Jul 302013
 

Someone named Mark Minter announced that he got engaged, and this created quite the uproar in the androsphere.  While I have seen the occasional comment from Mark Minter, I really don’t know who he is.  I can’t comment on this except to say that the uproar is missing the point.  There are two important things everyone should remember:

  1. Just because you meet a chick at Heartiste does not mean she is any better most women.  Mark Minter’s fiance, Kate, is a white (knight) nationalist who tried to shame white men at the Eradica blog.  Other than the talk about the white race, what she wrote is indistinguishable from the writings of an actual feminist.  No one should expect anything different from Kate because white (knight) nationalism is a goddess cult.
  2. The dangers of marriage 2.0 can not be solved by marrying the ‘right’ woman because the problems are systemic.  Anti-family courts are corrupt and operate outside of the constitution.  There is no way to escape anti-family courts because all marriage in the west is marriage 2.0.  Rather than trying to find an almost nonexistent woman to marry in the west, your time is better spent expating if you want to get married and/or reading books about the dangers of the anti-family court system like Stephen Baskerville’s Taken Into Custody.
Jan 242010
 

My latest post for The Spearhead is up. As with all Spearhead posts comments are disabled so comment on the post at The Spearhead.

(Disclaimer for this post: I am not nor do I claim to be an economist or have any formal education in economics.)

By now you have read The Misandry Bubble. (If not, go read it right now.) The term, misandry bubble, is very accurate because the misandry bubble operates like an economic bubble.

Economic bubbles fall into two types. The first type is typically a technological related economic bubble. The Railway Mania in the 1800s and the dot com bubble are two examples of this type. Both of those bubbles had all of the typical behaviors of economic bubbles, over-investment, rampant speculation, etc. However, when all was said and done there were real economic gains. The Railway Mania produced railroads, and the dot com bubble expanded the internet and created related businesses such as amazon.com. The second type of economic bubble is what might be called an asset bubble. The Tulip Mania of the 1600s and the recent (or current depending on where you live) housing bubble are both examples of asset bubbles. In an asset bubble the price of an asset increases beyond its fundamental value so the price of that asset must come down through inflation, a price collapse, or a combination thereof.

The misandry bubble is clearly an asset bubble. The fundamental value of women has not increased. Women aren’t becoming more beautiful, or smarter, or better cooks, or better girlfriends, etc. By any metric you wish to use, women are not improving. If anything they are getting worse so their fundamental value is going down not up. Thus, the misandry bubble exists because the demands, the “price”, women are demanding from men is going up while the fundamental value of women is holding steady or really going down.

In an economic bubble there are several social psychology factors. One is extrapolation, the idea that because prices have risen in the past they will do so in the future. During the housing bubble we saw this with speculators who flipped houses, and other people who bought houses because if they didn’t buy soon, “they would be priced out forever”. Realtors would say, “real estate only goes up”. David Lereah, the former Chief Economist for the National Association of Realtors, wrote books about how home prices would continue to rise until around 2010 or so. The same claims were made about the oil price spike of 2008 such as demand from the BRIC countries would remain high. We see the same claims in the misandry bubble. A lot of men accept the increasing demands of women because either they are “white knights” or believe that they have no other choice. However, as we see from the collapse of the housing bubble and the 2008 oil price spike, extrapolation is wrong, and this is true with the misandry bubble as well.

Another factor is herding, the idea that investors buy or sell in the direction of the market trend. In the housing bubble, many investment fund managers bought the investment vehicles that were designed to sell mortgages. During the bubble, there were hardly any voices speaking out about how the problems with these mortgage investment vehicles. There were people who noticed, but kept their mouths shut since it could mean losing pay or their jobs. Herding also existed on the level of individual buyers who bought because “everyone else was doing it”.

