ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2018 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Tuesday, December 12, 2017

The odds are not as bad as they look

At Alpha Game, Lee Jackson explains why the odds are seldom as bad as they appear mathematically:
My brother once applied for a job out-of-state.

There were over 250 applicants for the position. His odds were 1/250, mathematically speaking.

I talked to him on the phone when he decided to go through the application process. He said "Lee, people keep telling me I don't have a chance because there are so many people trying to get this job."

"Yeah, I imagine," I said.

"But the thing is, I'm really not going against all those guys. I'm better than most of them already."

Arrogant? No. It was objectively true.

When we were young, our dad and both of our grandads told us to "have a firm handshake," "show up on time," etc. The kind of basic stuff every man was supposed to know.

In Current Year, these things aren't common among the uptalking soyboy set.
He makes a good point. For example, we often hear that "half of all marriages fail." But does this mean that your marriage has a 50 percent of failure? Not at all. Because "all marriages" includes low-percentage marriages such as second and third marriages, interracial marriages, interreligious marriages, and marriages to women with 15+ sex partners.

I've never run the odds, but I would estimate that if you're on a first marriage to a woman of the same race and religion with an average number of sex partners, your odds of marital success are probably on the order of 85 percent. And certainly, the anecdotal experience of all the married couples I know would tend to support that, as over the course of 20 years, not even one in ten of them have divorced.

Labels:

125 Comments:

Anonymous E Deploribus Unum December 12, 2017 5:17 PM  

Totally true. I had a friend who made a bundle from doing short-term work for a placement agency. When asked how he managed to work every single day, he said, "I can speak English and I have all my teeth."

Yeah, the competition is not what it used to be.

Blogger Danby December 12, 2017 5:21 PM  

In IT anymore, speaking proper intelligible English is a net negative when looking for work.

Anonymous Bob December 12, 2017 5:23 PM  

There is no such thing as random. Most people confuse it with what they don't know.

Blogger Matthew Funk December 12, 2017 5:23 PM  

Akshuallly just became actuarially. I can get behind this. The more factors that are known, the more the odds can be more properly assessed. Even if you know all the odds, any probability that isn't 1 or 0 requires making at least two game plans.

Anonymous E Deploribus Unum December 12, 2017 5:27 PM  

Danby wrote:In IT anymore, speaking proper intelligible English is a net negative when looking for work.

Yeah, but teeth are always a bonus.

Blogger VFM #7634 December 12, 2017 5:29 PM  

Because "all marriages" includes low-percentage marriages such as second and third marriages, interracial marriages, interreligious marriages, and marriages to women with 15+ sex partners.

Also, based upon personal observation, marriages involving a Gamma male and an attractive woman, which are unfortunately fairly common if she's from a naively idealistic religious family.

Anonymous Anonymous December 12, 2017 5:32 PM  

The flip side is factors can also dramatically decrease your odds as well. Gotta be true to your own self.

Anonymous vfm 0202 December 12, 2017 5:34 PM  

As far as we can tell quantum events are random. In particular, we do know (Bell's Theorem) that there is no "hidden state" that determines quantum outcomes. So yeah, random is a real thing, philosophically troubling though it is.

Anonymous Icicle December 12, 2017 5:38 PM  

So yeah, random is a real thing, philosophically troubling though it is.

Only if you limit yourself to philosophy.

Anonymous Aeoli Pera December 12, 2017 5:38 PM  

The main complaint that these idiots don't know how to verbalize is...it's not that there's no safety net (there never was), it's that these "just do it" advisers are always the first to the feeding frenzy when things go south. This advice is emotionally perceived as predation. You'll never reach them while ignoring the trust issues.

Anonymous User December 12, 2017 5:41 PM  

Actually that's not entirely true regarding Bell's theorem. It's entirely compatible with Leibniz's theory of pre-existing harmony which can remove randomness altogether. Of course that's not without its own metaphysical problems.

Blogger Desillusionerad December 12, 2017 5:45 PM  

I would add over say age 25 too

Anonymous Aeoli Pera December 12, 2017 5:46 PM  

If you want to do good rhetoric on this issue, it will have to be framed as potential martyrdom. That's the only sort of dream logic that can convince a low-trust person to take a leap of faith. And in order for martyrdom to make sense, there must be an object of love which the sacrifice would honor.

