Men: You're Fired

This is your memo informing you that your position as provider workhorse has been terminated.

Women are not going back to becoming housewives. A collapse of the economy is not going to change this. Only a full scale loss of technology is going to change this fact because it was not women who liberated themselves - no matter how much feminists want to believe - it was technology which allowed for the changes.

Redundancy of housework meant that women as housewife was made redundant. Women however were smart enough to realize that they're redundancy in the home could not stand and so they became workers, flooding the market with cheap labor. They did this because they could do it. The office was comfortable, safe, and provided them with meaning to their lives and they're not leaving. They're not going to shift en masse to being housewives anymore because that job simply does not function within modernity.

Women didn't change their instincts though and those instincts have exacerbated the inherent greed of the female sex. Women - possessed of mild grade narcissism - cannot except any form of criticism since it damages their weak sense of self, a sense of self mostly derived from two places: the acceptance of the collectives they ascribe to and the dominant authority figures in their lives. Any female readers who feels emotional pangs at this paragraph is verifying this assertion.

This greed of the female is what drives the search for a good man. To the woman, who is naturally inclined to seek a mate for provision, a man who earns less than her is not a good man. This is the singular reason women can't find good man. Men didn't get worse. They didn't really change. Women didn't change their definition of good man either. A good man is the same: a superior man. The further the female ego is built up the less likely she will be to find any man as good since the definition of a good man is someone who is superior to her in every way and one in which she can exploit with her sex.

The role of the provider is not needed. Why aren't you listening to women? They don't need you. They've made that clear. Every time a woman utters a variation on the "men are useless" meme she is elucidating her own beliefs about men. And what are those beliefs? Did men suddenly stop being romantic, compassionate, and loving? No, men did not drop that part of themselves. What changed in recent decades is that women began to earn their own money. That's it. Now that they've done that they've declared the majority of the male sex as inferior, obsolete, and unnecessary. But men are still clinging to this model of manhood which does not exist and cannot exist in the modern world. Men are no longer providers for women.

Ask yourself this question. If women truly are the romantic, pair bonding sex, then when the role of men as provider of the family was destroyed, what did women do? Did women turn to romance? Did they suddenly start finding romantic, caring, sensitive men attractive? Did women start looking at men for reasons other than financially?  Or did they divorce their husbands, take their children, and write articles about the end of men?

Men are under NO obligations to women or society. None. Women don't need you in that role. You're not needed to carry the species. Men are like workers who continue to show up at the factory years after it's been shut down. It's time to find a new identity. One you create for yourself.

Women Rule the World

Women rule by proxy. Men certainly have limited power. If we break power down into economic, political, and reproductive then we can see that women in aggregate have far more power than men. There are more female voters. Women control more wealth than men. And most importantly, women’s sexual power far exceeds men’s.

The fact that women have not voted in a female president since being able to vote en masse for a hundred years is telling of their thoughts of ruling overtly. This is corroborated with women’s general dislike of working for a female boss. Though it does appear that women have decided they want to rule overtly now as I think most people are predicting a Clinton presidency as well as a female fed chief, giving the two most powerful positions over to females. I expect HIlary will be hated by women more than men, even by the women who voted for her.

Women’s power is a tripod propped up by capitalism, democracy, and sex. Sweep a single leg and the tripod falls. They’re more responsible for the way the world is than men are. They’re willing to take credit for improvements in society, even though they didn’t cause them, but not for the failings. There’s also the fact that women influence the subsequent generations through child rearing far greater than anyone else.

I’m conflicted on how I feel about a female president. On one hand I believe her term will be doomed from the beginning because of the economy, so it’s she’ll be seen as a failure. The other hand is that she’s guaranteed to make life worse for men.

Women will do what they're told by an authority figure. The milgram experiment is interesting to look at from a gender perspective. 100% of the female participants were willing to kill a person because an authority figure told them to do it. Sherly Sandberg is telling women to lead overtly. She's as much of an authority figure as they'll need. They're likely to follow what she says even if it makes them miserable. Expect that women will never surrender power.

Likely in the transformation from covert rule to overt rule some power will be displaced. Women will not lose any sexual power. That is certain. What power women will lose is the power of the victim class. They will attempt to retain this as long as possible but only so many bogus statistics will be held to when reality conflicts with them at every step. 

Women are innately sexists so it's likely that if women achieve overt power they will follow their solipsistic beliefs to a maximum conclusion and disenfranchise men to the point of violent revolt. Women are less rational than men  and being taught that men are the enemy. By making rational discourse impossible you make war inevitable. 

Worship Power

"All ideologies are bullshit strategies for power. Everything a person pretends to believe in is simply a strategy for gaining power, prestige, status, import, reverence, deferment. Christianity is no different than any other ideology. If it has power, then it is a good thing. Power is the only thing you CAN worship. It doesn't make any sense to NOT worship power, because to worship powerlessness is insane and illogical.

At least Christianity recognizes that nobody likes OTHER people who worship power and so teaches us to use reverse psychology and behave as if we are NOT powerful. Jesus did not come as a powerful figure, but as a meek, humble one, with massive, unbelievable fucking power of spirit."

White men are the greatest pussy beggars

Japan and China have as much technology as anyone else and while they've made changes to feminize their countries they have no where near the level of feminist insanity that effects the west. What's the difference? 

Perhaps it's as Magua from The Last of the Mohicans says.  "Magua understands that the white man is a dog to his women." Magua understands the white man well. There is no greater pussy beggar than white men. In the femdom communities the huge majority are white men eager to worship their goddess. Not surprisingly this post at koanic details the prevalence of whites who posses neanderthal DNA. What's interesting is that he states that the neanderthals were a matriarchal group. Taken together this can help explain a lot of the things we see happening today.

Empower Men

The best way to empower men is stop praising them for getting laid. Stop offering your friends validation for having sex. It's not an accomplishment. Running an ironman race is an accomplishment. Rebuilding a 67' mustang is an accomplishment. Winning Gladiator in WoW is an accomplishment. Rutting in the age of secularized mutual masturbation is nothing to brag about.

If you're seeking validation from sex you're not seeking sex. How many men right now would not care too much about sex if they didn't get congratulatory high fives from their friends? How many PUA forums would dry up if it weren't for all of the men posting lay reports. Ask yourself this, are you interested in the sex or the validation from your friends more?

Validating this behavior is what gives women so much power because they control sex absolutely or close enough. Then when a man wants some approval, some attention, he knows he'll get it twice. Once from the woman which is bad enough but another time from the men. I bet there will be less men willing to sleep with less than worthwhile women without the conciliatory high fiving that often comes from it.

I'm not saying to shame men. They don't need that. Leave men alone. But treat sex like a chimichanga. It's not even a steak dinner with a sweet potato and brown sugar. It's just a taco stand grade chimichanga that you picked up after your workout. No big deal.

