex after the fact”).
• In the case where it is reasonably likely the mother will pass a communicable disease to the child in labor, which is incurable or hard to treat (AIDS).

Had you asked me about this topic, only a couple of years ago, I’d have strongly asserted the mother’s right to abort in any circumstance. After all, I naïvely assumed that such a terrible decision would never have been made without a grave reason, after a lot of introspection. How wrong I was! Over at Johnston Archive, the data has been laid out. Here are the reasons that American women actually get abortions:

Summary: This report reviews available statistics regarding reasons given for obtaining abortions in the United States, including surveys by the Alan Guttmacher Institute and data from seven state health/statistics agencies that report relevant statistics (Arizona, Florida, Louisiana, Minnesota, Nebraska, South Dakota, and Utah). The official data imply that AGI claims regarding “hard case” abortions are inflated by roughly a factor of three. Actual percentage of U.S. abortions in “hard cases” are estimated as follows: in cases of rape, 0.3%; in cases of incest, 0.03%; in cases of risk to maternal life, 0.1%; in cases of risk to maternal health, 0.8%; and in cases of fetal health issues, 0.5%. About 98.3% of abortions in the United States are elective, including socio-economic reasons or for birth control. This includes perhaps 30% for primarily economic reasons and possibly 0.1% each for sex selection and selective reduction of multifetal pregnancies.

In other words, abortions which are justifiable (at least by my standards) are well beneath 5% of the total, and that’s being generous. Over 95% of all abortions in the U.S. are sought by wimminz who had one too many appletinis, and subsequently conceived after unprotected sex with Chad in the nightclub’s public toilet.

Atheists and agnostics need to get their minds right. These are not people who deserve sympathy, and this is not a “women’s health” issue. These are the most irresponsible and reprehensible people imaginable, and they’re all around us, right now.

This weekend we mourn little Zayla Rank, who was found slaughtered in her home on 26 January.

The Riverside County (California) Sheriff’s Department reports that they have arrested thirty-year old Susan Rank, Zayla’s skank-ho single mom.

News reports have followed the usual protocol, omitting any mention of little Zayla’s biological father. I suppose she was yet another virgin birth. Such things seem disturbingly common, these days. In an interview with Zayla’s aunties and grandmother, all manner of excuses were made for the murder. “I blame mental illness,” declared Tracylyn Sharrit, little Zayla’s auntie.

Sharrit doesn’t blame Rank. She says she blames the system.

“When a 3 year-old becomes collateral damage of somebody else’s mental illness, we as a society have to say what is broken in this system?” Sharrit told Eyewitness News. “Zayla couldn’t protect herself. Susan couldn’t protect her either. She was mentally gone.”

Relatives choose to blame “the system,” and I can’t help but agree. Little Zayla certainly needed protection, primarily from her deranged, drug-addled mother, and from relatives like Sharrit, who seem to be totally fine with blaming everyone but the perpetrator for this murder.

What would a better “system” entail? A sane society would have immediately taken Zayla from her unmarried mother at birth, and placed her with a normal family for adoption, and a chance for a healthy upbringing. It also would have probably followed something like the Soviet model, and sentenced her skank-ho single mom to a work camp, so that she could repay the social services money, squandered by her irresponsible behavior. The Chinese custom of forcible sterilization of such people also seems sensible, in context.

There seems little doubt that Mizz Rank will spend only enough time in the clink to get some more trashy tattoos, and she will shortly be released and fêted as a “victim,” empowered to do something like this again. Truly, we in the west have the worst of all possible worlds, in which female dysfunction is rewarded, and the costs for wimminz loathsome behavior offloaded onto innocent people, with their bastard kids often bearing the most violent and immediate abuse.

Three-year old Zayla Rank, photographed with her murderer: Skank-ho single mom Susan Rank, age 30.

My fellow Canadian, Jordan Peterson*, has lately been trending in the sphere. Here he is giving a proper scuzzing to a scroungy British feminist named Cathy Newman, on the state run BBC 4.

The Tranny Republic known as Ontario has passed a series of laws penalizing anyone who might offend weirdos. Dr. Peterson, a tenured professor and licensed clinical psychologist, is one of the few people who felt compelled to speak out against this sort of overreach. Given that the social penalty for this sort of thing, in Canada, is being publicized as “worse than Hitler,” his e-cred immediately shot through the roof, and he now makes 50,000 USD per month on patreon, ostensibly for making youtube videos, which aim to teach young men not to act like complete faggots.

In the aftermath of her dreadful showing, Mizz Newman claimed to have been cyberbullied and harassed by Dr. Peterson and his rabid, hateful, Hitler loving followers. Scott Adams deconstructed this brave feminist heroine in a pretty good video of his own.

Dr. Peterson is usually described as “right wing” or a member of the “alt-right”. In fact, there is no evidence of any such thing. His politics are unknown. What he has proven is that he’s exceptionally good at holding frame in the face of typical feminist topic-shifting and fallacies.

We can make no real assumptions about his private life, other than the fact that he seems to be great at debating lunatics, and probably learned such skills in childhood. It doesn’t hurt that he’s handsome, erudite and able to hammer his points home with a soft voice. I assume that after the destruction of this feminist harpy, he’ll never be invited on a national tee-vee program again.

*Peterson lives in Toronto, but he grew up in Fairview, Alberta

The inability of religious people to live up to their own teachings is a constant source of both mirth and pity; and, nowhere is this clown show more accessible than on Dalrock’s blog. Our latest example is a good religious patriarch named Evan Turner, who showed up to lambaste the social critics and white-knight for skank-ho single moms. Let’s read the Turner Diaries together, and see what he has to say…

Whenever some “new name” begins by identifying himself as a regular, you can be sure that it’s going to get fun quickly. That aside, let’s take a look at Mr. Turner’s argument in some detail.

In the first place, he conflates the bride price, which was paid to a woman’s parents, with child support, which is paid directly to skank-ho princess herself. It seems the misogynists among the ancient Hebrews weren’t as keen on funding female misbehavior as we are, today. Never mind that, though. Mr. Turner doesn’t want to go there.

Mr. Turner then segues into an argument that has lately been used by the same so-called “red pill women” that talk shit on the Two Birds One Stone Blog* on their off hours. Specifically, that child support payments aren’t enough to support skank-ho princess in her aspirations (which generally include bikers, drunkenness, illegal drugs, and thugs). Brother Evan doubles down on this theme repeatedly, to wit:

Since Mr. Turner is claiming to be a religious man, and since the rules for religious Protestants, Catholics and Jews are all pretty much the same, we should probably consult the text to see what the Jewish/Christian God said about meddling with single moms.

From Exodus 22: Thou shalt not afflict any widow, or fatherless child.

The single moms in question are not widows, but they do have fatherless children. Child support is a significant incentive to spread fatherlessness throughout society, normalize bastardy, and reward the perpetrators of this horror with free money.

From Deuteronomy 27: Cursed be he who perverts justice for the stranger, or the fatherless.

Do Christians and Jews like Turner prevent fatherless children from their rightful inheritance? Yes, they do. By supporting the child-support model they deprecate fatherhood. By white-knighting for single-moms, they give moral support to an evil system, which inhibits the ability of that skank-ho’s children to know their natural fathers.

While I have no information, it would not surprise me to learn that Mr. Turner slums around on dating sites with single moms, takes them out to the nightclub, and then uses these bottom-of-the-barrel women for sex. In doing so he both afflicts fatherless children, and he prevents those same children from ever acquiring their birthright. This is a very serious form of misbehavior to his own religious leaders, and he is soundly condemned for his actions in his own holy books.

So what would Mr. Turner do, if he were actually a serious Christian man? I believe that we can find a sensible answer in the epistle of James to the Jewish Christians of the diaspora. In the text we read:

So, the solution is straightforward. If you are religious, and you take these texts seriously, your job is not to exploit the broken family for the purposes of virtue signaling or your own sexual gratification. Decent religious men take up for the children, and they do so by condemning the skanks, and affirming the notion of fatherhood.

Edit: Dalrock has published a response to Turner’s lunacy himself. Read it.

*That’s right, bitch. I know who you are.

Surprise! Wimminz want to abolish the first amendment.

Down below, Deti writes a very good little mini post.

Women don’t want to get caught cheating because they don’t want to lose the benefits that come from being married, namely provision, protection, help around the house, a man around the house, help with the kids, father for the kids, an intact family, avoiding the trauma of splitting up an established family with the house and cars and money and everything else, avoiding the shame and judgment of peer women in a public divorce, and just the status of being married. It is not because they care about who will get hurt if they get caught. And it is not because they care about hurting their husbands if they get caught. They care about staying married for the benefits that come from being married.

180

The status that a female (be she a wimminz or a solid woman) derives from marriage comes almost exclusively from her peer group: that is, other females and possibly a couple of trannies and homos in her circle. The husband is for show.

It’s as though every day is a parade, where she marches down Broadway declaring:

Look what I managed to catch with my superior cunt/mouth/ass, and my skills at applying makeup, lying, and double-talk! My chump is at least as good as any of yours!

So, what differentiates a wimminz from a woman (i.e. a solid female)? In my experience, it is the peer-group in question. If a woman spends lots of time hanging out with other serious-minded women, then she will take on the characteristics of those women. If the same women moves to a new town (i.e. suddenly has her peer-group shorn away) and falls in with skanks, weird trannies, faggots and divorcées, then her behavior will go down the toilet almost immediately.

This is why the virginity fetishists (like social pathologist) have spent years sniping at me on Dalrock. I will take the time to tell the young bros the uncomfortable truth. Number of cocks inside a woman doesn’t really correlate with long-term marital success. A virgin at marriage means little more than princess has been surrounded by other serious women so far. Take that same sweet, virginal woman to some other locale, and watch how quickly those panties drop. Enter Jenny Erikson, Saeed Abeidini’s bitch of an ex-wife, and other examples too numerous to name here.

This is also the reason that many men on Dalrock will cop to the fact that they found a filthy lying slut that they liked, and successfully turned the whore into a housewife. If you ask any of these success-story men how they managed this feat, it always boils down to getting her away from her bitch friends, and re-inserting her into a female peer-group with some standards. Whether this was the man’s mother and sisters, or some women’s auxiliary of the Orthodox Church, it inevitably happened. The decisive factor is that on Tuesday, the bitch was running around with wimminz who didn’t mock her for being a filthy, lying slut; but on Wednesday, she was suddenly in the company of serious women who would shut her the fuck down for uttering an off-color joke. Suddenly, this trashy wimminz is wearing dresses, getting her skank-ho tattoos lasered off, and successfully raising healthy children as she takes care of husband’s needs. The men who tell these stories often credit Jesus or some religious miracle, and maybe in an abstract way perhaps that’s true, but Jesus always has help in reforming a whore, in the guise of a bunch of other women who won’t stand for a slut stinking up their sewing circle.

In another thread, Honeycomb shares a gem of an article written by “The Ambrose Girls.”

The article is quite short and direct, and the syntax/style looks like it had one single author. It’s possible that a group of wimminz wrote this dull self-justification, but I doubt it. I find it more likely that one wimminz wrote it, and pluralized the byline, for fear that she’d look like a slut. Now that she has a mythical peer group, it’s much easier for her to tell the truth about her status. She is a filthy, lying, slut; but, she has a theoretical group of other filthy, lying, sluts to flock around with, so potential judgment of her peers is less damaging to her ego.

It’s all about the flock.