Living With Snake Eyes
Snake Eyes: what a beautiful way of putting it. I stole the term from that unrepentant Truth Teller Wimminz because it perfectly sums up one of the harshest moral lessons you can learn, a lesson so harsh that most people mistake it for immorality: the Scorched Earth strategy.
This desperate but effectual method of defence can only be executed by the enthusiasm of a people who prefer their independence to their property; or by the rigor of an arbitrary government, which consults the public safety without submitting to their inclinations the liberty of choice.”
~Edward Gibbon, The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire.
Always be ready to burn it to the ground, salt your own fields, pull the pin, and nuke it from orbit. The Geneva Convention might take a dim view of it, but I hardly consider them to be a moral authority on the matter of war.
It’s a harsh lesson to learn, and utterly terrifying to the r-type mind: Titus was willing to set the entire meadow aflame and condemn the warren to death, rather than to accept the random predation of Celtic coyotes upon his kin.
Hark, wretches! how I mean to martyr you.
This one hand yet is left to cut your throats,
Whilst that Lavinia ‘tween her stumps doth hold
The basin that receives your guilty blood.
You know your mother means to feast with me,
And calls herself Revenge, and thinks me mad:
Hark, villains! I will grind your bones to dust
And with your blood and it I’ll make a paste,
And of the paste a coffin I will rear
And make two pasties of your shameful heads,
And bid that strumpet, your unhallow’d dam,
Like to the earth swallow her own increase.
Make no mistake, it’s a method of last resort; but the alternative is a death by a thousand cuts.
The modern world is characterized by staggered-negotiations, too much love of life, and the freeze-unfreeze stratagem of brainwashing and Cultural Marxism. Just one more compromise, just one more appeasement, just one more tiny hypocrisy – before you know it you’re bent over the barrel, without option or leverage, a slave to callow masters.
My old Sensei called it The Look of the Samurai: when you are fully willing to sacrifice your life in battle, thugs will quake in terror as the spectre of death wafts over their hearts. Their violence is one born out of venality; ego, greed, and cruelty. Yours will be the violence born of righteousness.
Meditation on inevitable death should be performed daily. Every day when one’s body and mind are at peace, one should meditate upon being ripped apart by arrows, rifles, spears and swords, being carried away by surging waves, being thrown into the midst of a great fire, being struck by lightning, being shaken to death by a great earthquake, falling from thousand-foot cliffs, dying of disease or committing seppuku at the death of one’s master. And every day without fail one should consider himself as dead.
Yamamoto Tsunetomo, Hagakure
You cannot negotiate with terrorist; you cannot compromise with evil.
Evil thrives when good men do nothing.
~Edmund Burke
But why do good men do nothing? Cowardice? Certainly. Love of luxury and comfort? Definitely. But the most pernicious cases are where they hold onto the self-image of being a Good Man. This is nothing but Pride masquerading as morality.
Society pats them on the head, “Good dog, here’s a biscuit!” and they call that morality. They crave the love and esteem of their peers, so they self-martyr themselves. They take up the burdens which others have rightly earned by acting against them, and carry the load. Out of sympathy for the sinner, they intervene against natural justice.
This isn’t being a Man. This is being a codependent weakling.
Rollo Tomassi posted the following capture from a /r/Redpill thread; like him, I will quote it in full:
I posted this earlier on another subreddit but it ended up getting removed because of fighting in the comments. I’ll sum up what happened thus far. I met my wife 7 years ago, she was extremely picky when it came to sex. She told me she only has been with 1 other guy before. She would never give a blow job, only would do certain positions and found almost every sex act degrading. I was frustrated by this, but I really liked her and hoped over the years she would open up sexually. Over the years, it never got any better but I learned to get over it. Well I ended up finding an old video from her college days of her engaging in group sex with 6 other people 5 guys 1 girl. In the video she has anal sex, oral sex, gets double teamed, and yells multiple times in the video she is a “I am a filthy whore.” All of it she was enthusiastic about it. I ended up feeling really sad. I can understand certain stuff people don’t want to do, but it wasn’t the fact she didn’t want to do them. She didn’t want to do them with me but every other guy she was their whore. I was angry hurt and I ended up saying some stupid shit to my wife.
