Fathers Of Daughters And No Sons, hat tip to Feeriker from dalrock.wordpress.com/2017/11/24/it-tastes-better-that-way/

There was a lengthy debate in that thread with Jeff Strand humble-bragging about his NAWALT daughters, how he expects them to command a high price in the marital marketplace and how & how likely that is to backfire on him very badly.

First off, I’m going to reduce patriarchy and Christianity to the most simple, direct and fundamental principle possible: young men, I’m talking 18-22ish, have a divine right to a wife. That means they deserve one without proving their worthiness, ability to afford a family and so on.

Jeff was not pleased. Any father of daughters reading this probably isn’t, either.

But the Christian explanation for this is as simple as “testosterone”. Young men need sex. Forcing them to go without sex until they’re 30 when an alternative is available is cruel and inhumane. Because of Biblical sex standards, that alternative… the only alternative… is a young, barely-legal wife.

The one caveat is that this specific guy does not deserve that specific girl. It’s okay for a father to pick and choose the best pre-college man he can find but it’s indefensible cruelty for him to hold out for a older man with status and a full bank account.

The parallel with Christian life is obvious. We pledge loyalty to Christ at a point in time when He is weak and largely helpless for the trials we face. He isn’t here and both Church and State are busy taking full advantage of it. In time, however, Christ will be recognized as God & King and those of us who remained loyal without reward, especially from a young age, will be very glad we did.

Marriage was designed by God to reflect this reality. When God made us “in His image, male and female” he meant this more than bilateral symmetry and bipedal locomotion. Ideal marriage is between two young lovers, he unproven and she with many options courting her ass, yet loyal to him.

Therefore, the Christian father has a duty to God Himself to prepare his daughters for marriage to a hopeful, local young man in order to reflect Christ within his family. No waiting for a suitor’s promotion to O-5 or scouring the globe for a virtuous Alpha.

If an 18yo man knows he’s got no chance until 28yo then a bitter ghost is a more likely result than a devout football celebrity. This also reflects Christian reality… the reality of Christ’s attitude towards unrepentant humanity on Judgment Day. How can a loving God create Hell? By going through the same emotions as an unsexy but hard-working man who starved for affection until his soul grew cold.

For a Biblical case, look at Matthew 10:37,42. “Anyone who loves their father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves their son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. And if anyone gives even a cup of cold water to one of these little ones who is my disciple, truly I tell you, that person will certainly not lose their reward.” Using your daughter to help a fellow Christian be sexually moral is a perfect fit to what Christ is commanding here.

The issue of sexual morality is truly this simple. Sex within marriage or not at all, and if a man is forced to wait until sex is no longer a driving force in his life then there aren’t going to be many happy families.

Countering this ideal, there is no man closer to the mindset of Adam, who literally turned his back on God to please a woman in rebellion, than the Fathers Of Daughters And No Sons. It is natural that he should want the best for his kids. It is unnatural, in fact a heinous evil, for him to demand suitors of similar value to his daughters. This is because men peak a decade later than women… and forcing men to go that decade with their balls in a jar is morally indefensible. But FODANS doesn’t care about those men. It’s hard without being able to see the pain in his own son’s eyes. He cares only for “me and mine”, and becomes a perfect example of why fatherhood would be a crime against God had God not made a special allowance in 1 Cor. 7. (It’s better to not get married but not a sin if you do.)

I personally don’t understand the FODANS attitude. Men are superior to women physically, mentally, emotionally and spiritually so why not raise a daughter to trade her for a son at the earliest opportunity? Why be horrified at the idea of finding a kid with potential and investing in him? Wouldn’t such a kid be more likely to become a high-status man than a kid who started at zero and was actively preyed upon by society? (Hello, student debt!)

Patriarchy means you invest in sons. Matriarchy means you invest in daughters, as if women can ever be truly happy in the first place. But FODANS like Jeff are horrified at the very idea that the best future their daughter can have is being a skilled lover for an engineering nerd who can’t afford his own education.

And not just horrified. FODANS would rather see their daughters become spinsters than ‘Quasimodo’s sex toy’. Almighty God will not be pleased that they put their daughters ahead of Christian morality & charity.

Meanwhile, we men might as well go MGTOW. If neither girls nor Daddies will give you a look until you’re successful and lootable then you’d be a damned fool to get married at that point, as your sex drive begins to ebb with age. You know, you’ve seen, you’ve experienced that they don’t want you. They want your wallet and status.

If you can manage it, fellow Christian, if you don’t get married before your hormones start to weaken then don’t ever get married. Not even if a unicorn comes along. There’s a younger man than you who <i>needs</i> that chick and you’ll be doing the Lord’s work by crushing the FODANS’ immoral schemes of delayed marriage.

I went shopping at the pet store for my relative who recently adopted six cats. Behold the “Jackson Galaxy” brand of cat toys:

Holy Hell, is this the result of PetSmart’s market research on what spokesman cat owners find appealing? The focus group must have been epic.

