Close
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 25

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Gong Shooter bigshane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Idaho Falls, ID
    Posts
    342

    Default Never Trust Anyone Who Hasn’t Been Punched in the Face

    The bittersweet truth about our modern, hyper-connected, info at the fingertips, Internet Era is that for practically any thought I have, I can find someone else who has already expressed it better than I planned to.

    I looked back and couldn't find that this had been previously shared here.






    Conservatives like to talk about the causes of Western Civilization’s downfall: feminism, loose morality, drug abuse, Christianity’s decline, reality TV. Blaming civilization’s downfall on lardy hagfish such as Andrea Dworkin is like a doctor diagnosing senility by an old person’s wrinkles. The fact that anyone listened to such a numskull is a symptom, not the cause, of a culture in decline. The cause of civilizational decline is dirt-simple: lack of contact with objective reality. The great banker-journalist (and founder of the originalNational Review) Walter Bagehot said it well almost 150 years ago:

    History is strewn with the wrecks of nations which have gained a little progressiveness at the cost of a great deal of hard manliness, and have thus prepared themselves for destruction as soon as the movements of the world gave a chance for it.

    Every great civilization reaches a point of prosperity where it is possible to live your entire life as a pacifist without any serious consequences. Many civilizations have come to the state of devolution represented by modern Berkeley folkways, from wife-swapping to vegetarianism. These ideas don’t come from a hardscrabble existence in contact with nature’s elemental forces; they are the inevitable consequence of being an effete urban twit removed from meaningful contact with reality. The over-civilized will try to portray their decadence as something “highly evolved” and worthy of emulation because it can only exist in the hothouse of highly civilized urban centers, much like influenza epidemics. Somehow these twittering blockheads missed out on what the word “evolution” means. Evolution involves brutal and often violent natural selection, and these people have not been exposed to brutal evolutionary forces any more than a typical urban poodle.

    Through human history, vigorous civilizations had various ways of dealing with the unfortunate human tendency toward being a weak ninny. The South Koreans (for my money, the hardest men in Asia today) have brutally tough military training as a rite of passage. I’ve been told that the Soviet system had students picking potatoes during national holidays. The ancient Greeks used competitive sports and constant warfare. The Anglo-American working classes, the last large virtuous group of people left in these countries, use bullying, violent sports, fisticuffs, and hard living.

    I think there is a certain worldview that comes from violent experience. It’s something like…manhood. You don’t have to be the world’s greatest badass to be a man, but you have to be willing to throw down when the time is right.

    A man who has been in a fight or played violent sports has experienced more of life and manhood than a man who hasn’t. Fisticuffs, wrestling matches, knife fights, violent sport, duels with baseball bats, facing down guns, or getting crushed in the football field—men who have had these experiences are different from men who have not. Men who have trained for or experienced such encounters know about bravery and mental fortitude from firsthand experience. Men who have been tested physically know that inequality is a physical fact. Men who know how to deal out violence know that radical feminism’s tenets—that women and men are equal—are a lie. We know that women are not the same as men: not physically, mentally, or in terms of moral character.

    Men who have fought know how difficult it is to stand against the crowd and that civilization is fragile and important. A man who has experienced violence knows that, at its core, civilization is an agreement between men to behave well. That agreement can be broken at any moment; it’s part of manhood to be ready when it is. Men who have been in fights know about something that is rarely spoken of without snickering these days: honor. Men who have been in fights know that, on some level, words are just words: At some point, words must be backed up by deeds.

    Above all, men who have been in fights know that there is nothing good or noble about being a victim. This is a concept the modern “conservative movement,” mostly run by wimps, has lost, probably irrevocably. They’re forever tugging at my heartstrings, from No Child Left Behind to Israel’s plight to MLK’s wonders to whining that the media doesn’t play fair to the overwrought emotional appeals they use to justify dropping bombs on Muslims. The Republicans are even taking seriously a pure victim-candidate: Michelle Bachman. As far as can be told, she’s a middle-American Barack Obama with boobs and a slightly loopier world view.

