Most MRAs are in victimhood mode. Their worldview is that since the West has decided to turn against winners, and champion loserness through equality and thus take revenge on those who rise above the herd, it’s time for men (traditionally perceived as being at the top of the hierarchy) to take revenge.
This revenge does not come in the form of fixing the problem. Instead, it’s compensation. You don’t get what you want; so instead, get a lot of whatever is left over. This means that instead of having what men crave, which is a sacred role for men and the appreciation of good women, you get lots of sex with female losers.
I’ll take a different path: experience numbs. The more you have a certain experience, the more you are dulled to it. This is the real reason most people loathe office work; it’s not so much boring in itself, but the repetition and lack of change and lacking of possible changed outcome is soul-crushing.
It’s the same way when you go to a party. You may remember the first ten names, but after that, you’re awash in so many similar memories that it all runs together. Soon you are numb to new names.
This is also one of the great challenges of life. You can’t find that “one best day ever” and repeat it over and over. The experiences of that day were not what made it great; it was your receptiveness to them, and the role they played in your life.
In other words, if you went out on your 21st birthday and went fishing with friends, got in a fistfight, drank until dawn and then fired bottle rockets at the sinking moon as dawn approached, it was the time more than the actions that made that day special. You can’t step into the same river twice.
So if you go out again and do the exact same stuff — fish with friends for twice as many hours, fight five times as many dudes, drink ten times as much and buy bigger bottle rockets — you can’t relive that moment. You are just going through the motions.
Sex is the same way. You can view it as an experience, in which the context defines its meaning, or you can treat it as a commodity, where more (and more convenient) is better.
If you want the best sex in history, you don’t find it by looking for sex. Instead, you look for the right experience: when you are open to love, finding someone who shares your vision, and coming together through a process of emotional negotiation and struggle to discover what you both find sacred and worth dying for.
That sounds more like love than casual sex, doesn’t it?
In a survey of 1,700 married couples, researchers found that couples in which one or both partners placed a high priority on getting or spending money were much less likely to have satisfying and stable marriages.
“Our study found that materialism was associated with spouses having lower levels of responsiveness and less emotional maturity. Materialism was also linked to less effective communication, higher levels of negative conflict, lower relationship satisfaction, and less marriage stability,” said Jason Carroll, a BYU professor of family life in Provo, Utah, and lead author of the study. – ABC
If you treat sex like a commodity, you’re treating it like money, where the amount matters but the experience is dead. Money is not the experience. It may be essential for it, and enable that experience, but you cannot create the experience with money. The same is true with the quantity of sex.
Those who think in this materialistic way miss out on what makes life valuable to us. We have a certain band of time in which we exist, and we want to make this time powerful by giving it context and thus meaning. Without something to work toward, it is empty repetition of experience.
Women crave security.
Ideally, they want to “marry up” — up in terms of strength, finances, clout, and intellectual capability. And this is reflected in a not uncommon female reaction. When a woman falls for a man whom she can look “up” to, she may say to him something such as “You make me feel safe” (I get this from female readers all the time — sometimes one article is all it takes). And from a Darwinian standpoint, this makes sense. For, if a woman’s children are to survive, she must secure a safe environment for them.
The cocoon of safety in which she traditionally was most comfortable — and it is her primary focus — is the family. And it is by necessity a little nanny state; it is, quite appropriately, a very socialist, top-down, command-control institution. Its closest thing to the “people,” the children, are controlled and afforded relatively few freedoms; the family is not democratic. And it is a communal place, where everything is shared and the “people” are cared for by the “government” (the parents). To a great extent, its operating principle is “From each according to his means; to each according to his needs.” – American Thinker
This is another form of confusing experience for quantity: what makes a woman feel safe is knowing she is with a man who is heading in the right direction. Not surprisingly, the converse makes men feel their lives are being lived well. This is a path to happiness: context, meaning and choice.
Every choice means a sacrifice. To choose one item out of ten is to cut out the other nine; to choose one path through life is to obliterate the others. You can choose either quality, or quantity, but not both. The two are paths that lead away from each other.
MRAs like to believe that quality is dead to them, and there is no hope, so they might as well pour themselves another drink, play more video games, and bang a few more confused and abused women in order to feel like they’re on top. It’s victimhood and dominance in one.
Of course, this becomes unsatisfying. After a while, you can’t tell the difference between women and the act has grown repetitive and stale, but your socially-programmed male pride will not let you admit that. So instead you become more hollow and more like a victim of society, not a male leadership figure.
Chastity is controversial now. Our witless herd culture views it as the opposite of fun. After all, to be chaste you have to give up on quantity, in order to choose quality. What if the trend-culture got it exactly wrong, and the path to quality is the path to joy, and quantity leads only to tedium?