I like nerds. I have a lot of nerdish tendencies. What makes me different from the modern nerd is that I do not follow the new state religion of worshipping the feminine herd instinct. Because I see it, up close and personal, at work, and it is not nice.

The trouble is, Ladies, that nerds are able to program, fix things, engineer things, think abstractly and do math. I lose most colleagues about three minutes into interviewing any Tech (they get depressed, just like any other human, and at about the same rate) when I start asking about operating systems and programming languages and what he has done. Which I need, to assess how much the depression has affected him.

If nerds and techies and tradesmen disappear, most of our modern tech will fail.

The herd instinct leads women astray. That quiet lad who is shy is probably a better father than the playa you know has dumped half the cheerleading squad. The end game is marriage, not how hot your boyfriend is, and all too many women disqualify themselves by thinking too much about how the girlfriends think, and not what God thinks.

To put it mildly, nerds are generally not the smoothest men around. To put it less mildly, nerds are generally very much disgusting. They are all that women find unattractive. Many a nerd has a story about coming up with the courage to ask a pretty girl out only to have her puke or laugh or run away. Well I’m sorry but nerds are (on average, of course) icky. Which is why women like to blame everything on nerds. Nerds are icky so no women will be caught dead defending them. So any attack on nerds triggers a signalling spiral in where all girls end up competing to see who hates nerds more, because no women wants to be thought as being nice to nerds. Cree-pyyyy. Remember that much of women’s mechanism of attraction depends on pre-selection. A man walking in with a hot girl to his side automatically becomes more attractive to women. By extension, a women who is nice to a nerd automatically becomes lower-status in the eyes of other women.

….

This was a conundrum that Scott Aaronson, the guy from the video above, took very seriously. And the conclusion he reached was if anything completely logical. I want to have sex. But my mere expression of that biological drive makes me go against the state religion. What to do? Go to a psychiatrist and ask to be castrated. Kill the instinct, so that I can respect the state religion, i.e. Feminism. Fortunately for him castrating unattractive men is not yet public policy of USG, so he could keep his testicles. Eventually he achieved professional status, making him just attractive enough to get a wife and beget children. Yet this still didn’t make him doubt the state religion. Well to some extent it did, and he tried to be a smartass and make a public announcement about how much he keeps the faith in the state religion in spite of almost sacrificing his genetic fitness for it. He thought he’d be praised for his faith; but women aren’t stupid. No, it wasn’t hard to notice the not-so-subtle displays of doubt against Feminism, and if anything he was publicly shamed for not going through and actually castrating himself. This guy actually had the nerve to marry and have sex with a woman? Eww, cree-pyyyy.

Well, the answer for people like Scott is to stop appeasing the harpies of the feminist left, do their job, raise their kids, and let feminism burn out, for the conservative and sane breed, while the progressives work out cool hashtags.

This society we have is not functional. It is slowly dying, while we admire our irony.

This 21st century Bacchanalia is flashy and fun, bursting with a vibrant hedonism of clubs, bars, festivals, conventions, easy sex, easy drugs, easy booze, easy desserts, easy work, constant novelty and stimulation from the Internet, the television and from Hollywood, but it will end us all. If everyone is avoiding family life and child-rearing so that they can spend more time doing what our grandparents (and great-grandparents, and great-great-grandparents, and great-great-great-grandp…) would have called “mortally sinning,” we’ll all be gone without a legacy before the end of the century. When one speaks of “mortal sin,” one must remember that the very English word “mortal” is derived from the ancient Latin word for death, mors. Our forefathers are looking down on us as we commit the most pathetic and protracted suicide in history. Rather grim, innit?

If you are a standard, milquetoast, liberal-by-default Westerner, this might all sound like racist, sexist and homophobic vomit. I would remind you then that, in our culture, we have multiple mainstream, high-tech systems for helping complete strangers prostitute each other. Take Seeking Arrangement, a popular service that helps young females, typically college students (the girls who, in any other era, would have been nobly raising society’s next generation), whore themselves out to unscrupulous and wealthy men for expensive gifts and money. Like Monty Python’s rude French sentry, I vomit in the general direction of this service. Prostitution is still largely illegal in the West, de jure. It seems we make some exceptions, however, when the pimps and prostitutes can satisfactorily rationalize their whoring to us — just enough to soothe our dwindling consciences and atrophied probity.

But this is institutionalized. One cannot, in general, criticize mothers. One can make huge demands on fathers. I particularly like this quote because the person discussed left Ontario, that home of the prissy social engineers and the most misandrist family court I know of. Ladies, note that the risks of marrying to the man are very high and he will need to know you are faithful, for he is placing his life, fortune and sacred honour on that fidelity.

In a time that the courts reward the feckless.

In real life, there hasn’t been any sort of organized conspiracy to accomplish anything like this, but there are trends which have remarkably similar effects. Whatever has happened seems to be a result of mass action; the independent arrival at conclusions by multitudes of men based on present incentives. The most important aspect of this is arguably the marriage strike. In this case, men tend to work much harder when they have a family to support. This benefits everyone, women who are wives, children, and unfortunately even the state through increased tax revenue. Without families, men naturally scale down their productivity to match their actual needs. Their needs turn out to be remarkably small. Men don’t like shopping for useless things to hang on the wall or more than a week or so worth of clothing and all the other non-functional things women buy and which forms the majority of the basis of the consumer market.

I would argue that an important piece of shrugging against the modern system would involve actively attempting to bankrupt the family court system (and other systems) by finding ways to deprive such systems of revenue. This would hit them where it hurts the most. I say ‘shrugging against’ here because I think it better captures the idea that exit could be used in an almost offensive manner as well as bringing up all the expansive imagery from the book which exemplifies the power of exit. So far, men not paying their court ordered bills is mostly a result of inability to pay rather than principled refusal resulting from mass action. Certainly exit is used, as in this case, if only very rarely. We need to change this. I think it is clear from the psychological disposition of men that organized activism will never really be all that forthcoming, and so we must focus on what men are psychologically disposed to: exit. Men who are subjected to these sorts of unfair payments should be actively encouraged to just pack up and leave. Possibly even with a conspiracy approximating a modern underground railroad where sympathetic men aide them in shrugging the outrageous obligations put on them by helping them out of the country. Or at least out of the reach of the state.

I can think of the obvious objection here: “Won’t someone please think of the children!” Well, I am. I am thinking about children (and the whole family), but I have escaped myopia and took a view that extends all the way to the horizon. Children are done a huge disservice by easy divorce. It is a fact that they are better off when their parents stay together until at least they grow up. So long as the system exists in the current state, the only thing we can be sure of is that millions more men and children will be caught in its clutches in the future. Suffering will only increase and increase. Anything that lets the system of easy, no-fault divorce with the concomitant asset division last even one week longer than it has to is immoral.

In short, what should we do? I suggest it is our duty to subvert the family court, the social workers, the entire educational system that encourages women (and men) to let their base emotions run riot. Instead we need to rediscover our Austen and the book of Proverbs: look for the person who acts nobly, not the person who fakes it: encourage early marriage, for life, let our churches support the people and, finally, keep the state far away. For we can no longer afford to assume that the state is Christian: it is not. It is neopagan, worshipping the old Gods of Potency (Baal) and Fertility (Aphrodite), with the rituals of shame, sacrifice and accepted periods of licence. The problem is that the old Roman pagan virtues of courage, probity, honour and respect are seen as heretical, sexist, and have been abandoned.

This system is in its death spiral: left alone the denizens will lose all technology, for they hate the scholar, the technician and the tradesmen, calling them boring and nerds, and with it civilization.

Let us instead preserve the good. Perhaps we will need to refound the monasteries. Perhaps Christ will come. And perhaps the descendants of those Peoples the Victorians bought to a saving faith will return the favour, allowing us to regain our sanity and see revival in the Church and restoration of Christendom.