Blogger S. Misanthrope December 12, 2017 5:49 PM  

Yes! Also duh. Working in a stats job, such attempts to generalize and apply statistics to things that aren't homogeneous enough are very irritating. But don't try and tell a MGTOW that...

Blogger Aeoli December 12, 2017 5:50 PM  

Basically, there is no argument in favor of supporting Western civilization in general except as an act of worshipful self-sacrifice. Western girls (the particular case, please note the emotional metaphor) just plain aren't worth the cost-benefit otherwise.

Anonymous One Deplorable DT December 12, 2017 5:52 PM  

“Never tell me the odds.”
Capt. Picard
Battlestar Galactica - A New Hope

Anonymous SAK December 12, 2017 5:53 PM  

The Free Northerner gathered together some of the numbers. There is a link on that page to a divorce risk probability calculator as well.

Anonymous Aeoli Pera December 12, 2017 5:53 PM  

The Alt-White makes this case by framing it as a duty (sacrifice) to the Race, where the tribal god is the emergent national gestalt. If you can't match that case you'll fail to persuade these alienated souls every single time.

Blogger dc.sunsets December 12, 2017 5:54 PM  

Marital success also depends on how long you've known each other. Finding a girl early works well. Both of you will be less likely to be shopworn.

In our consumer culture where we're always encouraged to trade in the old for "newer, faster, shinier" etc., it takes a little mental maturity to realize that marriage is signing up to grow old, weak and wrinkled together. People conditioned to live in the Perpetual Now probably don't do well with this.

Time.....is. (Thank Heaven, otherwise everything would happen at the same time, making enjoyment of the Wonders of Life impossible.)

Anonymous Isidore the Farmer December 12, 2017 5:57 PM  

I have enjoyed his posts so far.

Blogger dc.sunsets December 12, 2017 5:57 PM  

Lots of people have already murdered their future happiness by embedding deal-breaker experiences in their past. They don't like to hear that they're F-ed.

One of the more important tasks of being a parent is to explain to your kids by the time they're 12 or 13 why it is worth their while to AVOID experiences that will taint the rest of their lives. It's like helping a kid in a dare-devil phase avoid a spinal injury, only with social interactions (mostly sexually-related.)

Anonymous Aeoli Pera December 12, 2017 5:58 PM  

You know I'm right too, because you don't owe shit to anybody...except you owe everything to Jesus.

Anonymous Aeoli Pera December 12, 2017 6:00 PM  

They tell you in sales that you never argue price. Price obnections aren't about price, they're about the fear of buyer's remorse...and the reminders of previous stupid decisions that brings.

Anonymous Looking Glass December 12, 2017 6:05 PM  

If you marry a virgin, your "secular" odds drop to around 20%.

Christians that pray together is around 5%.

Churchians have a super-high divorce rate, unsurprisingly.

Still, for any American, it's the Legal Structure that you're afraid of. It isn't the Marriage aspect. This can be dealt with.

Blogger VD December 12, 2017 6:05 PM  

This advice is emotionally perceived as predation. You'll never reach them while ignoring the trust issues.

I'm not trying to reach them. I am not going to pretend to care about them. They are cowardly narcissists and I don't like them.

I am addressing normal people who have been misinformed and misled.

Anonymous WaterBoy December 12, 2017 6:06 PM  

Vox: "Because "all marriages" includes low-percentage marriages such as second and third marriages...."

...and fourth, fifth, sixth, etc...all the way to nine, in the case of Zsa Zsa Gábor. In fact, I would guess that the numbers for multiple marriages in Hollywood alone approach the high 90's...which unnaturally skews the numbers for the country overall.

Anonymous Pitcrew December 12, 2017 6:10 PM  

@16
That advice could be worth a million dollars, literally.

Blogger VD December 12, 2017 6:12 PM  

If you marry a virgin, your "secular" odds drop to around 20%.

But that doesn't account for other favorable factors. That's what people leave out. For example, just by being white instead of black, you reduce your chance of divorce - with no other factor - from 48.5% to 44.4%. 75.1 percent of men with a BA degree are still in their first marriage at age 46.

Blogger S1AL December 12, 2017 6:12 PM  

Yeah, the divorce rate is heavily skewed by the extremes, particularly people who get married 3+ times. The research I've seen indicates that regular church attendance (bimonthly or more) cuts it by over half. Your estimate of 85% gets closer to 95% under those conditions.