I asked her if she could drop our daughter off at her sister’s house because I wanted to talk to her. She asked why, I told her we’d discuss after she came back.
I don’t remember all the details of the conversation, so I’ll try my best to sum it up. I was drinking a bit before she came which wasn’t the best idea.
Me: Is there anything about your past you have been hiding about me?
Her: Why are we talking about this?
Me: I just want to know were you in any type of porn or anything like that?
Her: are you taking drugs?
Me: I found your video from college with the other guys. I don’t know who you are anymore and I feel ill being around you.
She starts crying.
Me: Do you have anything to say?
She continues to cry. This was pointless I go to grab my keys to leave. And she tries to stop me.
Me: If you don’t want me to leave then I need you to be 100% honest with me, and tell me why you lied to me for all these years.
She: I didn’t want you to think I was a slut
Me: I would have been perfectly fine if you told me, I would have loved to have done those wild things with you. Look I get it I don’t turn you on like those other guys do. You liked sucking their dicks but not mine.
She: It’s not that, I didn’t want you to think less of me.
Me: No it is exactly that, there is a thing lying about sleeping with other guys. It’s not that you didn’t like doing those things. You didn’t like doing them with me.
She: I can do that stuff with you. I am attracted to you, you know that.
Me: I don’t want you to do it because you feel like you have to. I want someone that actually desires me.
She: I can change I promise don’t ruin our marriage over this we can work things out. We can go to marriage counseling seriously talk to me.
Me: Marriage counseling won’t change how you feel about me. Look I will try marriage counseling but I want a trial separation for now.
She: Please don’t do this. Don’t throw away our marriage for what I did in college please.
Me: Stop fucking acting like it’s a one time thing. Be honest with me how many guys did you fuck before me. How many guys dicks have you sucked, and how many guys have you let fuck you in the ass.
She: why does it matter, I said I’ll do them with you
Me: I am so fucking lucky. I got married to a whore, that fucks like a prude.
She: Please don’t waste all of our marriage for this. I am willing to change.
Me: I am not divorcing you but I want a trial separation for now, and I want to see how things go, right now I feel sick looking at you.
I ended up leaving my wife kept trying to stop me. She kept on begging saying I could do anything I wanted with her, it was truly pathetic and I lost all respect for my wife the way she was trying to manipulate me with sex.
I am staying at a motel right now; I have been getting constant calls from my wife. She has been asking me where I am, if I tell her than she is going to confront me and I don’t feel like I am ready for that. I feel so fucking drained. I feel bad saying those things to my wife but I don’t know what else to do I am so fucking hurt over this.
As I said before I wouldn’t care if she had a promiscuous past, seriously, wouldn’t care but the fact she did all those things for other guys but doesn’t do them for me hurts me the deepest.
I don’t see how this marriage can be recovered. I can’t change her attraction to me. My father has recently has been diagnosed with a tumor in his lung, and that has already been stressing me out pretty badly.
Please tell me what exactly I can do, my confidence as a man has been destroyed. Before I found out about this, I tried to get my wife to open up sexually but she completely shot it down. I really believe she isn’t attracted to me in the way she was to those other guys. That’s why she felt completely fine being “their whore” but won’t give me a blow job. I want a woman that looks at me lustfully, not that has sex with me to fulfill “wifey duties.”
I don’t feel entitled to other types of sex with my wife. I want her to want to do them. Now even if she does do them it will be out of guilt, not out of desire. I don’t see how we can recover our marriage. I feel really shitty that I won’t be able to seem my daughter as much, especially during her younger years.
I have already made some calls to reroute my paychecks and get my finances in order if we do go for a divorce. My brother works at a big law firm, I am thinking about contacting him to at least see what I should be doing now. Thing is once I call him it becomes the point of no return, if I tell my family members than their image of my wife becomes destroyed. Also I’d have to check because right now she is dependent on me for health insurance, and I don’t want her to be deprived of that if we do divorce, because she has been having health issues. I don’t want to ruin anything but I can’t see how things would ever be okay. If you don’t have any advice for me and are just going to be judgmental please don’t waste your time commenting. I know I said some hurtful things in there but you don’t know the level of hurt I am feeling right now. I have apologized to my wife since then, but I don’t see how our relationship can be recovered.