More importantly though offer men validation and approval for things that actually matter. Things that don't involve kissing a woman's ass or giving her any underserved attention. For god sakes stop shaming men who don't get laid. It doesn't make you superior no matter what Roosh thinks. Sex has become a handshake now. We've taken on the mold of masturbating bonobos. Sticking your dick into a soulless woman's hole is as validating to your manhood as taking a shower in the morning. Treat it as such.

Women Choose and Men Lose

Women are already disposed towards materialism and pettiness. When they display it by mate selecting for money they just expose themselves for what they are. I appreciate it as it saves me time from realizing that these women are soulless. In the past that might have taken a few dates to figure out. Soulless women will wind up with soulless men in loveless marriages only connected by their lust for money.

So a woman who reads what I wrote might be offended. It sounsd harsh. Certainly, it does. I look down on this type of woman though. There is nothing for me to be intimidated by. I have the wealth I need to survive. See, that’s the difference. I wouldn’t expect a woman to date homeless men or men who can’t support themselves but every woman reading this knows that’s not what women want. They want to exploit their potential husbands to fill the void in them where their soul should be. They shove plastic crap made in China into their psyches, garbage food grown in Mexico, and spend, spend, spend endlessly with the crack addict belief that this time I’ll be happy, fulfilled, content.

Men will let them do it too because men are pathetic and needy. Their only accomplishments in life have become getting pussy and most can’t even do that so these pathetic men will do anything to receive the least bit of attention and validation from a woman. They’ll marry fat, bitch women. They’ll sell other men out without thought.

And nothing will change. Women have all of the power in sexual relationships and men are needy slaves. This woman will probably get what she wants. Most women will. Men aren’t on strike. That is nonsense. Look at Minter. The first woman to offer him companionship and he jumps at the chance to get enslaved with her.

Men need to understand one thing. Women do not like you. They never have liked you. They are built and designed to exploit you and cast you aside the moment your usefulness is gone. Women say they don’t need men. They’re right. They don’t. They’ve made that clear and I believe them. Right now, men need women. If they didn’t need women they wouldn’t be so eager to endure abuse, so willing to be exploited. Women are going to get whatever they want and men are going to accept it and suffer for it.

Man's Oldest Enemy

If you wanted to give a psychological evaluation of a political ideology it would be easy to label conservatives as fearful. If you wanted to spin it nicely you might call it cautious. The right prospers during lean times. That is to say it survives during lean times. No one prospers then. Winter is coming is the Stark family motto. It could be a conservative motto as well. It's no wonder then that the right is full of Christians, apocalyptic prophets, and white people.

And the left? How would we diagnose that group? It's not pretty. Messiah complex might work. They have a penchant for fixing things, saving things, or at least attempting to fix and save things. Their plans always fail because they don't read history. For the progressive left cracking opening a history book is like peering into a horror novel too ghastly and terrible to be considered something to draw wisdom from. It's only purpose is a warning sign. To the left the future is always bright, sunny, without a cloud on the horizon. The 87 trillion dollar liabilities don't matter. The economy is fine. Ignore the muslims. Intolerance is the problem.

You know what else the left is? Maniacal, ego maniacs. You can't be the lord savior without first being the lord. And that means power. You can't look at the world and want to fix it unless you're certain that you can fix it, that everyone else who tried didn't care as much and wasn't as smart as you. Obviously, since you're certain of success and morality then your way is clear. But this egoism is rarely backed up by any real accomplishment, any real understanding of history, any long term projections into the future. They don't read history remember and they're known as bleeding heart liberals for a reason. They feel first and rationalize later. That's fine during spring, summer, and fall but during a winter anyone who doesn't plan ahead doesn't survive.

The difference between the left and the right in america is drawn on a map. You can see it. Red state. Blue state. More importantly, the distinction is made between a mostly rural environment and a mostly urban environment. Cities tend toward leftism and there is no surprise that the growth of the modern city and the modern state coincide. With the loss of survival through agrarian means either untenable or impossible the ruralite makes the sojourn into the metropolis in search of employment. A job replaces the farm and understanding political teachings becomes more important than understanding harvest season.

Nature is cyclical. A season to all things. A time to build and a time to destroy but once cut off from nature, isolated within concrete, disconnected from the seasons, the bounty, and most importantly the winter, the urbanite forgets about nature. At worst it becomes a nuisance - like conservatives - something to hem and haw over but nothing of any real concern. A rainy day when you planned your picnic. Scraping windows on your commute to work. Those who live close to the natural world know better. Mother nature is aptly described as a woman, beautiful and alluring at times but fierce and ruthless.

If man has made eternal war against anything it is nature. It's true. Before an environmentalist shirks in horror and composes a eulogy over the death of trees consider that this war is not what we've come to know war as. There are two types of war with two different goals, one to dominate and another to destroy. The war against nature is our oldest struggle, our greatest conflict, but it is not one to destroy. Man seeks domination over nature by mastering gravity, by taming the forest, harnessing the energy of the sun or the atom. Only the suicidal would seek to destroy nature.

The significance of all this in the right/left divide is their relationship to nature. As much as the environmentalists lament the death of trees and compose dirges to sunflowers, their war against nature is the same as others. The left's battle with nature is against human nature and instinct. When it denies that gender exists beyond social construct it denies nature. When it denies racial differences it denies nature. It is an inner world and an inner conflict the leftist struggle with. Disconnected from where their food comes from, cut off from the source of their clothing, from the cycle of life and death, they believe they have bested the natural world without and focus their attention on the conflict within human nature.

Adaptation is reflex. Changes in the environment can create the atmosphere for changes in ideology. Cities produce dependency. Rural environments produce self-reliance. City kids are summer kids born to recline on the beach listening to the waves and pluck fruit from the hanging limbs. Free from the seasons of nature they forget nature believing it pacified. The march goes on. More left and left and their ever victorious army will not be stopped by anything but man's greatest enemy.

All that lives must....

Goodbye Roosh

http://www.rooshv.com/the-manosphere-is-lost

In his emotional breakdown Roosh says farewell to the manosphere. Sorta.

In a tirade that would fit right in with a feminist on her rag, Roosh remonstrates the manosphere for being too inclusive with women and "beta" males. He makes some vague allusions to the pacification of the manosphere for social acceptance while at the same time condemning the old neo-nazis who hate black. Apparently, his brand of anti-pc rhetoric is permissible but others isn't. Then he bids farewell to the manosphere and now everyone is supposed to feel some sense of loss.

Hopefully, he stays gone because he's actually helped very few men do anything. His game is weak because he's not aggressive enough. He has to approach hundreds of women to have sex because his game is so indirect that most women assume he's their new gay friend. He had trouble getting laid in Denmark which speaks a lot about his game. While I don't know dick about Denmark, this guy does:  http://www.boytoystory.com/get-girls/ And he bashes Roosh as a loser PUA more intent on selling books than actually getting people laid. The sole reason is that Roosh doesn't get laid as much as he wants you to think. He's out to sell books and generate money from his websites and little more.