    Modern “civilized” males don’t get in fistfights. They don’t play violent sports. They play video games and, at best, watch TV sports. Modern males are physical and emotional weaklings. The ideal male isn’t John Wayne or James Bond or Jimmy Stewart anymore. It’s some crying tit that goes to a therapist, a sort of agreeable lesbian with a dick who calls the police (whom he hates in theory) when there is trouble. The ideal modern male is the British shrimp who handed his pants over to the looter in south London.

    How did we get here? Estrogens in the food supply? Cultural Marxism’s corrosive influence? Small families? Some of the greatest badasses I’ve known had many brothers to fight with growing up. When good men who will fight are all extinct, there is no more civilization. No lantern-jawed viragos are going to save you from the barbarian hordes. No mincing nancy boys with Harvard diplomas will stand up for the common decencies: They’re a social construct, dontcha know. The conservative movement won’t save you: They’re chicken-hearted careerists petrified of offending a victim group.

    Teddy Roosevelt, my ideal President, kept a lion and a bear as pets in the White House and took his daily exercise doing jiu-jitsu and boxing. He even lost vision in an eye in a friendly boxing match while he was president. Our last three glorious leaders are men who kept fluffy dogs and went jogging. I don’t trust squirrelly girly-men in any context. When confronted with difficult decisions, they don’t do what’s right or tell the truth—they’ll do what’s easy or politically expedient. Unlike the last three, Teddy Roosevelt never sent men to die in pointless wars, though he was more than happy to go himself or risk his neck wrestling with bears.

    I’m no great shakes: I’m a shrimpy egghead in a suit who thinks about math all day. I don’t train for fighting anymore, and my experiences with violence are fairly limited. Nonetheless, I judge people on these sorts of things. When I first meet a man, I don’t care what kind of sheepskins or awards he has on his walls. I don’t care if he is liberal or conservative. I want to know if they have my back in a fight. That’s really the only thing that matters.
    Last edited by bigshane; 02-27-2013 at 10:57. Reason: link not obvious enough in original formatting.
    Any sufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable from malice.
    - feedback -
    (former username "zip")

  2. #2
    Fleeing Idaho to get IKEA Bailey Guns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    SE Oklahoma
    Posts
    16,469
    Blog Entries
    4

    Default

    I haven't read this particular essay, but ones similar. All make very good points and all are worthwhile reads.
    Stella - my best girl ever.
    11/04/1994 - 12/23/2010



    Don't wanna get shot by the police?
    "Stop Resisting Arrest!"


  3. #3
    Guest
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Castle Rock
    Posts
    3,254

    Default

    Can you post the source or a link to this?

    Thanks,

  4. #4
    Gong Shooter bigshane's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Idaho Falls, ID
    Posts
    342

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 10mm-man View Post
    Can you post the source or a link to this?

    Thanks,
    The title is a link, and the word "this" is a link, but wasn't showing up very overtly. If needed, here is the raw url: http://takimag.com/article/never_tru...the_face/print
    Any sufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable from malice.
    - feedback -
    (former username "zip")

  5. #5
    Definitively Not A Gong Shooter
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Bakersfield CA
    Posts
    1,084

    Default

    Well that compliments me personally (college football), but I have met people who haven't been "punched in the face" so to speak and who would back me up no matter what. Interesting read none the less, but if I ever have a boy, I will not force football upon him. I can already see the effects of banging my head for 10 years and know I am screwed mentally and physically when I get older.

    I can understand where this is going because everyday I have a physical practice or a hard workout I want to quit. I never have the past 10 years, but these days of physical hardships have made me a better person and have made me truly value hard work and the positives it brings. Men who haven't physically worked and been knocked on their ass everyday wouldn't value hardwork as I personally see it.

    Regardless interesting perspective.