Introduce yourself, bring up a topic, rant about you inlaws here. It’s all good for Thanksgiving weekend!

To start it off, my trick for getting home quickly while avoiding cops is to be the second-fastest car on the road at all times. Don’t bother with the radar detectors; it’s only the trainee cops who keep it on all the time anyway. And always, always keep one eye closed while driving drunk so you don’t see double.

That last is actual advice I’ve gotten in driver’s ed.

Sourced from www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/11/16/california-proposal-no-kids-then-dont-pay-school-taxes.html

“A California man has proposed a ballot measure to exempt residents who don’t have kids in state public schools from paying the taxes to fund them.

“The .California Education Tax Relief Act,. proposed by Lee Olson of Huntington Beach, would allow California residents with no children in the public school system to avoid paying taxes and fees designated for state school funding, KTVU reports.

Last week, the state Attorney General’s Office gave approval for circulation of the initiative, allowing proponents to start collecting the signatures necessary to get a spot on the November 2018 ballot.”

THANK YOU, GOD! I’ve wanted something like this for a long time. Fathers are as damaging to men as feminists. They have taxed us bachelors “for the children” for a very long time and dare to be disgusted that the immorally-funded public education system has become immoral. Their children are not our problem. Find this petition, sign it and spread the word! It’s long past time to defund public education and besides, the smart fathers are already homeschooling.

“It.s unclear whether the measure might stand a chance of even getting on the ballot this time. If it did, it could meet stiff opposition from parents and others worried such a massive exemption would result in higher taxes elsewhere.”

No American government in living memory ever reduced spending just because tax revenues fell. Not until they went bankrupt after exhausting every possible method of doing so. If there is no correlation between taxing and spending then there is no reason to pay taxes.

The Left says “men are evil” and the Right says “no, men are disposable”.

The Left says “men must be punished” and the Right says “no, they must be exploited”.

Quoted for truth from RazorBladeKandy2, link below.

The opposite of freedom is guilt. Whenever I visit family who still go to church, I’m guilted into going with them. Such visits are increasingly… not boring.

The last time I attended church, the church bulletin solicited new deaconesses. I complained to the greeter, pointing out how Titus 2 requires older women to teach younger women to be attentive to husbands and busy at home… NOT to handle Scripture. Men study God, women study men. It goes without saying that the head coverings of 1 Cor. 11 were not practiced. Strange that all the women who study Scripture these days haven’t come across that verse yet?

Apologetics tip: These arguments are easy to remember, the rhyming of Titus 2 and the numbering of 1 Cor. 11. Nearly all churches are guilty of disobeying these so whenever the topic comes up, you won’t even need a Bible.

It was also invaded by a local cult that day. Total coincidence. I didn’t learn which one because the pastor’s wife ran them off too quickly. Pastor just watched; he didn’t exactly look the part of Defender of the Faith. I respected the cult more than the church. They at least took a risk for what they believed.

The previous time I went to church, at the church I grew up in, an unmarried young woman wanted funding for a missions trip to Germany. She was going alone, not as part of a missionary organization. She didn’t speak the language. She had no evangelism experience. She knew nobody in-country. And she was only going to be gone a week.

She wanted the Church to fund her no-witness sex tour of Musloid invaders. I missed my chance to nuke her because I intentionally overslept to skip the singing. Guitar-led 7-11 songs, seven words repeated eleven times.

What happened? On what day did Almighty God trip over the Church’s power cord, unplugging it?

*Edited after-posting for grammar*

From techcrunch.com/2017/11/08/driverless-shuttle-in-las-vegas-gets-in-fender-bender-within-an-hour/?utm_medium=TCnewsletter:

A driverless shuttle set free in downtown Las Vegas was involved in a minor accident less than an hour after it hit the streets, reported the local NBC affiliate KSNV. Not really the kind of publicity you want, or that self-driving cars need.

The shuttle, an egglike 8-seater Navya, is operated by the AAA and Keolis. It was a test deployment along half a mile of the Fremont East “Innovation District,. so this thing wasn’t cruising the strip. Probably a good thing.

Now, it must be said that technically the robo-car was not at fault. It was struck by a semi that was backing up, and really just grazed . none of the passengers was hurt.

Like any functioning autonomous vehicle, the shuttle can avoid obstacles and stop in a hurry if needed. What it apparently can’t do is move a couple feet out of the way when it looks like a 20-ton truck is going to back into it.

Why the hard push for driverless cars? There is no reason to create new, extremely complex infrastructure in order to not have a driver handy when you need one.

It was about the breakdown of society for a social species. In the Mouse Utopia experiment, overpopulation was the cause of the breakdown. But what is causing the breakdown with humans? We’re not overpopulated. There are no external threats like plague or famine. It isn’t hormonal birth control, not when a solid majority of humanity doesn’t use it.

Our society’s breakdown is self-inflicted, avoidable and unprofitable for anybody. There is no practical motive. No material reason or cause.