Edit – I want to make things work, between me and my wife. I understand she doesn’t want to do certain sex acts. I am considering proposing to her the idea of an open marriage. That way we can still be together as a family and we both can have the fulfilling sex lives we want.
Her behaviour was sickening; divorce, at this point, is the only option. Let’s bullet point this:
- Her betrayal wasn’t the premarital sex; as he said, he could have tolerated that. Her betrayal was the refusal to fulfil her marital vows for 7 years! Marriage demands full sexual availability from both partners.
- At the start, she could have faked her attraction – a good wife occasionally will when she’s ‘not in the mood.’ At this point there is no way that he can ever believe her again, no matter how much Game he learns, or how many weights he lifts. Even the paltry sex life they had has been destroyed by her deceitfulness.
- Her response was to deflect, emotionally manipulate with tears, and then desperately try to hold onto him. There isn’t an ounce of contrition in her body; had there been, she would have admitted that she didn’t deserve him. She would have allowed him to go, while working on herself in the Hope of earning him back – not the expectation that she was entitled to him.
- That she cheated on him during the marriage is a certainty.
- “The marriage” – how can you call this a marriage? He gave himself fully and completely; she treated him – at best – like a beloved dog. Not a husband. She never gave herself to him.
- Staying with her would set a bad example for his daughter; it would tell her that she can misbehave without consequences, that she can be a slut and use men. To be a dutiful father, he must divorce her.
To argue that he should stay with her for any reason – for the sake of the children, because of the wedding vows, scripture, et cetera – is to spit on the whole concept of the sanctity of marriage. It’s spitting in the faces of all the Ladies who work hard to be good wives. It’s arguing that – yet again – women should never suffer the consequences of their behaviour, that an emotional apology is all that’s needed to undo the destruction they wrought.
Feeling bad is not the same as atonement. Atonement means acknowledging the wrong you did, and embracing the consequences; knowing that you fully deserve them.
Staying with her preserves the appearance of morality, it gives him the appearance of having a strong back with which to carry others’ sins, but on the inside he’ll be crumbling. The resentment will grow and infect his every action. His pride will lead him into self-destruction, and he’ll lash out – subtly and innocuously – against her and his daughter. He’ll fall down into a pit of self-loathing, and he’ll raise another little girl who despise her father, and all of masculinity.
It’s only after we’ve lost everything that we’re free to do anything.
~Tyler Durden, Fight Club
Truly moral behaviour requires a detachment from the direct consequences of your actions. A complete relinquishment of life and property, a complete abandonment of your emotional well-being. Being moral isn’t about feeling good; it’s about doing what’s Right, regardless of all else.
No. Not even in the face of Armageddon. Never compromise.
~Rorschach, Watchmen
There’s no guarantee that it’ll bring you success… but to do the opposite is to guarantee a Hell on Earth.
Matthew 19:21-22
Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me.
But when the young man heard that saying, he went away sorrowful: for he had great possessions.
“when you are fully willing to sacrifice your life in battle, thugs will quake in terror as the spectre of death wafts over their hearts. Their violence is one born out of venality; ego, greed, and cruelty. Yours will be the violence born of righteousness.”
The Passion of Jesus being one of the best examples.
Marriage? What marriage? There was nothing there to begin with. In Catholicism, concealing important things about your pre-married life from your spouse is grounds for annulment. And in Catholicism, that’ not “divorce.” Divorce is a perfectly valid contract being ended due to one or both partners wanting out of the arrangement. Annulment is a contract being declared a fraud because one partner went into it without full disclosure or understanding. It’ not ending a marriage, it’s saying there was nothing there to begin with.
The idea being that physical nakedness is a symbol of emotional nakedness. People need to see their spouse, scars and all, before making the decision of marrying them. This woman misrepresented her moral and spiritual self to her husband. The woman he thought she was and the woman she really is are completely different people. She took away his free will; isn’t that basically metaphysical violation? He has every right to walk away from this. If he is in a Catholic marriage, I would strongly urge him to go to his pastor, explain the situation, and request an annulment trial. He doesn’t deserve this.