  6. #6
    Grand Master Know It All Sharpienads's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs
    Posts
    3,403

    Default

    I've never literally been punched in the face. Metaphorically I've had my shit kicked in.
    Last edited by Sharpienads; 02-27-2013 at 11:14.
    Kyle

    Girlscouts? Hmmm, I don't know... I think it's kinda dangerous to teach young girls self esteem and leadership skills.

  7. #7
    Don of the Asian Mafia ChunkyMonkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Centennial, CO
    Posts
    8,397
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sharpienads View Post
    I've never literally been punched in the face. Metaphorically I've had my shit kicked in.
    You are ugly enough already
    Quote Originally Posted by crays View Post
    It doesn't matter how many rifles you buy...they're still cheaper than one wife, in the long run.
    Coarf Feedback
    Instagram

  8. #8
    Moderator "Doctor" Grey TheGrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Lone Tree
    Posts
    5,750

    Default

    While I understand the sentiment behind this post, it's just another "wimmin need to be kept in the kitchin, get me a SAMMICH!" platitude. That's BS.

    Our society has swung too far into the "think of the children (and every other group that can be a ready vitim for my agenda!)" and it's starting to cannibalize the foundations of our country. But when an article above paints women with the same brush as Andrea Dworkin, sprinkled with a light dose of misogyny and suggests that "estrogen" in the water is the cause of the decay of our society's moral fiber, I'd like to shovel a nice deep layer of this crap onto my garden's foundations. Men and women have differences, yup. Women aren't born with a "LIBERAL" stamp on their forehead. I served my country, dammit. I like to shoot guns, I like movies with explosions and heroes, I eat meat, I protect and care for my family and my neighbors, John Wayne and Ronald Reagan's photos grace our walls and I'll be DAMNED if some self-professed shrimpy egghead that thinks about math all day tries to put me back into a corner because his panties are in a bunch about something and he needs someone to blame. I remember back in the 70s, my mom had to have my dad's permission to withdraw a specific amount of money from their joint checking account! What, freedom is only good for men, and not women?

    There is no way in HELL that going back to those "good old manly-man" days are going to make things better. Nor are they going to happen, because I will kick the ass of any Y chromosome-carrying person that would try to take my freedoms away, either physically or by bull$hit justifications like the above article. Where is the difference in theory between "all semi-automatic guns are bad" and "today's men are acting like women. And that's bad!" attitude? I say we join forces, find a way where our differences are considered strengths and take our freedoms back from those that would de-fang us. We're in this together, whether egghead likes it or not.

    Whooo. How'd that soapbox get there?

  9. #9
    Death Eater Troublco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    KFSU (Ft. Sumner, NM)
    Posts
    4,927

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheGrey View Post
    While I understand the sentiment behind this post, it's just another "wimmin need to be kept in the kitchin, get me a SAMMICH!" platitude. That's BS.

    Our society has swung too far into the "think of the children (and every other group that can be a ready vitim for my agenda!)" and it's starting to cannibalize the foundations of our country. But when an article above paints women with the same brush as Andrea Dworkin, sprinkled with a light dose of misogyny and suggests that "estrogen" in the water is the cause of the decay of our society's moral fiber, I'd like to shovel a nice deep layer of this crap onto my garden's foundations. Men and women have differences, yup. Women aren't born with a "LIBERAL" stamp on their forehead. I served my country, dammit. I like to shoot guns, I like movies with explosions and heroes, I eat meat, I protect and care for my family and my neighbors, John Wayne and Ronald Reagan's photos grace our walls and I'll be DAMNED if some self-professed shrimpy egghead that thinks about math all day tries to put me back into a corner because his panties are in a bunch about something and he needs someone to blame. I remember back in the 70s, my mom had to have my dad's permission to withdraw a specific amount of money from their joint checking account! What, freedom is only good for men, and not women?

    There is no way in HELL that going back to those "good old manly-man" days are going to make things better. Nor are they going to happen, because I will kick the ass of any Y chromosome-carrying person that would try to take my freedoms away, either physically or by bull$hit justifications like the above article. Where is the difference in theory between "all semi-automatic guns are bad" and "today's men are acting like women. And that's bad!" attitude? I say we join forces, find a way where our differences are considered strengths and take our freedoms back from those that would de-fang us. We're in this together, whether egghead likes it or not.