One aspect of herding that isn’t well know is the use of shaming language to get people who would be skeptical of the behavior causing the bubble to fall in line. There was plenty of shaming language used in the housing bubble. Many made claims that renters were losers and “would be priced out forever” (as in they would forever have the stigma of being a renter since they wouldn’t be able to afford buying a house in the future). The biggest example of shaming language has to be the Century 21 commercial from 2006 (the below video).

In addition to the shaming language to get the husband to buy the house, there is also a great deal of misandry in this video. This is a case of the housing bubble and the misandry bubble overlapping. The husband was right to be skeptical. This commercial aired in 2006. If the couple was really worried about schools, they could have waited two years (when their oldest was starting kindergarten) and saved a boatload of money. Even better they could have rented waiting out the housing bubble in the location with the schools they wanted. However, it was more important to make the husband fall in line despite the fact that he was originally right. With the misandry bubble, shaming language is nothing new as we have the Catalog of Anti-Male Shaming Tactics.

We also see moral hazards with bubbles where the decision making of investors in terms of risk and reward is interfered with. With the housing bubble, they are plenty of moral hazards as the government was and is encouraging people to buy houses. The $8000 tax credit for new homeowners is a prime example. It encourages people who would otherwise rationally weigh whether they would want to buy a house or not to believe there is less risk in buying a house than there actually is. Moral hazards aren’t limited to government policy either. The explosion of exotic mortgages during the housing bubble allowed people to buy houses they otherwise could not afford. These moral hazards lead to many of the foreclosures we see today since they threw the risk-reward relationship of whether to buy a house or not out of whack. Moral hazards also exist in the misandry bubble. The clearest example is with divorce and family courts. With the way divorce works now, women can easily divorce their husbands and get rewarded for it both financially and in getting the kids creating an incentive to get divorced. The same is true with the false rape industry. A woman can get away with making false rape accusations which creates an incentive to make false rape accusations. In the churches, priests/ministers/pastors “encourage” men to get married (using plenty of shaming language) creating a moral hazard of men marrying women they otherwise wouldn’t.

When economic bubbles happen, people who implicitly or explicitly realize there is a bubble, make changes in their behavior. Many people decided to wait out the housing bubble by renting to the point of deciding to rent their entire lives in some cases since they were soured on buying houses. With the 2008 oil price spike, people changed their driving habits and started buying more fuel efficient cars. The misandry bubble is no different. Many men learn game, go ghost, become part of the marriage strike, or even just minimize their time alone with certain types of women.

Overproduction and the search for alternatives is another aspect of a bubble. With the housing bubble, many more houses were built than needed. Areas were gentrified by people looking for cheap housing. The 2008 oil price spike led to increased oil production where possible and investment into alternative energy and other alternatives to oil. With the misandry bubble many men decide to expat to find women or bring foreign women to where they live. In the longer term, alternatives will include virtual reality sex, sex bots, and artificial wombs. The creation of these technologies is guaranteed by the fact that the misandry bubble is an economic bubble.

However, the misandry bubble is different from economic bubbles in one important way. The prices due to a bubble must come down through either inflation, lowered prices, or a combination. There is no equivalent to inflation in the misandry bubble so the “price” women are demanding from men must by definition collapse to where it was before. With the creation of technological alternatives, it will collapse to a lower level than it was before.

Sep 212009
 

I have never been a huge proponent of expating.  I certainly understand why any man might expat.  At some point I may do it myself.  The problem I have with expating is that women are the same everywhere.  A lot of guys who expat do so just to find a woman.  As we all know you can’t bring a woman back to the US at all since she can and most likely will absorb feminist tendencies.  Even if you never come back to the US, feminism is still out there to influence women due to American (and European) global media.

On the other hand if you’re expating because you’re worried that the US is going to turn full totalitarian soon, that is more understandable and makes sense for expating.  One of the things I have never liked about expating is how the main options for it are third world countries.  If the US is about to turn totalitarian then it really doesn’t matter since getting out is the main priority.