I agree with the general idea of this, but as for the guy… I think he should have given his wife a second chance. He didn’t really get, what was going on, and he was deeply hurt and he overreacted, with almost violent consequence. But it could be that he was wrong. I think she was a really tragical character, who didn’t have the courage and trust to “jump” over a certain fence. Why regard all that she said as mere “manipulion”? Why not assume that she was honest? Obviously there was some sexual problem she wasn’t able to handle by her own. She did things that she thought of as filthy and degrading with men she didn’t love, and she obviously got some self-destructive kick out of this, but she couldn’t show the things she was ashamed of to the man she actually loved. She wasn’t able to trust, to give herself over. She didn’t dare to believe that she could have both, be like a slut and and the same time loved and respected by her man. Ultimately, most women dream of combining this. And thinking of the New Testament, I wonder what could have happened and changed, if he would have been strong enough to forgive her and accept her confession and her remorse? It wouldn’t have humiliated him at all; from now on he probably would have been able to have total control even in sexual matters also. That is certainly better said than done; probably what he saw was very hard to get out of his head. In any case, I can think of an entirely different outcome of this story. I wouldn’t know, but this solution offered here might not have been the only one.
@Petronius
“she was a really tragical character, who didn’t have the courage and trust…”
The maximum effective range of an excuse is exactly zero meters. She spent years lying to her husband on a daily basis about one of the central parts of their relationship. Upon discovery, she failed to actually apologize, and merely begged that there be no consequences while still refusing to come clean about her past, and offering treats in exchange for turning a blind eye to her complete lack of good faith in the marriage. You mention a confession and remorse to forgive, but she offers neither. As for total control in sexual matters, the entire point is that he shouldn’t have to force that sort of thing. It should be offered because she wants to, not because she feels guilty (for as long as that might last).
I admire your ability to rationalize the best in people, but the end of the day, “you are, what you do, when it counts.” The best of intentions and tragic emotional weaknesses are essentially mere trivia.
@ Petronius
Maybe he could have forgiven her if she had owned up: “Yes, that was me, that was a stage of my life. I did that stuff to try and feel wanted. I didn’t want to do that stuff because I was worried you would think less of me. I didn’t tell you because I was scared you would leave me. I’ve made the past seven years of your life a lie. I am sorry. Please forgive me.” You can’t be forgiven for your sins unless you have owned them and not tried to lessen your guilt. That’s all this woman did. And she tried to make her husband ignore those mistakes.
I remember reading “A Doll’s House” in high school. In it, a man is blackmailed with the information that his wife forged her father’s signature for a lot of money to pay for the husband’s funeral care. The husband is furious that his wife for concealing this from him, until the threat of the blackmail is lifted, at which point the husband starts acting like nothing ever happened because nothing bad will happen and is no longer angry with her. The wife leaves him after saying that neither of them ever had the emotional maturity to have a true marriage, and says that the husband just wanted to “pretend” to be married.
The point being, that acting as if mistakes and misdeeds never occurred as long as you get what you want is the behavior of a child. This woman is a child. Is her husband one, as well?
Wrt above: “funeral care” should be “medical care.” Being difference there!
What a fine post! And worthy of further thought!
Aurini you are absolutely 100% correct and no bones about it.
BUT:
Our colleges and universities – particularly the liberal arts programs – are moron factories. Going to our highest learning institutions GUARANTEES that you WILL be exposed to drugs, to careless sex, to Marxism and socialism, to homosexuality, and God only knows what other corrupting influences. Kate over at Small Dead Animals has a running gag entitled ‘What is the opposite of Diversity? University!’ whenever the latest asshattery crops up in our schools. My own daughter has been caught up in the moral and ethical decay and decline of our society even though she was raised properly at home.
As for your boy and his gang banging wife… People CAN change. You are wrong about children being irrelevant – they are EVERYTHING and if you throw the old lady out, you can bet the kid will hit the trash with her. You never know what is going on in such cases but there MAY be something worth salvaging. If she has been a good woman since here college days, it may be worth trying to talk things out. Remember, you can always launch the nukes any time you want – but once they’re off you can’t call them back.
