Oh man after that last comment from flenser i feel really bad about myself. I wish one of your female commentors would say something nice to me Dalrock.
I have produced more right-wing literary content than you can dream of.
I suspect your idea of “right-wing literary content” involves assorted libertarian rags. Before you started reading those you were no doubt some other species of leftist – a socialist, perhaps. Socialist -> libertarian is a common transition. And it lets you retain most of the stupid things you believed all along.
We provided our opening points and arguments
What is this “we” nonsense? Unless you are the Queen of England, correct English usage is for you to refer to yourself as “I”.
I wish one of your female commentors would say something nice to me
One of those blasted whores? Why would you want one of those to say something nice to you? You need further indoctrination in order to rid yourself of this thoughtcrime.
This is a lefty-site pretending to be conservative in order to take swipes at conservatives. TGH has wandered off to TAP or Reason in search of something else to say.
Dalrocks may be a Christian (though I don’t see him saying so anywhere) but Jimmy Carter is a Christian.
“Conservatives” are actually left-wingers, “Christians” are actually anti-Christian. Women are cock-hungy sluts. Then there’s the whole idiotic “game” thing, with its jargon of alphas and betas. One obstacle to you people spreading information anywhere is your habit of making up your own language. “Gilligans”, for instance. You can talk amongst yourselves, but you’re almost unintelligible to outsiders.
flenser,
Not sure how you found/came across this blog. I think this is the first post you’ve commented on. Anyways, this above reminds me of the Jack Nicholson scene in a Few Good Men where he shouts back “You can’t handle the truth”. There is a reason the Matrix analogy of red-pill/blue-pill is used. You clearly aren’t ready to process/ruminate over any of this. It is too destructive to your worldview. Many people when faced with a truth they cannot handle retreat to the comfort of stubbornly held unexamined beliefs and then simply decry those others as nutcases. I’ve got a post stuck in moderation apparently due to maybe profanity where I highlighted the similarity of this stuff to the Catholic Church/Galileo controversy over the Earth/Sun.
One thing I’ll give Escoffier major credit for both here on this blog and on HUS is when he came across this stuff especially the female hypergamy stuff he was open minded and smart enough to realize it was hitting on some major truths with a high degree of explanatory power. He is still to willing to give women a pass though and shiift most of the moral culpability to men.
flenser, I am a 56 year old Australian, much more conservative than most of my friends and family. I sometimes joke that I would only be socially comfortable in rural Alabama – except they don’t like Catholics. But even I can see that most SoCons have been out to lunch for forty years.
And Game works. It keeps my wife happy and compliant.
Tim, I found a virgin. You only have to find one.
flenser: “One obstacle to you people spreading information anywhere is your habit of making up your own language. “Gilligans”, for instance. You can talk amongst yourselves, but you’re almost unintelligible to outsiders.”
You are unintelligible to me. What do you want to say? And I dont mean what do you want say about what others are saying (I get that you say that others are stupid but not exactly why). What is your message? Who are you speaking for?
Oh of course, I only have to find. How silly of me. They’re everywhere. Oh wait…
flenser, all women are POTENTIAL whores. The trick is to get to be her only client. I have seen women do things you would not believe. “Nice girls”.
David Collard
They took this logical error and combined it with their natural sympathy for sluts, and decided to create a social order where only men are punished for out of wedlock births.
v.R.
I call BS on this. Tradcons have NO “natural sympathy for sluts” whatsoever.
For some definition of TradCon, I suppose that is true. Such people are few and far between nowadays. Perhaps you are thinking of traditional conservatives of, oh, 75 years ago? I’d agree.
Say, the people at “Focus on the Family ” likely would call themselves tradcons. Did you read the previous article on this site in which some mangina name of Stanton called unmarried women with bastard children “heroes”? I did, and it wasn’t anything new to me.
Today, the people who would call themselves tradcon are always read to welcome another unmarried woman with her bastard children into the church. Always. Because it would not be merciful to turn them away. There’s something to that idea, to be sure, but where’s the line between mercy and approval? If Sally Slutpants and her two bastard children, by two different men of course, is welcome to come in and be a full member of the church, what message does that send? Sympathy, or no sympathy?
So, v.R., show me these tradcons who have no sympathy for sluts – where are they?
the social conservative movement AS IT IS EXPRESSED in popular politics, ie, the ones running candidates like Rick Perry, Bachmann, Palin, etc have adopted some of the traits of liberalism and feminism
You seem to be defining “social conservatism” as meaning “all Republican politicians”
Political parties express the will of the country, to some extent. To a greater extent they express the will of politically powerful groups. The Chamber of Commerce, for instance, has rather more clout in the GOP than does Focus On The Family.
Saying that the GOP is socially liberal-ish because social conservatives are actually socially liberal makes exactly as much sense as claiming that the GOP is a big-government party because libertarians are actually big government fans.
I’m sure you can see the problem in the latter case. So why can’t you see it in the former one?
flenser, a good example is National Review Online. I gave up my regular reading because the site started going soft on feminism and dumb on American interventionism.
Relative to what social conservatives used to be, today’s social conservatives are quite liberal.
Just as, the poor people in the US are rich compared to the poor people in some other nations. So yes, our poor are rich.
Palin, Bachmann, and Perry have all been praised by many of the groups today who identify as “socially conservative.”
flenser,
What is this “we” nonsense? Unless you are the Queen of England, correct English usage is for you to refer to yourself as “I”.
He clearly meant that more than one person gave you the opening case against socons, as both Brendan, Mike C, and TFH did.
What a cowardly way to dodge the points presented. But we expect nothing more from a feminist socon.
flenser, all women are POTENTIAL whores. The trick is to get to be her only client. I have seen women do things you would not believe
.
You’d be surprised what I’d believe and what I’ve seen.
I get the impression that the average reader of this site* is an idealist who’s had his ideals shattered. Guys who once thought that women were the essence of all that is good and pure in the world, and who have been left embittered by the discovery that they are just as flawed as men are. And now you’ve swung from one extreme to the other.