    Whooo. How'd that soapbox get there?


    Well said. I agree that a lot of what's happened with women's rights was overdue. But I also think that the view of the militant feminists is extreme; there is indeed some truth to the idea that men and women are different. My wife feels much like you do, and I agree with her. She's one of the strongest women I know, in the sense of strength of character/do what needs done/persevere. But she also agrees that men and women are not exact equals, were not designed to be. She'd have been one of the ones standing up in the original women's rights movement; but has no time for the modern militant feminists. As far as I can tell, I'm about the only male on the planet that has a chance of telling her no, or what to do (including her father). And you can bet that's by choice - HERS.

    As far as I can tell, this boils down into the basic opinion I've had for years. Maybe I saw something like this years ago, but I don't have any recollection of a specific thing that caused this opinion to form. That opinion is, life is too easy now. I think that's basically the same as what was said, leaving out some of the other stuff. We don't have to worry about having our hair taken by some irritated natives. We don't worry quite the same way about where our next meal will come from. We're not as worried about basic security as we needed to be 150 or so years ago. And this change of condition enables a much easier standard of living than was possible before. Progressivism was impossible when your concerns for the day included basic survival. You're out plowing a field, or herding some cows, or whatever; and you had to carry a rifle because you could be attacked at any time by those irritated natives who wanted not only to separate you from your hair, but they wanted what you had. I believe we're regressing back to some of that; we have a segment of the population that finds it easier to steal than work. Look at our prison populations! My other euphemism for this is best exemplified by the "Cowboy after OSHA". Safety is basically a good thing. But when you apply some of the conditions we're talking about in this thread, it becomes a burden that overshadows its original purpose.

    When life becomes too easy, the cultural "immune system" required by living conditions retreats, and you get diseases like progressivism.

    I was speaking with a colleague yesterday, and we wound up on a similar subject of things (indicators) of societal change. What we were talking about was the change in what used to be societal recreation and what fills that spot today. Boiling it down; politics and involvement in the system used to be a common hobby. People used to follow politics and politicians, the politicians used to need to be good orators to get their points/position across. You'd have large portions of the local population who'd show up for a speech by some politico coming thru town. As far as I've been able to tell from what I've read, this really began changing in the very late 19th century/early 20th century. That made me wonder...what would cause this? What would fill in as a new activity? Didn't take long to figure it out. What national-level activities started becoming popular largely in the beginning of the 20th century? Large scale professional sports. Football, baseball, and so on. Things that were not possible when our daily focus was on surviving until the next day. Sure, we could (and did) do these things on a smaller scale, but on a large scale they weren't possible until our concerns changed, and other factors like how many hours we were working changed. When we lived in smaller communitites where everyone depended on their neighbors to help (barn raisings, banding together for common defense, things like that) the big recreational events were town dances, the political system, and things like that. There was an entirely different focus, based on entirely different needs. I believe it was the Roman Emperors who called their versions of sports (gladiators, etc) the "Opiate of the masses".

    I'd say that strength is bred from adversity, and we're seeing new adversity in our country today. I think my wife is as strong as she is because she had a hard childhood. She doesn't complain about it, it's just the way it was. But it made her who she is. George Washington would not have been who he was had the need not been there. And I believe that we'll see new leaders emerge, based on need. I just wish they'd hurry the hell up...

    Didn't mean to go that long. Rant off.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	OSHA-Cowboy.jpg 
Views:	10 
Size:	185.7 KB 
ID:	22685
    Last edited by Troublco; 02-28-2013 at 09:02.
    SI VIS PACEM, PARA BELLUM

    Herding cats and favoring center

  10. #10
    I blame everything on Tummy Aches
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Brighton
    Posts
    7,688

    Default

    You can trust me the. Like a lot a lot.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •