When Gangbangers Look Good (“What Now?” Part II)

(For the usual intro, see the first post in the series)

-I have a confession I must make: I have a growing envy of criminals. I was raised Christian, but the older I get, the more I see the government as my corrupt, colossal enemy, and the Church as impotent when it comes to correct teaching on masculinity, and the more I notice that the everyday working man gets no love from the ladies. Guys like Omar Little from The Wire (and the stickup man he is based on), Walter White from Breaking Bad (And the Alabama meth maker he is based on), Big Meech, and Tavon White (who does get the ladies) are increasingly starting to look like guys to look up to.

Taxes are going up, and respect for good men is drastically going down, especially since young women feel that they should not have to ever depend on a man, but instead become career strivers and put marriage on the backburner during their most fertile years. Reasons to become an honest working man are disappearing left and right, never mind the economy. The fact of the matter is: America loves the badman, the Rudeboi, the gangsta, the rogue. The guy who follows the rules and does it “the right way” might be successful, but it takes longer, is much harder, and just flat gets less respect. Plus, with the way the marriage, dating, and economic system is now rigged, even shadows of promises of loyalty and fidelity are rare. Breaking bad is indeed riskier, but can be much more rewarding than, say, being a corporate office drone. Plus, men account for 90+% of workplace and wartime deaths, so it ain’t like the risk wasn’t there to begin with.

We live in an amoral, consumer-based society. Moreover, we live in a very short-sighted part of the world (the West in general, and the USA in particular). Companies care only about the next quarter’s numbers, and will outsource and do mass layoffs in a heartbeat. Politicians say and do whatever they need to to get reelected. Single mother have kids by whoever to increase the next welfare/child-support check, or, in the case of upper-class folk, try to lure the richest man to marry them so they can get the most money from him in the divorce (i.e. that whore Robin Givens…though Mike was not thinking with the right head on that one). People work just to spend more than their paycheck on stupid stuff they really don’t need.  Nobody really thinks long-term anymore; most Americans have no emergency savings above a meager amount.

Furthermore, what, really, is the point of trying to economically become a man? It is no secret (and I leave it to the reader to do the research on this, as the doing of it is an eye-opening experience in itself) that healthy (let alone Biblical) masculinity is under attack in the West. Fathers are routinely disrespected in the media and in popular culture. Men who want to become traditional  family men are ever more hemmed in by feminist laws designed (even if this is not stated in their creation, this is the effect they have) to frustrate and criminalize healthy masculine behavior. For instance, it did not used to be a potentially criminal act for a man to have sex with his wife/girlfriend while she was drunk. Nor did “emotional abuse” used to be taken seriously. Nor did a man’s job used to be a tool used to silence him from saying things others may be offended by. To be frank, this $h!t is beyond ridiculous.

When I say “economically become a man”, what I am referring to is the time-honored practice of men increasing their economic production in preparation of taking on the responsibility of providing for a wife and children. Understand this: Financially, men are much better at surviving than women. Point blank, overall, that’s just the truth. Men require very little money, in actual fact, to survive. For instance, I have a friend who, at one point, lived very comfortably with some roommates. His income? Less than $11k per year. I personally have been homeless, slept in cars, on a cot, beach bummed, and slept on couches, and in an apartment with no electricity (just running water), and I personally could live like a king on $30,000 per year. Also, look at the ways many men survive in the Third World.

Fundamentally, men have a very low threshold for what is “comfortable”. I have slept in beds and on cots, and with a camping sleeping bag liner beneath a sheet and a sleeping bag as a comforter, a cot is just like sleeping on a bed, plus it’s cheap, stows away nicely, and is portable. In another life, I used to be a night-shift hotel clerk. I have seen many blue-collar guys agree to take the not-entirely-clean, semi-messed-up, shady looking room, knowing this in advance, in exchange for a discounted rate (or in some cases at full price). I could sell many rooms to men that I’d never dream of selling to women, because the men’s rationale was: “I’m just gonna sleep a few hours here, and then I’ll be gone”, or “I’ll clean it myself if you give me a discount.” On nights when business was slow or we were full up and somebody demanded to get switched into a better room, men were our saving grace. However, you can’t run a good hotel operation and make any money without catering to women.