Chances are very high that Roosh's exit is hyperbole. He's not going anywhere. His mediocre existence is made bearable only by the attention he receives online and he's not going to leave that behind. There's also the fact that he earns money selling his bogus "how to be a girls new gay friend" books. There is almost no chance that his departure is permanent. Once his period is over (heavy flow this month) he'll be back writing worthless articles on game and making decent social commentary on feminism and the nature of women. So goodbye Roosh. For now.

Christ the feminine

Christianity is feminine. Jesus called his followers to turn the other cheek. A masculine religion like Odinism called for his followers to rise up and destroy the ice giants. One is for a tolerance of evil. The other is for its destruction. The feminine is explicitly left and Christ was feminine. While history may not appear as a solid leftward march it was not for a lack of ideology. The same could said for the feminists or the abolitionists. If you recall that Socrates called for freeing the slaves and equal rights for women. His arguments are just as good today as they were then but it wasn't until the prosperity of technological advance that the slaves could be free and women were liberated. It was not so much the lack of moral underpinnings to the problem but the necessity for slaves and housewives. Once slaves became economically inefficient they were freed. Once women were redundant thanks to washing machines, public schools, and household appliances they were put to work outside the home. The leftist ideology has always been in Christianity. The equality of all men’s souls. The tolerance of evil. None of that changed or had any effect for millennia because it couldn’t. It needed prosperity, technology, and opportunity to become active but there lay a kernel of leftism dormant within Christianity since its inception.


There are few men in Christianity compared to women for a reason. It prattles endlessly about love because it is a feminine religion and the feminine is the source of leftism. The likely stop to global leftist thought will not be imposed by men but by nature as we either reach the redundancy of human labor or the leftist singularity destroys the whole.

Should Women Vote

Should women vote? I don’t like the question mainly because I’m uncertain about democracy. It seems impossible to contain the electorate. Originally, women could vote if they were considered heads of house but that generally fell on a man. The intent was that only those who contributed to the republic would have a say in how it was run. It worked at the time but lawmakers need jobs and they constantly reform lest they be put out of business. Eventually, groups lobbied for expansion of the electorate to include everyone natural born. There was never really any need to discriminate against women with the vote.

But voting was a terrible idea anyway. First, because it politicizes people who should not be concerned with politics. Prior to democracy no one cared about issues. The issues of the day were the things that mattered. Did I have a job. Was there food available to eat. The banality of gay marriage would have no place in the majority. If the answer to the former questions was a no then the people voted with pitchforks and guillotines and replaced their leaders by force. It offered real consequences to the leaders because if they screwed up their heads rolled. Now the elite wield the vote like a cudgel to legitimize their rule. They can deflect the blame if the president miscalculates something because he was the chosen elect of the people. It’s the people’s fault for voting for a moron. Third, democracy politicizes the family when the family should be united. Their survival should be paramount and linked symbiotically to each other. By the division created along political issues it furthers the dividing line between woman and man who are naturally going to hold differing political opinions and creates animosity where union is needed.

Besides which, opposing female suffrage directly is too radical a notion for too little gain. It demonizes the manosphere et al further and offers fuel to our opponents to ignore everything else they might be willing to listen to otherwise. Only a small percent of feminists are truly man hating. The others are just following their lead. They’re going along to get along and many would be willing to listen to a new way of life if one was presented. The problem is that there isn’t another paradigm offered. There is the feminist woman and nothing else.

Follow Your Obsessions

A few years ago I went through a painful ordeal. While I won't go into the details it pushed my sanity to the limit nearly breaking me in the process, but it also helped me realize a few things about my mind. Namely, I noticed that the worse and worse my situation got the more I was drawn to horrible ideas. As I grew fearful, depressed, emotional, and weak my mind was pulled in a few directions. First, I could not stop thinking about my parents dying. At the time I was staying with my father and the thought of him dying repeated in my mind like a mantra. I did not really fear his death as much as I feared being abandoned. At the time I was incapacitated. There was no way for me to care for myself so my fears were not unfounded. Even though he was in good health I kept thinking of facing homelessness and poverty in my current mental state which was quite literally insane.

The other area my mind was pulled to was obsession with my problem and I think this helped me confirm some of what Freud wrote about obsessions. Freud's theory of an obsession was something like psychoanalytic career advice. Our obsessions are the chink in our mental armor, they reveal the cracks where we are weakest, showing the soft underbelly we try to protect. For me, I'm obsessed with dieting and weight loss. That's pretty easy to understand. I'm a lonely person and I'm insecure about my body. It seems to fit together well. To have my needs for affection met I feel like I need to lose weight. I've been trying to for years and failed which is why it's turned into an obsession. Behind the motivation to lose weight is an unfulfilled need. It is suffering which is this driving force.

This can also reveal what a person values. As I lose weight I judge others by their bodies more. In my desire to understand other people I've realized that people hold different values than myself. Success is relative to the individual. I noticed this after reading about a career woman. She wouldn't date a man who made less than her and couldn't find a date because she was successful. I thought her callow but really it's a false dichotomy. Her values and my values do not align. Her successful man is not my successful man. To me it's like the vulgar woman who reveals her true character on the first date. Some men might recoil at the obtuse behavior but I find it reassuring. Maybe not in the moment as it's happening but afterwards I can enjoy the efficiency of it. She didn't waste my time trying to be someone she wasn't. I'm not going to find out six months into the relationship that she is a prude or angry person. I know up front who she is and that we're not compatible. I think this is one of the reasons why relationships fall apart.

The typical American date is a meeting of two actors both sworn to their roles for their initial few meetings. The man plays his part and the woman players her part and while those two roles may be in flux in modernity they are still facade. An unfortunate thing is that many first dates that go poorly are probably between two people who were overall compatible but could never get passed the initial attraction phase. I don't value money much beyond the necessities of life. I don't know why this is but I never have. It's never interested me to make money. I only wanted happiness and money was never a part of that.

I putted through college. That's the best way I can describe it. It's fitting. I took dozens of classes that I never needed to. I spent the better part of a decade at school mostly racking up loans I'd never pay back. I quickly noticed that most of the students and faculty had no real interest in learning. Knowledge was secondary to making money. That was their goal and not the knowledge itself. Understandable but unfortunate.

I finally picked a major, English, and worked toward that. All of my frolics into science and history stopped as I sat down with my adviser and she explained to me that I had all of my elective credits met twice over and that a class on Roman history was not going to help me graduate. I left my rebuttal silence.

Even when I picked a major I had my doubts. I chose english because I liked writing not because I enjoyed reading literature. I didn't. In fact I still don't enjoy literature. I've never enjoyed it and always thought of it as boring. I liked reading but nothing literary.