Nor should he have moved out – when or if this goes to court, walking out on the wife is a HUGE tactical/legal mistake. If that goes to court your boy is in trouble! The lawyer scum will try to spin that as abandonment and this man might get the worst of it. NEVER break up like this – speak to a lawyer first! It is one thing to burn the crops and salt the earth…but if you have to do that – use tactical nukes! And do it so that you inflict maximum damage on your enemies. As the old nickel goes, if vengeance is your final option – serve it up stone cold. Your enemies do not deserve the heat and spice of your rage.
@Aeglachel
“I am sorry. Please forgive me.” Don’t forget “I don’t deserve your forgiveness.” If forgiveness is to mean something, it can’t be demanded or expected. And even when given, it doesn’t mean things can go on as before.
@Glenfilthie
I’d argue that his daughter is the number one reason *to* divorce. I can’t imagine anything more damaging than seeing her dad subjected to daily abuse and disrespect from her mom. She’d be better off having a dad who refused to cave, even if that means that he doesn’t see her until she’s 18.
Wimminz made a similar decision with his kids, and I fully support the guy on it. Heck, if I had a family court threaten to throw me in prison over unreasonable child support, I hope I’d have the balls to call them on their bluff. “Many fine books have been written in prison,” as Hunter S. Thompson once said.
Or Heinlein: “You can’t enslave a free man. You can kill him – but you can’t enslave him.”
Indeed, one of the most important Biblical teachings (in my non-authoritative opinion :-D ) is in fact this – the Bible often speaks of ‘losing one’s life to save it’ and ‘loving not one’s life unto death’ and of course the passage from Matthew 19 that you quoted above. Christian history is full of martyrs and others who, although they didn’t die directly due to their faith, lived a (often much) more difficult life as a Christian than if they were not one – even in a society were Christianity was not openly, lethally persecuted, more subtle persecutions such as economic (no one would hire you) or social (being mocked, shunned, etc) often applied. Sometimes I wonder if that persecution is coming back…after all what good ‘progressive’ organization would want to hire someone who is ‘homophobic’ or doesn’t believe in ‘a woman’s right to choose’? And *all* corporations are progressive, and increasingly the only employment left is through major corporations, whose partnership with the government crowds out the small private sector. But I digress…
Famous Christian writers like C.S. Lewis and George MacDonald also exposit upon this point – basically, the issue is not that you can’t necessarily *have* life, *have* wealth, enjoy some luxuries, etc – it is the issue of growing inordinately attached to them – failing to ‘hate’ them in the Biblical sense – basically clutching, holding on to them with a vise grip of fear and possessiveness and being desperately unwilling to lose them, to let them go in the service of something higher if the need arises.
If you think about it – unless you can let go of things in the way discussed both in the Scripture and in this post, you can’t ever really have them in any substantive manner – take for example an application of this principle to the modern West – what good is having a middle class lifestyle and all of its’ accouterments if you are scared of losing them at any time, and spend your time and energy desperately trying to protect them, taking shit from your boss and an abusive employer, paying constant lip service to the gods of PC, living a life of cowardice-enabled, consumerism-powered comfort and ease, afraid to stand up and risk losing what you have?
Those men of whom Yamamoto Tsunetomo spoke were/are far more alive than those who love their lives too much – who love them more than truth/principals and God.
If you let go of life and those other related things mentioned above – yes – you may lose them, but any chance you really have of having them, of enjoying them – is to be had in not fearfully holding on them at any cost to one’s principles and life. Now I think there is a time for discretion in battle – after all a soldier tasked with taking out an enemy machine gun nest could far better employ stealth to go around the side as opposed to doing a suicide charge – but that solider must always march into any mission willing to lay it all on the line if called to do so. There is a huge gap between a martyr and a suicide. So pick your battles wisely, but when they are wisely chosen don’t be afraid to go full-bore. Even when battle is chosen, sometimes stealth tactics are best, other times open combat.
I am not the best writer, I tend to ramble a bit…but hopefully my point still made it across. :-)
Damn Aurini, I think this is the best post you’ve written yet. I’ll definitely have to check out Hagakure too.
Hagakure should be on every young man’s reading list. For its anachronisms (written c. 1400 IIRC- ???)it is a manual for everyday life for aspiring samurai, which is at minimum a better example than that set by 21st century feminuts, and at best were one of the pinnacles of what a man (alpha, sigma, and beta) could become. A lifetime dedicated to learning the arts of combat, to either live victoriously or die gloriously, not bent over a barrel.