If men are the bread-and-butter of low-end motels due to their tolerance of lower living conditions (they just don’t tend to care much past the basics), women are the make-or-break element of mid-to-high-end motels, and of ALL hotels. You simply cannot run a hotel chain without taking women into very close account; much as I hate marriage legally, even I must say that single men have no business owning hotel chains unless they have wives, sisters, or mothers in the business with them (this was the case for the owner of the joint I worked in). Barring that, there are little things you just don’t notice as a man that your female counterpart will look at you in amazement at not noticing, and they WILL cost you money and business reputation. Put simply, women demand a standard of living that is far above what men do, and they will spend more money than men on it (note that the money they spend may or may not be money they themselves made). Furthermore, women will complain if something is not to their liking, and will very quickly vacate your establishment and write a scathing review of it if they are not happy. The female dollar in hospitality outweighs the male dollar, because even though you can get more men in for less upkeep, if you can please women, you can raise your ceiling far and above what you can with male guests, because women can be talked into spending much more money than men for appearance (kinda a female theme, ain’t it?). The saying of punk husbands is doubly true in the hospitality industry: “If mama ain’t happy, nobody’s happy.”

Therefore, the people I made the biggest sales to at that job (that I got no commission on, so I usually didn’t bother upselling any rooms, but I digress) were “Strong Independent” women and married couples. Moreover, the people who gave me a run for my money in the actual customer service were always female. If a room was messed up, it was always the wife who noticed first, and in 95% of cases, who came to me about it first. If amenities were lacking or bad, it was the angry woman who put up a negative review (which caused many a complaint from the Big Boss at meetings). Fundamentally, women drove how they ran the business, because unhappy women were the most costly customers, and happy women brought in the highest amounts of money, and the best reviews. Either way, women draw more (and for sure deny more) business in that industry than men do, dollar-for-dollar.

I use this analogy of hotel guests to point this out: Women are the reason men bother earning a lot of money. We have established that men need little to sustain themselves. As the great Dave Chappelle said: “If a man could [have sex with] a woman in a cardboard box, he wouldn’t buy a house!”, “A woman’s test in life, is material. A man’s test in life, is a woman”, and more directly: “Men have nice cars, not because they like nice cars, [but] [be]cause they know [that] women like nice cars…men are hunters, and the car’s the bait.” The unspoken premise? There’s always another man with a nicer car…

Let’s take a further look into that car analogy with this question: What if women gained the ability to regularly get nice cars for themselves? Would this not take away the men’s need to get nice cars? Say that now women can get Mercedes Benz S550s easily. Well, now the only men who would bother with getting nice cars would be those who could get cars like Bentleys, Konigseggs, Rolls Royce Phantoms, Aston Martins, ect. Guys who could only get to Honda-level nice would be left behind; the “bait” would no longer be appealing. Suppose further that all men were forced to annually buy one Mercedes per man for a woman that each man would never see, and who had no obligations to said man.

Well, fundamentally, that is the world we live in over here in the US of A, and the West. Women have become able to support themselves without men because of massive forced transfers of wealth from men to women, with no corresponding stipulations on that money from women to men; only from women to the State. If it weren’t for Affirmative Action, Welfare, Chalimony, and other such nonsense, rest assured that the lie of the “Independent Woman” would be exposed as just that: A lie. But it gets worse. This dynamic has an insidious set of outcomes: In supplanting the role of provider, the State has slapped taxpaying men in the face twice: Men are, overall, still supporting women, but on a large scale, mainly via government-enforced wealth redistribution, so that women have little to no accountability to men (“Independent”), but men are held ever more accountable to women, even as they lose more and more economic and financial freedom via feminist laws and taxation. To add insult to injury, every tax paying man is effectively paying to obsolete the role of Male Provider more and more every day.

For every ten grand a working man generates (gross pay), if he’s making “Provider” type money, Uncle Sam will, in some way or other, get upwards of two grand of that, and rest assured that lots of that two+ grand will be effectively subsidizing women’s lifestyles, of which said working man has no say in (school taxes, any type of welfare, a chunk of all government-funded healthcare, and all government programs in general, since women are net beneficiaries of government programs more-so than men).

