Cropped and filtered with permission from wikimedia
Three days ago I gently urged my weathered Ford down snow-covered roads on my way home from work. The fear and hysteria of other drivers stood out to me. And then I wondered, how many actually practice “driving?” How many people associate skill behind the wheel with a necessary survival mechanism improving your chances of getting home safely? How many just associate it with F1 and street-racing?
“Game” strikes many as a synonym for hookup culture, however, this is disingenuous as suggesting that the skill of driving makes one a participant in race culture.
In the 21st Century, a necessity for both arises out of the dangers of dealing with others. With obstacles like the divorce court racket, the low societal standards for females, the feeling of entitlement for the average woman to a movie star husband, and the venomous atmosphere in which boys grow up the world has no shortage of dangers for men who wish to find a woman. These are the potholes, slick roads and ice on our roads. How does one ensure his safety in a world of potential crashes? He learns.
Some men learn through experience: watching, listening and observing the movements of others on the road seeing what leads to safe passage or fatal crashes. Others study vigorously from experts until they too have the skills necessary to provide comfort and safety in the volatile environment of the road.
But for every man who has skill behind the wheel, several dozen sad men sit slumped in defeat. They never learned to drive; they never paid attention to the road. They took it for granted as something natural that needed no thought. They took the television and film portrayals of it as Gospel truth.
Photo owned by me
And now the sad reality: if you did not learn by experience or have a skilled teacher, you are doomed to crash. Not if, but when. Sincere danger whisks past on either side and surrounds us. Perhaps the greatest danger rests in the sheer ignorance and denial of this reality by pacified drivers, the willful ignorant.
The clouds gather over the West and flurries fall. Soon all men behind the wheel without
some semblance of skill will wish they could learn. The young men are watching the crashes of their fathers, uncles and bosses. They’re not buying the 50-year feminist lie anymore. Thankfully, we get more new driving instructors every day with a red pill prescription in hand for the curious.
The Manosphere is about to get a slew of applicants for Gender Studies 101.
Great analogy!
DO you mind if I use this ~
“Would you rather be happy, or right? That’s a question my father once asked me when I asked him why he was putting up with a veritable hail of whining from my mother. As it turns out, he should have been asking my mother the question.
Men tend to ask themselves this question on a regular bais, opting for happy. For women, the idea never occurs. Everything is about truth, justice, and the feminine way.
The fact is women were self-reportedly more satisfied with their lives when they spent their days caring for their children, maintaining the house, cooking delicious meals, and exercising so she could flash her husband a view of her shapely thighs as she headed upstairs for the night. Never mention this fact to the modern woman as it will give them the vapors. “But that’s, not right! Women didn’t have CHOICES! They were basically SLAVES! They didn’t have INDEPENDENCE! There’s no way they could have been happy.”
I would love to do a post on your comment. It is brilliant! Thanks, Lori
Just email me at laalex2@aol.com
@Lori
Certainly.
Do you want me to link it to your blog or would you rather remain anonymous?
Linking is fine
Why are you so terrified of women?
Coming from a New Atheist beta chump, I find this comment flushed with irony. Also, see the plurium interrogationum fallacy, although I’ve come to realize it’s a waste of time attempting to educate a New Atheist on anything, especially logic and reason.
Why the name calling? Are you not capable of engaging a conversation on an adult level? The question was quite simple. Here, I’ll write it again more slowly because maybe you can’t read fast: Why are you so terrified of women? There’s nothing ironic about it… unless of course if you’re in possession of some other definition of the word that I’m not perhaps aware of.
I see you don’t know how to use google, so I’ll give you a definition of the fallacy of many questions, which you posed in your initial comment
Fallacy of Many Questions- A question that has a presupposition that is complex. The presupposition is a proposition that is presumed to be acceptable to the respondent when the question is asked.
For example, if I were to ask you if your mother knows you participate in fetishistic sex with men in pony costumes, that would be a fallacy of plurium interrogationum because it presupposes you participate in pony sex as you presupposed I am somehow afraid of women.
Alright, I’ll assume for a second that you’re merely developmentally disabled and unused to speaking, writing or reading in English.
Feminism has eroded the natural relationships between males and females. Any male who wishes to engage in a relationship with females in this age must guarantee that he can reconstruct at least the basic fundamentals of biologically successful female/male relationships. Otherwise he stands to lose to the 72% female initiated divorce rate and other goodies in the post-women’s rights world. I hardly see where terror comes into play.
I believe I’m in possession of a lot of things you are not, specifically mental acuity.
Since you have failed to behave by the standards I’ve enumerated and have nothing constructive at all to say other than logical fallacies, you’re done.
Being able to use the phrase “plurium interrogationum fallacy” instead of something simpler like “trick question” or “complex question” is humorous in and of itself.
So is your calling someone a New Atheist beta chump.
You’ve created quite a novel, narcissistic defense around your 1950′s glass fortress of a point of view.
correction: glass TRACK HOUSE.
Works better than fortress
As a reminder of my comment policy, I’m preemptively filtering all New Atheist peons who wish to sell their pedantic elevatorgate-style nonsense here. The last thing any thoughtful individual wants to see is a circle-jerking session between the cognitively undeveloped Dawkins priesthood. Make a logical argument or live in the spam section. Your coice.
As for my use of “ad-homs,” they typically accompany a refutation rather than take the place of one as is the case so any whining, crying, fainting to be had over this is about as warranted as a Kim Kardashian wearing white at her wedding.