That said, I do prefer the rogue Miyomoto Musashi. His exploits as ronin are awe-inspiring and often amusing.
@lozozlo
Damned straight.
@bringthereality
One of the passages that stuck out to me was “Do not put your hands in the folds of your Kimono. This looks foolish.” It brought to mind the jackings that young troops would get for putting their hands in their in their pockets while in Uniform.
Two fighting forces, with utterly different traditions, and yet holding the same value. Heck, you can even see it in the Zulus in the eponymous film; every military stands at attention, almost identically, every military has nearly identical disciplines and rank-structures.
There really is one human nature, just different flavours of it.
The virtue, the love of liberty, required for a scorched earth policy, the virtuous brand of violence as with Sensei, brilliant stuff. I was a bit shocked that you would express so well the spirit of what I touched on in the comment thread vis-a-vis what Ceer said in the previous post.
If I disagree with the assessment of a struggling marriage and bother to communicate it, it is a complement from my perspective. I don’t seek greater knowledge in low company.
“..too much love of life…” I think it is we who love life. The r-selection primitives have too much love of existence, which is really a dearth of mental refinement necessary to sublimate primitive instincts expressing crude and capricious emotions.
“There isn’t an ounce of contrition in her body; had there been, she would have admitted that she didn’t deserve him.” Women are not moral because they are not innately cultural. The Female Imperative is decidedly primeval. Might makes right and women and evolution live in the moment, so they deserved each other. A ought to man up–for himself first and foremost. Then he might see the female nature for what it is and not make silly demands on a woman. Women act cultural for advantage based on masculine authority from somewhere. They are social chameleons.
“That she cheated on him during the marriage is a certainty.” I don’t think a certainty. Women are entirely motivated by relative social status in every moment for ferally-wise reproductive advantage. Men are probably hardwired to not want sluts, but regardless men do NOT want to marry sluts. Husband is in denial about that, and she is correct. She put on an act for high status. Sex is a means for women; they hunger for masculine commitment after alpha sperm. She very well could have cheated, but she could also have been there, done that and wanted ‘something more’ which is family. Having children changes women, who live in the moment always. The frame of women and men is different. She could very well be doing everything she can to make the marriage work (except to worry about her marriage potential as a younger woman, which women can only do indirectly as appeasement to authority of the moment).
“She never gave herself to him.” He never conquered her. He never tried to own her. I find the whole idea of female culpability in a moral sense to be ridiculous. Patriarchy makes morality a virtue for themselves, or its a tool of subjugation and corruption. Women are on the cock carousel to gain status as they see things by testing their maximum SMV, which they never suppose could decline because liberated women are status whores. Chaste women are vagina hucksters who don’t destructively test their market value, and because a man of superlative authority made her, not because it is natural for women to do so.
So that’s where you were going with scorched earth. Love it! I recently posted that men should redefine marriage into a de facto form of separate residences and my-way-or-I-hit-the-highway without government sanction or whatever suits their fundamental purposes. Conservatives have failed at conserving any value from patriarchy past.
However, one marriage I do not believe is a scorched earth scale. Brothers in politics must be before women and children, before family, or as a man you cannot own, guide, and keep your family. But there is no hope for our man having his own patriarchy, even if he could get past the first hurdle of being blue-pill and denying the merits of his wife hiding her slutty past, for herself but so what? Who would marry these sickly men if not sluts? There is virtually nothing else to wed.
We don’t have the power to build patriarchy, only to prepare the infrastructure of ideas and dissiminate it. Once we are building with humans in interlocking relationships, lots of women and children and men will be no good for building material, but there is always a fresh supply of women, yes women per biology, entering puberty. Building and maintaining civilization requires earnest garbage elimination. Some make trash and others burn it. The civilized man is the greatest threat to human garbage or he is only a feckless post-civilized man. I think some of us can rally around that idea. Seems to be catching on: alphahole.wordpress.com (not my blog).
Great stuff, Aurini! You have been prolific lately.
Doug, that was fucking beautiful. Please, expand it into an independent post.