Blogger Aeoli Pera December 12, 2017 6:13 PM  

VD wrote:I am addressing normal people who have been misinformed and misled.

Normal people already want to get married. If somebody is averse to the risk of marrying, it's because something happened, either to them or someone they know. If you want to breed spergs, break out the statistical analysis. Otherwise, fundamental persuasion rules apply.

Blogger VD December 12, 2017 6:19 PM  

Normal people already want to get married. If somebody is averse to the risk of marrying, it's because something happened, either to them or someone they know.

That is not true because everyone under the age of 50 has been hammered by bullshit statistical divorce propaganda since they were children. They have been taught to fear a bogeyman.

And why are you trying to tell me how to persuade people? I'm observably a lot better at it than you are.

Anonymous Mortis December 12, 2017 6:27 PM  

And certainly, the anecdotal experience of all the married couples I know would tend to support that, as over the course of 20 years, not even one in ten of them have divorced.

Vox, that's the problem with anecdotal experience; I've known a similar number of couples over a similar period of time and the ones that aren't divorced are trapped in sexless, horrible marriages. It's awful being around them at family gatherings and the like because you can cut the tension with a knife. I'm not convinced I'm a special enough snowflake to beat the odds.

I am addressing normal people who have been misinformed and misled.

Is that why there's been a sudden pro-marriage pivot at places like Alpha Game and some of the sites it links to? Because reading those sites for years confirmed a lot of what I've seen and convinced me to give up on finding a sane woman, let alone getting married. I'm leaning more towards being a Sugar Daddy now. At least then you get one desire consistently met.

Also, some of the Ilk have been insufferable on this. Finding a virgin woman of marrying age in the US? Oh, come on ... and lobbing personal insults and sanctimonious scolding at people who are simply having doubts doesn't help. See "Who Cares" by Darlock and "Shame and the single man" over at Alpha Game.

Anonymous MaskettaMan December 12, 2017 6:34 PM  

I think Scott Adams' "How to Fail..." said something like this. How do you know what the odds are? Allow that you might not actually know the odds that something will work out. How many jobs have you actually applied to? How many girls have you actually asked out? How many shots have you actually taken?

You can't curse the world if you haven't even tried that hard to get what you want.

Anonymous patrick kelly December 12, 2017 6:42 PM  

"Aeoli Pera wrote:If you want to do good rhetoric on this issue, it will have to be framed as potential martyrdom. That's the only sort of dream logic that can convince a low-trust person to take a leap of faith. And in order for martyrdom to make sense, there must be an object of love which the sacrifice would honor."

In the Eastern Orthodox Churches the married are called "living martyrs".

Anonymous happy one December 12, 2017 6:44 PM  

VD wrote:
I am addressing normal people who have been misinformed and misled.


How have we been misinformed and mislead?

Would you sell everything you own and mortgage your future earnings and the future of your children to buy a ticket in a lottery with these odds?

Because it's not about us, it's about our children's futures.

You're asking us to have children and gamble on being able to father them to adulthood despite all the odds against us.

Blogger Koanic December 12, 2017 6:51 PM  

The statistical rise in divorce, however sliced, reflects a qualitative change in married life, beyond the binary of legal rupture. Breeding numbered tax serfs in Babylon carries dark risks. But those curses were earned for us by our gutless foolish fathers. What we make for our children remains unset.

OpenID markstoval December 12, 2017 6:51 PM  

"... I would estimate that if you're on a first marriage to a woman of the same race and religion with an average number of sex partners, your odds of marital success are probably on the order of 85 percent."

I met a girl who was of my nation and was not "experienced". I offered her love, devotion and loyalty. We have been together 44 years. (43 of those married)

I find that most of my friends (all younger than me) that have experienced divorce never really tried or doomed themselves to failure from the get go. Marry a ground floor girl from your own tribe and then always love her. She will never stray.

The only time we came close to a breakup I recalled that I made a vow before God to take care of her till I died. I decided that my vow was much more important than the piddling little disagreement we had.

The odds of a good marriage are high if you really try.

Blogger Aeoli Pera December 12, 2017 6:54 PM  

VD wrote:And why are you trying to tell me how to persuade people? I'm observably a lot better at it than you are.

Because I'm better suited for talking someone off a ledge.