That's where my mistake was. When deciding a major or a career path I would have been better served by following my obsessions in greater detail. Instead of majoring in english, I should have majored in nutrition or physical training. I would have not lacked for any enthusiasm at the time but I didn't know what I wanted.

Bombing For Peace

Feminist assert their certainty that the spread of feminism into the world is cause of social ascent. Backed by the statistics of a reduction of crime and violence within western countries they spread their ideology pell mell without regard for the veracity of their claims and while it may be true about the statistics, in the endless complexity of society and historical change there are very few certainties.

Most of their claims can be reduced to the hypothetical pile with one phrase. Correlation does not equal causation. An oft cited saying in our scientifically driven, digital age and one that holds merit in many circumstances. The drop in crime is debatable as well.    In America, some cities have an increase in gun violence but a decrease in gun homicide. The answer is found not in police tactics but in medical technology. Of course the police are all too willing to take the praise. But so are the politicians. So are the professors. Oddly, the doctors seem to be the last group in line to claim this victory even though they're most responsible for it. Some E.R. surgeons claim that only 1/5 gunshot wounds are fatal now.

George Bush believed in democracy and capitalism as fervently as the feminists believe in the authenticity of their claims. Bush invaded several countries under the ostensible auspices of liberating the Iraqi people and while many might wish to make the claim that Bush was not the brightest president to set foot in the office he wasn't without his reasons. Democracies rarely war against each other. In the modern world the spread of democracy is correlative with the spread of peace. Though a caveat must be that democracies tend not to war against each other. Instead, a democracy because a war among itself, preferring electoral war if possible and civil war if not. But Bush looked at the planet and with the zealous belief of those who keep the faith he bombed for peace believing that if he could establish democracy within Iraq and Afghanistan he would cement his legacy as a peaceful warrior.

There are many correlations to the decline in crime but a look at history shows that the majority of social changes enacted today are not anything new. When looking at society it's important to understand the novel. What is it up about this era that is different from the last. Women obtained power throughout history so it's not that and contra to the women's studies revisionist theory of history, men have never been an oppressive force to women. As Warren Farrell points out, it's best to say that both men and women have traditionally been repressed by gender roles. It's an example of the individual sacrificing itself on the altar of the collective. Women have worked as well. In particular the lower and middle class women were often treated no differently than lower and middle class men. They worked. They did the jobs they were capable and while there was sexual segregation in employment, they were not chained to the stove as it often remarked.

So what did change and what has changed about our time? There are many corollaries that one can draw from the present. One is that the majority white or Christian countries are more peaceful though no feminists will ever make that claim lest they be ejected from the safety of the leftists hive mind. Perhaps it was evolution. Maybe in two hundred years humans evolved enough to allow for these changes within society to occur. Doubtful, as I've seen no evidence of it. In fact, it appears that our intelligence has already peaked so it's unlikely we've had some great behavioral or intellectual evolution. But the pioneers who settled America didn't have cell phones. Neither did the 19th century feminists, nor the women who gained power in ancient Sparta. They didn't have cars or high speed internet. They didn't have washing machines which made their jobs redundant in the home. They didn't have birth control.

The most likely answer as to why things have changed and improved is not found in social or ideological progress but within technology. All of the examples given by the feminists always fail to mention the impact that technology has had. In fact, any progressive is likely to cite their own ideology as the driving force behind what they deem the moralization of humanity when it fact is has always been driven by technology and not morality.

Socrates was an abolitionist long before the Emancipation Proclamation. He was probably the first feminist as well so it was never a lack of moral ambition that was missing within the world. The ideology was there and has been there for literal millennia but what was lacking was the wherewithal. Once innovation in agriculture - the cotton gin for example - made slaves redundant or for the most part economically inefficient it was only a short time before they were freed.

Society is a vast, complex network not easily understood. There is a certain balance to it. For each joy of civilization one must sacrifice something else. Simplified it is a balance between collective beliefs and individual desires. It has been throughout history this balance between the individual and the collective which has lead to the advance of technology and consequently the advance of society. Where one element became unbalanced the other becomes dominant and eventually a rebalancing occurs. Society is self-correcting and if enough people abandon the sacrifice of their individuality for the collective by destroying all social bonds and "social constructs" there will be no collective and no society left and un-oppressed individuals will all meander around unrestrained and listless, lacking cohesion. They will probably all congratulate themselves on their moral superiority though.

It's easy to conflate change within society to ideology. Temping, especially when someone wants that ideology to spread. Backed by the veracity of not only the moral superiority but the efficiency of one's belief it's easy to become entrenched in that belief system to the exclusion of all others. From there it's no great leap to follow in the steps of other leaders who were absolutely certain in their righteousness and start "bombing for peace". And while there is no lack of groups willing to accept the victory for the advance of civilization there is none who can rightly claim it since it is not social advancement that we see in the world today but technological innovation.

Must watch MGTOW video

Mark Minter and the Manosphere by Dr. Illusion

http://illusionofsanity.com/blog/?p=1020

A great post by Dr. Illusion. I wanted to share it with everyone. Even though I've been called a reverse pollyanna by some I'm not. I'm all about humor and laughter.

I realized that facing a constant deluge of hate will turn me into smeagol, nestling myself in my cave, clinging to my false identity of hate. I avoid feminist posts now. In fact, I avoid all of the news. I have a simple way of figuring out what's going on in the world. I open up my door and stare outside. Look the sun is out and the grass is still green and I don't see feminist hate machines rolling down the sidewalks yet so I'm going to enjoy this day.

And now a zen story to encapsulate how I feel.

"One day while walking through the wilderness a man stumbled upon a vicious tiger. He ran but soon came to the edge of a high cliff. Desperate to save himself, he climbed down a vine and dangled over the fatal precipice. As he hung there, two mice appeared from a hole in the cliff and began gnawing on the vine. Suddenly, he noticed on the vine a plump wild strawberry. He plucked it and popped it in his mouth. It was incredibly delicious!"

Thanks Dr. Illusion for the great post. 

The future of war

The City-State and The Internet

There may be an inverse correlation with moral agency and technological advance. The past didn't have democracy which politicizes EVERYONE who still assumes their vote matters. Politics makes people miserable. At least it does for me and I've considered giving up any political theory in favor of spiritual development.

If you take the vote away from everyone then no one will care about issues or politics. They'll focus on themselves and their own lives which is why I believe people outside of a democracy would be happier. The games of power are sickening. It's like the ring of power from the Lord of the Rings. The more you wield it the more you want to wield it and the sicker you become. Not even the noble hobbits were immune to the corruption of the ring of power.

The past didn't have social media nor all of the connective communication devices that we do today. The positive is that there is a growing movement of disdain for the current political and social climate. While the voices on the left, right, and center are divergent on the aims of a successful society they are united in their general enmity of the current status quo and are eager for change. Real change and not the BS Obama change.