Fundamentally, when women no longer need men economically, and the cause of this is increasing government involvement that men overwhelmingly pay for, the point of a man going out and jumping through ever more expensive, asinine, and time-consuming hoops in hopes of getting a good paying job, which is ever more restrictive of his expression and way of life, in hopes of impressing some gal, who is ever more likely to blow him off, screw him over, or just use him and then dump him for the next man…well, that point just kinda seems increasingly stupid. Society has made it crystal clear that masculine providers are outdated buffoons, easily manipulated, and just as easily shut down, and even imprisoned, at the behest of some woman (with the power of the State backing her 100% at all times)…maybe even that Joe Schmoe’s wife (or ex-wife). They are not, overall, respected. They are not, overall, paid enough, considering what they are put through. They are, overall, more and more at risk…at risk of losing their jobs for the dumbest reasons, at risk of losing even the chance at a prime-age woman due to her “Being able to do it herself”, and at risk of losing their own sanity in the overwhelming tide of PC foolishness which is drowning them. Fundamentally, society is more and more a parasite, and they are the ever-weakening hosts. And more and more young men are getting this, and deciding not to strive just to become another sucker. Look at Japan for an extreme example.

But deep down, men still want to achieve. We still want to be successful, still want to become great. And for a man, his work, his occupation, his vocation (vocare=Latin for “To call”; his calling), is tied to his very self-identity, even in the Biblical sense (The very first command God gave to Adam, which He gave before before He even gave him a woman, was a naming job). Work means a lot more, in every way, to men than it does to women. This is why the obsession of Western women with “Careers” (God damn that ugly 20th century made word and whoever coined it), thinking that that will somehow make them better wives, is so exasperating. This is a direct inversion, literally of Biblical proportions, of the roles God Himself (and you could argue this even without bringing in Christian themes, but this is where that mess is highlighted the most) gave men and women, and NOBODY seems to notice this. They do notice the consequences, however: More and more men abandoning the traditional roles they would have played (and more women usurping them with the aid of the State), more fatherlessness, more poverty, less childbearing overall, more chaos, and a society that is coming ever closer to a disastrous dystopian state.

At this point, the man with the desire to work, but the hatred of the BS society is selling and extracting from him, faces all sorts of existential questions from all sorts of angles. Hence the part of this post series’ title: “What now?” What now that good is bad? What now that women can do it too? Why try? Why bother when you really don’t come out ahead…even if, financially, you do? What is the point of toil past the level of self-sustainment and maybe a few fun toys? What of that gnawing dream to conquer an industry? What of that wife and children…when all these women want is career, career, career, and then MAYBE family? And why work to be a sucker? How do you, if nothing else, work, and NOT get screwed? And the biggest question of all: What if following the law isn’t the best option…and what is the point if even people who are supposed to administer it don’t follow it themselves? As Glenn Reynolds from PJMedia likes to opine, “Laws are for Little People.” When does “breaking bad” (Moving into illegal/underground activity) become a feasible option? When do Omar, Walter, and co. start to look less like villains, and more like well-adjusted men?

Read Freakonomics and SuperFreakonomics. Listen to the legendary Notrious B.I.G.’s song “Ten Crack Commandments” and compare it with corporate business strategy. Read some Sudhir Venkatesh. Study how gangsters, mobsters, and corporate owners make money. Legal and illegal money really ain’t that different. But now, what with the economy, taxation, and corrupt government, illegal, or at least illicit, money looks better by the hour.

I will get into specifics later, but here, my fundamental argument is: If you are a man trying to get a “Good paying job”, understand that you are in for some ugly shocks along the way. The world ain’t like it was even a decade ago. What was once black-and-white is now shades of gray. If you want to more immediately have more control of your income, and if you do not believe in supporting a system which is, almost by design, crushing you and your ever-diminishing kind, then now, more than ever, is the time to start looking into alternative sources of income. Of particular interest are those sources which evade Uncle Sam’s greedy pig eyes, and thus evade his ability to steal from…I mean, tax, them. I mean, honestly, at this point, seeing how many good men are getting screwed (up to and including thrown in jail…think about that), you really have little to lose…think of it as diversification.

 

 

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s