However, there are new ideas in expating that solve (or at least lessen) some of issues in expating.  There’s an idea that a man who goes by the name, spocksdisciple, came up with called “inpating” in which rather than going to another country, a man moves to a low population rural area.  He describes it here with some additional thoughts on expating in general.  Here is what inpating is in his own words:

An alternative rarely discussed to expating is “inpating” otherwise called “Siberian” exile, I’ve thought about this as well, it’s a bit easier as you’re not actually leaving the country, you’re just leaving the antfarms called cities behind(where most femnazis and manginas are at). My own plan is to move to the Yukon territories(or Alaska if you’re American) and a small town or city, this option is more for true MGTOWs and men who have left the need for women and regular sex behind them. Many men won’t be able to follow this path because of a lack of appropriate skills, motivation and self discipline. Some call it “hermiting” I call it ultimate freedom, anyone who’s ever been backpacking or lived in remote areas for extended periods of time will know what I’m talking about, nobody around to judge you or to make rules for you or shame you, also nobody around to care what happens to you. Freedom is a two edged sword…this is a test of what you’re really made of as a man and as a human being.

“Inpating” is an idea that can work for a man right now.  Spocksdisciple suggests Alaska which is good for inpating, but even North Dakota or Montana might be good enough.  Depending on what a man wishes to do, “inpating” can be a good alternative to expating.

Another idea that might come online in the future is “charter cities” (i.e. Hong Kongs).  If you look at the charter cities website, the founder of the idea was looking for a way improving the third world through the use of importing the laws and practices of first world countries.  Whether that idea would work is beside the point.  Charter cities would allow an real easy to access alternative since there would be some partnership between a third country and a first world country.  A charter city has the best of both worlds, of expating to a third world country while still retaining first world standards of living.  The most likely locations for charter cities are in Asia where many of the good expat destinations already are.  The charter cities blog is good for finding out more about the concept.

Another possible future idea is seasteading, homesteading on the high seas.  Seasteading is a concept created by Patri Friedman, the grandson of Milton Friedman.  Since seasteads are on the high seas, they are outside any zone that any current country can claim.  This makes seasteads truly independent states.  Friedman has developed an incremental plan for seasteading so the initial stages all can be done with currently existing technology so its much more realistic than you might think.  More can be found out about seasteading at its website.

Out of these ideas, inpating is the only idea available now.  However, we might see some charter cities in the future and most likely will see seasteading in the future since Friedman has a real plan to make seasteading a reality.

Aug 162009
 

I have never really liked the whole idea of expating. It stems from the idea that if a man just gets out of America (or North America or the West), he will find lots of good women. Some guys who have expated or want to expat even go as far as saying going to Europe is a good idea which is ludicrous. (However, if a man believes that the country he is in is about to become outright socialist and exapts, that I understand because in that case there is a tangible problem that is solved on the personal level by going elsewhere.)

Women are the same everywhere. There may be more restrictions on their behavior in other places but its only a matter of time before that falls apart. (Even Muslim countries are feminist in a peculiar way since burkas and sexual harassment lawsuits are similar.) On top of that women have always been the same. There is plenty of proof of this, but the latest comes from MarkyMark’s blog:

“Tie yourself up with a woman, and like a chained convict, you lose all freedom . . . If you only know what women in general are! Egotism, vanity, silliness, triviality in everything. That’s what women are when they show themselves as they really are…No, don’t marry, my dear friend. Don’t marry!”
— Leo Tolstoy, “War and Peace”

“Women are generally stupid, but the devil lends her brains when she works for him. Then she accomplishes miracles of thinking, farsightedness, constancy, in order to do something nasty.”
— Leo Tolstoy 1898


Leo Tolstoy lived in the 1800s before modern feminism in Russia. Yet, the problems he describes with women are the same that we have now. The only real difference is that women now have the weapon of government to use against men. This means that even if the weapon of government is taken away from women, it doesn’t mean men are safe. It also means that expating to find a non-American or non-Western woman doesn’t work either.
Women (other than a small few who get it) are the same everywhere and always have been.
Translate »