The vision I have for the future is humility. One of diversity of thought and coexistence of various ideologies. I begin with humility. I am not God and I do not know what's best for everyone. I know only what I want, if that. I can decide for myself. I control my own life and have no need for power over others. But to bring that about diversity of thought there must be an end to universalism. The idea of big government must be put to rest.

The city-state is a social construct where autonomous states may govern themselves as they wish. This is similar to the United States prior to the tyrant Abraham Lincoln imposing his universalist thought onto everyone. But these city-states would not be limited to 50 or any other arbitrary number. It would allow for states to grow and govern as they see fit. A christian state could be born, a theocratic christian state run under the principles of the Bible, so long as it agreed to exist peacefully next to other autonomous states. This breeds independence to people and true diversity. Diversity of lifestyle where the Christian would not fear a secularized media and school system. It would have no need to brainwash children or force them to conform to its ideas of equality and secular thought.

The left could have their paradise. They could have their free and just world without gender or race or religion. But they never want that because theirs is a spirit of a parasite latched onto the greater beast.

We only need to look to the internet to see the future. The groups that form along various websites are similar to the pairings of the city-states that would form. The homosexuals could have their own state. Let them. The catholics and the muslims could form theirs as well. And any other who would choose to do such a thing. The internet communities that we see could very well be the models of future societies.

We are fortunate to live in these times as we may see this come about. The government has spent beyond its means. The trillions in unfunded liabilities can never be paid which means a downsizing, which means they'll lose power. Hopefully, the angst of the populace will not allow them to regrow back to their former state after it collapses. I don't think it will because I don't think it will need to.

Certain technologies such as 3D printing will redistribute the population away from cities. We can see the growth of universalist thought along with the growth of the city. People forced to live in close proximity to each other must conform to a certain rigidity of thought in order for it to function. But as the industrial world collapses because of a decentralization of industry in the form of 3D printing then it's likely the same will trigger an exodus from the city.

It is need which defines us. People need food and they need jobs. When the jobs are all in the cities then the people will all be in the cities. When the jobs are decentralized then the people will not be there. Most people do not like most people and most people will be happie choosing where and what form of society they live under. But for any of this to work a vitriolic hatred of universalism must be burned into everyone's mind.

The Feminist Nightmare

Saw this article and it made me think of feminists. A french woman was apparently attacked by a wild group of stray cats while out walking her dog. For the whole story read: The feminist nightmare.

I'm surprised someone else hasn't blogged this yet.

If Hillary Clinton Becomes President

Back when Obama got elected the first time I thought it might bring about some change in race. I thought the racial ideologues would back off with their white racist witch hunts. How can a country be racist if it elected a black man? I was wrong. The anti-racism spiel seemed to intensify if anything.

The same will happen with a female president. If you think a female president will make the feminists back off you're mistaken. It will embolden them and they'll roll out even more blatant female supremacist laws and misandrous organizations. The stories that will come out of the media will make The End of Men article look pro-male.

Just wait until a lesbian, man-hating, feminist sits in the oval office. Women will lose their minds with hate.

The Female Not the Male is the Sexist

An unpublicized study reveals the nature of women, exposing an innate sisterhood between them which doesn't exist among men. I also believe this points to female solipsism and the general inability of women to even acknowledge that men exist. The study found a large ingroup bias among women that did not exist in men. Here's a link:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15491274/

Is God a noun?

The muslims believe the christians are idol worshippers among other things. They see the crucifix, the image of Christ on the cross, and believe that this is God. I understand their complaints.

The difficulty with religion is that it is an extremely abstract concept and these high concept abstractions are often lost on those who cannot follow it. They're best just told what to do to live a good, cooperative life with their fellow man as it's likely beyond their ability, intellectually and spiritually to truly grasp the concept of God.

The taoist acknowledge this. In fact, their sacred book the Tao Te Ching, begins with a warning. The Tao which can be told is not the eternal Tao. As nebulous and open to interpretation as the tao is one thing it is not is a noun.

God can only be idolized by first making Him a noun. A noun can be pictured in the mind and a person prays to christ on the cross, or to the image of christ on the cross as has be indelibly burned into their psyche. But god is ephemeral, best understood as a non-thing, both subject and verb and there lies the impossibility for language to grasp God and the impossibility of materialist and scientists to quantify God. If they struggle to understand quantum physics or string theory while denying anything immaterial then they'll never be able to understand God.

Nevertheless, in the mind's of the believe God often becomes an image. Where as religion is intended to bring union with God, a shift in consciousness, it is often lost on those who exploit its precepts or can't understand it.

“You shall not make for yourself a carved image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above.... Exodus 20:3

Idolatry worship is in the mind. This is where the muslims get it wrong. The image of the cross is not needed. Ideally, in prayer a Christian would never hold a picture of jesus in his mind nor an image of Michelangelo's God the bearded father in their head. The buddhist get this right. They hold no image of Buddha. That is idolatry as it limits God to a noun.

The Rifle and The Drone

Democracy worked best around the time after the American Revolution. Democracy being a distribution of power among the people, there was one invention which lead to this being possible and tenable during the era, the rifle. Ubiquitous access to firearms was more liable for the American and French revolutions than was the Enlightenment era's philosophy of egalitarianism. The rifle made power distributable among the people more than the vote. Voting became an extension of that most carnal of power and since all power is derivative of violence then general equality of rich man and poor man armed with a flintlock rifle by necessity made them equals. God made man but Samuel Colt made them equal.

With the advance of military technology there is a push away from the common man. The 2nd amendment can be destroyed in two ways. One by revoking its status legally. Two by making the possession of firearms pose little threat to the state. The state has attempted both but has been more successful for the later.

Now we enter the age of the drone a nearly autonomous killing machine. At most a user inputs some data on a screen safely tucked away in a bunker somewhere and the drone kills a group of people or drops a bomb on a weapon's factory. It's like a video game.

There is really no division between state and citizen. The two are imagination. There is man with resources, the rich man and man without resources poor man. By voluntarily surrendering one's freedom a man may gain temporary access to certain resources. For example, a man in the military may gain access to a million dollar attack chopper but only while he wears a certain uniform. Regardless, the dichotomy remains rich man poor man and the gap between the two is ever widening.

Prior to the rifle there was the lancer, the swordsmen, and the archer. The problem with all three of these is similar. The amount of training it took to create an able bodied swordsmen was too long. The elite with the resources to allow someone to train a swordsmen were not apt to distribute this power to the peasants. The aristocracy held sway because no one could compete. Never doubt where power lay. It is brought from the willingness to murder another or it is phantasmal, illusionary, so much brainwashing on television. And so it took ten years to train a swordsmen and outfit him in armor. Then the rifle came and it took an afternoon to show a boy how to fire a rifle. He was now competitive with a 200 pound man in battle. The rifle destroyed the aristocracy as much as the guillotine did because it is technology which brings about changes.