That explodes behavioral science. It explodes evolution, that being free to do as we will results in our refusing to do what we must to survive… and forcing other people to not survive, either. Don’t breed. Don’t self-discipline. Don’t cooperate with others. Those who do so anyway are preyed upon and punished with a fanaticism that only religion can explain.

Not even the Elites benefit from their campaigns of feminism and parasitism. They seek to be kings of ashen wastes instead of stewards of empires. Tyrants of mongrel hordes instead of fathers to their own kids. It isn’t a better path; it isn’t a natural path; it’s not even a path. It’s social arson.

MGTOWs are the ones who, finding no place for themselves in society, save themselves just as the “beautiful one” mice focused inward to escape their own unacceptable reality. We’re not damaged. We’re not destroying society. We’re escaping the cannibal’s pot, and the cannibal complains that he may starve as a result. Never mind that being an omnivorous human, he is surrounded by other food sources.

The purpose of society is to benefit its members. That was Calhoun’s true discovery. Obvious, but… if it’s obvious than why does human society try to consume its own members? The mice had no choice. We did.

It seems a good idea with recent comments to dedicate a thread for discussion of current grievances between Catholics/Orthodox and Protestants. I’ve had some frustrations that may be regional only and some Catholics have complained that they’re falsely accused of hating Prots.

So, this thread is for anybody of either side to air a grievance they have. Current issues only. There’s no point in rehashing ancient history; those were bad days when we killed each other in God’s name. Many lost and nobody won. Now that the modern West is descending into balkanization and tribalism, however, having a forum to keep brotherhood alive between branches seems a good idea.

For my part, I have two issues. One with Cat laity putting signs around their homes warning off Prot (“and other religions”) solicitors. Are these signs common? Has the RCC ruled about them? The other is Cat clergy pushing illegal immigration against the USA. Are these rogue priests getting involved where they shouldn’t, or is the Vatican doing this throughout the West and I shouldn’t take it as a specific attack?

Bring your issues if you have ’em.

That assertion was my claim that America was founded by Christians fleeing Catholic persecution. We can debate history but that was such a sweeping statement that there’s no real point. I said it to point out the extent to which Catholics have historically hated Protestants.

It seems nothing has changed. Most Catholics cannot say a single kind word about us Protestants even for a special occasion.

I wish that Two Crows was the rule not the exception. Our branches could start putting the bloody past behind us. He pleased God by accepting us as fellow Christians while the others complained the thread was being derailed, as if one compliment ever was the same as agreeing with Luther.

This is exactly what makes life in America so hard today. A few Cats are cooperative but most want us Prots gone. A few blacks are decent people but most are BLM dindus. The Texicans and Mexifornians are furious at the bad behavior of Latin American parasites but their voices are drowned out. There are just barely enough female unicorns that it’s hard to give up hope.

It’s individuals like Two Crows that prevent the whole mess from descending into dystopian genocide.

There’s a fairly consistent theme running through the Manosphere that Alpha Male-run societies are ideal, particularly Islamic and ersatz-feudal societies. This is a mistake. Matriarchies are not “women in power”. Matriarchies are “Alpha men in power”. Women don’t want to wield power themselves, they want to bang the powerful men.

A truly patriarchal society is not hierarchical. It is ordered but in such a way that ordinary, unsexy, undesirable men are the designated winners. No central authority exists except the minimum needed for uniform justice and infrastructure.

Women hate patriarchy because they cannot easily pick the winners. They must commit to the lieutenant and only after their youthful options fade, find out if he’s the general they always wanted. Hypergamy is completely thwarted. Men being men, this is actually a self-fulfilling prophecy. A man given his young wife’s best efforts is eager to produce for her and even a man of humble means will reward her far beyond what she gives him.

But women would rather be “King David’s Fourth Thursday Night of the Month” than “Uriah’s one and only”.

Restoring patriarchy will never be accomplished by making men more attractive. Hypergamy makes that a non-starter; if most men were top-tier then it wouldn’t be the top tier anymore. It’ll be accomplished by granting unattractive men, from the beginning and not-yet-earned, their share of respect and authority in both civil and religious spheres. This is the secret behind the USA’s astonishing success; it was a blank-slate country in which every man held the same status as any other before the law, with no aristocracy, theocracy or oligarchy to sort men into the usual winners and losers, each to receive the consequences of his conduct.

This means that re-achieving patriarchy will only happen when society pays MGTOWs to return to society. “Society” referring to the shrinking handful of winner-take-all Elites who must choose between their egos and the general welfare of the peasants… unlikely. This is why the hope of Christians is in Heaven, not Earth, because the jocks will literally burn in Hell before they deprive themselves of eager women for the sake of nerds.

Closing on a theological note, God’s wish for humanity to be patriarchal mirrors His plan for Heaven to be patriarchal–that is, NOT hierarchical. The future for us Christians is not to be God’s servants in Heaven; it is to be God’s peers in Heaven. His friends. No hierarchy. Take heart, fellow Christian MGTOWs! Your suffering for doing good unites you to God as an equal, not a servitor.