The push to drones move power away from the people because the people do not have access to drones. That may or may not change but the rich man grows greater in strength because he can afford these million dollar death machines and the working class grows poorer. When drones become totally autonomous and hundreds of drones can perform patrol duties, surveillance, and serve arrest warrants without human insight the shift toward elite power will be nearly absolute. A few men will control the drones and the drone oversight and maintenance crew and anyone not them will be peasants. Humans are violent chimpanzees and no amount of modern liberalism and kindhearted diatribes have changed that.

The only way for power to be distributed evenly is not with voting but making sure everyone can kill each other. In particular, if the state fears the people, or the rich man fears the poor man, there can be peace. Otherwise, if the rich man has no need to restrain his inner psychopath, he won't.

Drones don't exist in vacuums however. There is another device that helps with power distribution. The internet allows for the free exchange of information. It's turned everyone's apartment into a television station allowing everyone to freely broadcast their thoughts to millions of others. Unfortunately, most people ignore all of this. Look for well thought out blogs and videos with insightful, educational commentary and you'll usually stumble over a writer that's struggling to get by or make a living from his craft for the specific reason that well thought out posts don't draw much attention. Commentary on relationships and celebrity gossip bring tenfold the attention as of a philosophical treatise on consciousness. But the internet has organized people. It is this era's rifle which has given some power to the people and stripped it away from the elite which is why internet freedom is just as important if not more so than the 2nd amendment. The days of the rifle defending freedom are gone. Liberty hangs on the wire, on youtube, on the blogs, and the web pages.

On the feminization of the military

One day they'll push too far and some young man with ambition will realize he has no hopes of obtaining the rank he deserves through merit. He'll split off and take a lot of other angry young men with him. There's only so much transgender and gay praise a southern boy can take before he's had it and realizes that the military and the nation he believed in no longer existed. Then things get interesting. Real interesting.

When most people hear of secession and civil war they have an image of dumb rednecks with shotguns lead by Alex Jones. Then they say how impossible it is for citizens to fight the military which may or may not be true but the more likely scenario is of a schism within the military of highly trained, heavily armed soldiers performing a coup or going rogue against the military. So when the leftists imagine a revolt they always envision the military on THEIR side when any real civil war will have a military, political leaders, and infrastructure on both sides.

Considering that the majority of the military are all white, male, christian, conservatives who are being oppressed with leftist tolerance, the splinter faction scenario is possible. Another possibility is that the white christians simply stop joining the military and as diversity becomes the norm within the military we go the way of Rome and fill up the rank with foreigners and aliens. Similarly as Rome, once the decline accelerates the foreign born military will not hold loyalty to anyone and will turn to looting and piracy once the .gov checks stop rolling in.

But leftists don't live in reality. They long for ideals and not realism. For a society to function properly it must focus its intent on the mainstream of the culture not the outlier. The transgender is such a tiny minority that paying them any mind within the collective is wasted since their issues don't matter. 

Sammich

Should she lie about her N count?

I know what hell is

At the advice of my doctor I started a new drug. It would be the last time I took his advice.

For two weeks I took it only in small amounts. Twice a day I took the little blue pill. I needed help. I was desperate. My life, I had figured, would end if I didn't take something. I had nothing to lose as the only way out of my suffering was medication or suicide. So instead of ending my life I chose another option and found a doctor.

For the first few days I noticed nothing. No changes. No shift in thinking or feeling. Then one day I woke up but couldn't wake up. I grew scared. I was awake but my brain was in sleep mode. I wanted nothing to do with consciousness even though I had slept for over twelve hours. In a panic I decide that I would exercise to clear my head. This is when I knew something was wrong because as I went for a jog down the block the fogginess didn't leave and I nearly fell asleep. The sleep jogger. It passed and I thought nothing of it. Strange body. Strange things happen to me. 

Then a week later the disaster. I was working out hard, lifting weights in my apartment. I was doing upright rows, an exercise I'll never do again. Something snapped. My neck went stiff as a board and suddenly I felt terror ripple through me in a dark wave. Overcome, I huddled in the corner, unable to cry or face the light. Eventually, I called my father to take me to the emergency room.

They gave me some benzodiazepines to calm and wrote me a very small prescription. They told me to stop taking my medication. I did and stayed on the benzos until the prescription ran out.

Then hell. For two weeks I paced, tearing a track through the beige rug of my apartment. Back and forth I walked, incapable of stopping or sitting. The feelings of restlessness were too intense. Pulses shook up my legs. Warm flashes rushed through my neck, chest, and arms. If someone looked at me I would weep. I had no control. There was nothing stopping my emotions, no barrier between me and anyone else. I could not smile and for the first time in my life I could not laugh or tell a joke. No joy. No rest. Nothing but the endless pacing, the terror of being alive. The fear I would be abandoned, and the anxiety, the destructive anxiety that taught me what horror that never dies feels like. 

I returned to the hospital twice but they offered little help. When I saw my doctor again he refused to give me anything for the pain. At the time I had no desire to say or do anything to him but now I want to drive a knife through his heart. 

As I paced and paced my family grew worried. Everyone's lives stopped because they had to deal with me. I refused to leave them alone and suffer in silence. In two weeks I slept about ten hours. Laying in bed was excruciating. 

I searched the internet but found no help. I did locate one forum for people who had taken the drug I was on. The reports were similar to my own. I remember one woman writing, "I would not give this drug to Hitler." 

Slowly, things began to recede. After 14 days of pacing, of feeling my legs cramp up and spasm, the restlessness started to fade. I sat down. For ten minutes I sat in a chair. I started crying. I could sit down. I could sit in a chair. That night I even slept in a bed for three hours. 

Days went by and eventually it faded but it took years to fully recover. My neck still felt stiff and sore and I would occasionally bouts of restlessness and hot flashes in my body. 

I thought things in my life were bad and could never be worse but I learned what hell is. If you're going through hell then the best advice I can give is this. "This too shall pass." 

I competed against Jesus

I wanted to beat Jesus' record but I failed in the end. He is the superior man. I made it 22 days straight though. 22 days without food living only on water. I watched my muscle and fat wither from my body. I witnessed the true hierarchy of needs we experience because I lost all desire and thoughts of sex completely. Instead of sex fantasies I had food fantasies. Thoughts of cheeseburgers and fried chicken cajoled through my mind tempting me. Women were invisible to me. They held no interest and I knew that I cared for them no more than I cared for my next orgasm. Scars that I had on my arms and shoulders cleared away. My skin improved. I could sit still, not in any focused meditation, but just sit and stare at a tree without restlessness or boredom. The only intrusive thoughts I had were the same thing repeating. "Feed. Food. Gravy. Mashed potatoes." Eventually my will broke and I ate a salad, just some spinach in a bowl and nothing else. The flavor. The taste. I knew what food tasted like as no one who has gone without can understand.

Women make great car alarms

I often watch ASMR videos to relax and fall asleep. That and some of the girls that make them are really beautiful. I've noticed the popularity in ASMR has really grown lately. I think part of it is because of the tingles generated but also because of our lack of intimacy in relationships is dwindling with technology and text messaging. There are thousands of ASMR videos on youtube, most of them made by young, attractive females. Judging by the comment section I would guess that young men make up the majority of the viewership.

One theory I have is of the whispering woman. It connects with the intense desire that men have to bond with their mother in infancy which is actually a greater need than the female infant has. The whispering woman represents a peaceful surrounding, closeness, and intimacy between the boy and mother. One study did a test on subliminal messages. They had screen showing a series of images and then played various messages within the images. They noticed that a man’s heart rate would reduce after they showed the message, “mother and I are one.” The soft whispering of females would likely initiate this response and feelings of safety in men.

The contrast to this is the shrieking woman. Every man who hears a woman shriek will react bodily to it. If a woman whispering is a lullaby then the women shrieking is an alarm to danger. Notice in an emergency situation you will rarely hear a man shriek or even shout. Men grow very silent during an emergency, blood drains from their face, their skin turns pale, and their body is flooded with adrenaline. The shrieking woman is a call to arms.

About the hair pulling and spanking thing. They stimulate the same part of the brain which deals with sex. The two are inexorably linked. In females, the most likely response in our evolution would be for her to subdue a violent male by offering sex. The women who were not willing to sleep with a violent male would not survive. This helps explain a lot of the desires women can have for serial killers and criminals. Another theory is that alpha male behavior is a simulation of constrained violence. I’m not implying that alphas are violent only that their behavior represents a sublimated form of violence acceptable in modernity the same way that sports are a form of sublimated warfare.

Some manufacturers have caught onto this type of psychological response.  For example, they make baby rockers that rocks to the rhythm of a woman's steps as it simulates the sensations within the womb. Some even add a beating pulse, timed to the same rate of a woman's heart beat. Given that the first sound everyone hears is their mother's heart beating it's no surprise that to mimic the state of the womb will cause feelings of safety and relaxation. 

If car alarm companies really wanted to make someone pay attention to their sirens they would make it sound like a woman shrieking. 

Your Job Could Get You Laid

LAMPS a theory of attraction by Donal Graeme that covers the biggest factors in sexual attraction. In this post I'm going to write about these attraction vectors and how they relate to some popular jobs. I'll be basing these assumptions on the obvious stereotypes for each profession and what I believe is the most common factors. There are outliers who don't fall into any of these categories. I know that. 

I use a point scoring system which grades based from -5 and +5. Looks is self-explanatory. Athleticism is not. For the sake of this article I consider the following questions when considering athleticism. Can they throw a football? Can they shoot a free throw? Can they punch a man in the face? Money is also self-explanatory but power is not. For power I break it into two areas. Personal power and social power. Personal power is the freedom someone has. Free time, ability to vacation, ability to relocate and choose job location is personal power. Social power is determined by one thing. Can they tell others what to do? For status I base most of it on whether they're given praise by movies or television. 


Unemployed: This is the lowest status a man can have unless he's wealthy or retired. 

• Looks: Bad, the stereotype is that an unemployed man is an alcoholic bum who is a slob, unwashed, and dirty. -3 point.
•  Athleticism: He's not working out too much either. He's probably ugly but his life has probably been harder than most. He's probably had to defend himself before so he can throw a punch. +1
• Money: This one's obvious. -5
• Power: This an odd position. What the homeless lack in power over others they often compensate for with power over themselves. That power translates into free time. They've got a lot of it. +2
• Status: Get a job you hippie. -5

Overall Score: -10

The only way these men can improve is by getting a job. Any job is better than none. They can expect to have one night stands or short term flings. No relationships, no marriage, and no dating.

Firefighter

• Looks: Neutral. Often physically fit but not exceptionally so. Most professions don't have looks stereotypes. 0
• Athleticism: Firefighters are know for staying physically fit for their demanding jobs. +1 
• Money: Low. Firefighters are not paid well. About average for most people but nothing that will stand out. score: +2
• Power: They wear a uniform which is a sign of one's power and authority but they work long hours though and have no power over anyone. 0
• Status: Firefighters are held in high esteem. Women buy calendar's with their nude bodies on it and more than one woman I know has a firefighter fetish. +4

Overall Score: 7

A firefighter will be highly attractive to a lot of women. He has all of the major areas covered. He may lack for some wealth but he'll make enough money to support a family. Highly attractive position worthy of the praise and status they receive. This job will increase your attractiveness overall. 

Tip: if you want to get laid on Halloween and have a good body then wear a firefighter outfit to a party and watch as the women literally molest you. 

Musician, Actor, Artist

This is a difficult profession to score. On one hand most people in entertainment are failures. Only the top 1% are successful. Entertainment is a top heavy career. But for those lucky few their status is propelled into the stratosphere. At the same time a celebrity is held as a god among men who can land nearly any woman he desires but the ones at the bottom are little better than unemployed.  

I'm not going to score this based on Brad Pitt. The top artists and entertainers receive the highest marks on this scale as they are +5 in all areas for a perfect +25. This scoring is for the average actor and musician.

• Looks: Good. Sure there are some ugly people in entertainment and art but they all tend to focus on appearance more. There aren't throngs of overweight or ugly struggling actors because ugly people know they don't stand a chance. +3
• Athleticism: While they're known for their looks they're not known for being very good athletes. They spend too much time spouting Shakespeare and not enough time at the gym. -2 
• Money: Starving artists don't get that name because they're mildly successful. They're as broke as can be. This area is a failure. -4
• Power: They have the power...to move you. Plus they smoke weed without even caring and sleep in. +1
• Status: High. For whatever reason we grant artists high status even if they're unsuccessful. Musicians top this one out because they easily display their talent to others. Writers are the least desired because it's harder for others to see their work and they have a smaller audience. +4

Overall Score: 2

A struggling artist can use his talent to land some women so long as he can display it. His lack of money and athleticism are a hindrance to any long term relationship.  Don't expect to marry or for girls to stay around for an encore. 

Anyone unemployed should learn an art, particularly music. You can then use it as an excuse for being worthless and fool some women into sleeping with you. You can't start a family You can probably have a few short term relationships until they realize you're never going to be Tommy Lee.

Service Sector:

I'm defining the service sector as anyone who is in restaurant or retail work. This includes most of the managers. A grocery store manager is a trumped up stock boy who makes the schedules and orders more vegetables. Someone like a janitor is also included. This is a big area so I'm limiting it to only two. Restaurants and Walmarts for the most part. 

• Looks: Have you ever been to Walmart?  There's nothing very special about this. They're not going to be fit or need to look good. -1
• Athleticism: stocking shelves or helping a customer load their big screen TV is not going to get anyone jacked. Forget it. They're unathletic and unfit. -1
• Money: These guys are barely ranked above the hippies who are unemployed and the starving artists. While some waiters can make good money most don't. +2
• Power: None. This is wage slavery. They command nothing and no one. They have no time or freedom and little money to show for it. Subsistence living. -3
• Status: At least he has a job. +1

Overall Score: -5

This is the lowest status job you can have. The money isn't good, the work sucks, the customers are annoying, and most women will be out your reach. If you're doing this job at 30 don't expect much.

Engineer: 

Engineers are so smart and every girls says she loves intelligent guys. Well not really because these guys might be able to design a bridge but they don't have the kind of intelligence women are attracted to, verbal skills. 

• Looks: Low. Dorky nerds go into engineering and everyone knows it. Acne and pocket protectors come to mind when thinking about an engineer. -3
• Athleticism: If you threw these guys a football they could calculate the wind speed velocity and accurately pinpoint the trajectory based upon advanced calculus but they'd probably get knocked in the head with the ball instead of catching it. -5
• Money: This is where these guys shine. As they come into their thirties they're going to start making some real money. Straight out of college engineers make more than any other degree. If they go to work for the oil and gas companies they'll be in the top percent of earners in the country. +5
• Power: Their money will grant them some power to control their lives but they are chained to a corporate desk job. The power they acquire through their money will be wasted because they'll be enslaved by the first woman that gives them any sex. -1
• Status: The engineer is still held as low status but that has been changing in recent years. There are TV shows about this type of person now and the status has shifted somewhat. It's still not much of a job to drop on a woman to impress her but it's getting better. 0

Overall Score: -4

The engineer struggles with a lot of these metrics. He can expect to be a lonely virgin until he reaches 30 and women want to have children. Then he can expect one of them to snatch him up, sex him up, and ship him off to work for her. Good for a living but bad for a sex life. 

Doctor: 

You save lives or give women boob jobs. They love you. This is the highest status job an American man can expect to have if he wants a beautiful wife.  Before Obama care and the influx of female doctor's make this profession low status and low pay you can expect a lot from this line of work. It's not for everyone though and the doctor does not score high on all areas.

• Looks: Neutral. Doctors are not known for their looks and all of the tv shows about them aren't going to change that. They know a lot about the body though so they score neutral because they genuinely take care of themselves. 0
• Athleticism: I wouldn't trust a doctor to throw down in a bar fight with me even if he could fix my jaw afterwards. They're known for reading books not tossing around footballs. However, he's not without his own form of protection. Any man who knows how to heal someone also knows how to kill them.  0
• Money: Glorious. They're paid more than the other jobs on here. Some doctors might earn lower wages then the engineers but only if they choose the wrong specialties. Pediatrics and general practitioners being the worst paying. Still, doctors are making more than anyone. +5
• Power: Forget it. Most doctors work for hospitals. They work long hours and are slaves to their employers and the insurance company.  They have little free time as they can be on call often. They're situation is better if they have private practice but only marginally. However, the doctor is saved because he has the power of life and death over others.  +1
• Status: Very high. This will continue as long as shows like ER, Grey's Anatomy, and Scrubs keep showing doctors on television. However, they lose some points because people are slowly becoming fed up with cold hearted doctors pushing drugs on people who don't need them. +4

Overall Score: 10

The doctor can expect status and respect from his profession but it comes at a great cost. Lots of school, debt, and stress is what his life will be like. He can expect little freedom over his life. His status is shrinking as more abuse within medicine and the drug companies becomes widespread. Also, obamacare is going to cripple doctors and make their lives even worse. 

Take this job if you like helping people and want a hot wife, a nice home, and don't mind giving up your freedom. Not for everyone. 

Blue Collar/Trades:  Plumbers, electricians, construction workers, welders, roofers all fall into this category.

• Looks: plumbers crack. Not known for their fine appearances. -2
• Athleticism: Jocks in high school. They can punch, throw, and kick even if they years of picking up scrap have slowed them down. +2
• Money: Decent. They're above most in the service sector. They have a reliable trade that will always be in demand so they won't be out of work much. They can support a family though. +3
• Power: Little to none. Most jobs offer very little power and this one is no exception. They may have more personal power than most but very little. -1
• Status: Neutral. Even if these guys make more than a corporate slave they're still considered low status. I've never seen a TV show about plumbers, Super Mario excluded. 0

Overall Score: +2

Average job. You can expect an average wife and an average life. Nothing too drastic. Nothing unstable. Lots of tedium, boredom, and lots of work. 

Business Owner: 

• Looks: Neutral. There's no stereotype about this group concerning looks. The type of people that open a business is wide ranging. 0
• Athleticism: Expect lots of confident men to open businesses and become CEOs. They're leaders and are above average in fitness levels. +2
• Money: The potential for great money is there even if it never manifests. Women will often be attracted to potential millionaires. It's like playing the lottery for them. Unfortunately, most businesses fail and having a steady income might not happen. +1
• Power: You got it baby. Put your minions to work. Both social and personal power are yours. You can vacation when you want and command your underlings to do whatever you want. However, as your business grows and you gain more power over others you will lose power over yourself. You will become a slave to your job and work at it 24/7. +3
• Status: America loves to tout about business owners. They have positive social status but not as great as doctors or firefighters. +2

Overall Score: 8

They fall just below doctors. They score well on nearly all areas. They are leaders and can make good money. They are attractive to women and carry no negative status. Except to receive above the average lifestyle depending on success.

Drug Dealer:

• Looks: I've seen a few ugly ass drug dealers. -1
• Athleticism: Gang bangers will fuck you up. +3
• Money: I score this very low. But they got bank, I can hear you say. They got fifties on the top and hundreds on the bottom. Yah, they do for about five years and then they rot in a jail cell. -5
• Power: They'll fucking kill you and they do what they want. Ultimate power. +5
• Status: Thank to the endless stream of gangster movies their status is very high. This wasn't always so. Before gangsters were cool criminals were considered low status. Hollywood changed all of that. +4

Overall Score: 6

Their time as dons and kingpins is limited. They run hotter than any other profession for a few years and then go cold as an igloo. While they're free and alive they're attractiveness to women is very high but overall they're failures. 

If death and prison doesn't faze you then this job won't be so bad.

There are other jobs I could cover but this list is expansive enough. There are some very high status jobs that don't fall into this category. Personal trainers, soldiers, and police officers can score very high as well. Overall, I think firefighter is the best profession for a few good reasons. She'll never balk at telling her friends what you do. She'll be turned on by the uniform and you'll have enough money so that she'll feel as though she's enslaved a winner.

How does your job stack up?