Anonymous VFM #7916 December 12, 2017 6:58 PM  

Dalrock has explored this question quite a bit.

https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2012/04/28/are-young-marriages-doomed-to-divorce/
https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2011/08/26/why-a-womans-age-at-time-of-marriage-matters-and-what-this-tells-us-about-the-apex-fallacy/
https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2012/07/04/conventional-wisdom-on-the-trend-in-us-divorce-rates-may-be-about-to-change/
https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2015/02/07/2014-never-married-data/
https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2016/11/23/the-rational-response-to-high-divorce-rates/

Anonymous Ominous Cowherd December 12, 2017 7:04 PM  

happy one wrote:You're asking us to have children and gamble on being able to father them to adulthood despite all the odds against us.

What are the odds of fathering to adulthood the children you never have? I'm not saying to take out a marriage license, but I'm certain that your odds of raising good children are zero if you father no children, and at least weakly greater than zero if you father one or more.

Anonymous Post Alley Crackpot December 12, 2017 7:06 PM  

"I've never run the odds, but I would estimate ... your odds of marital success are probably on the order of 85 percent ..."

Assuming ceteris paribus when it comes to revolver design and so forth, this slots between the odds for Russian roulette when using anything from a six-shooter to an eight-shooter, roughly speaking.

If I were wanting to impart a sense of encouragement, this is not the sort of ad hoc statistic I'd use for it.

Blogger tweell December 12, 2017 7:07 PM  

Vox, I would note that you are of the upper class, and those you associate with are as well. The slow destruction of the nuclear family hasn't reached the upper class yet, so everything's fine from where you are. In the lower middle class, things aren't that great.

Of my siblings, I'm the only one who didn't get divorced. My sisters married three times each (one has managed to stay married, the other hasn't), and my brother's on his second. Bad picks? Probably, but our parents were married for almost 60 years, so we had a good example to follow. I see the same pattern in my cousins - a few have managed to win, but we're batting less than .500 as a family.

Anonymous VFM #7916 December 12, 2017 7:08 PM  

Life is risk. Hedge appropriately, but you'll never succeed when you never risk.

Have balls and be a patriarch until life knocks you on your ass, or "Zero's you out" as Rollo might say. Then get back up and go again.

Anonymous MaskettaMan December 12, 2017 7:16 PM  

I keep hearing this doubt about one's ability to raise a child, from people who have had bad parents themselves. And it breaks my heart because I always hear it from the kindest, most sensitive people. There really is a loss of self-confidence in our people and I pray that we're past the nadir.

Anonymous Looking Glass December 12, 2017 7:18 PM  

@27 VD

Wasn't disagreeing. Like all Set Theory approaches, once you start slicing, you end up dealing with very different worlds. It's the reason the ultra-religious have sub-10% divorce rates.

The main "avoid marriage" issue is the carnage seen or experienced growing up. The 80s & 90s saw the final peak of the Boomer Divorce Trend. Boomers divorce at a far higher rate than any other generation and that's been rolling through the statistics for years now. (I think someone linked to Dalrock teasing out that detail.)

But it all keys off the "Divorce Rape" issue, which means there are regional aspects to the issue. The de facto legal application of Divorce, against a Man, means the laws around Marriage are actually unconstitutional, as they violate the 13th & 14th Amendments. It's the reason there's a very American nature to the "don't get married" points. Though, as I've said a number of times over the last couple of years (mostly at Dalrock's place), there are approaches to drastically lowering the problems on the legal side of things. There's a clear mental dichotomy issue, when dealing with Americans, about "Marriage = Full Marriage License + Legal Consequences". You can thank the gays for blowing up that reality.

Anonymous 0007 December 12, 2017 7:19 PM  

When I was hired by the US DoS in 1999,(I quit my job of 20+ years) I was told that they had received over 3500 applications for the open positions. There was a total of 32 positions to be filled. I was the oldest hired at 55 and the youngest was just over 40 IIRC.
And the wife and I got married in '66 and stayed that way until she died in '15. Maybe I got lucky a couple of times...

Anonymous Daniel December 12, 2017 7:24 PM  

There never was a guarantee that doing the right thing was going to be easy.

Off topic: Is there a way to submit questions to Alpha Game Plan for the Alpha Mail column, or are responses to that column chosen from comments entirely at the author's discretion?

Blogger Aeoli Pera December 12, 2017 7:27 PM  

VFM #7916 wrote:Life is risk.

It's a bad bet for some of us. But life is good, because God made it. Therefore death is bad, which is why God condemned it to the lake of fire. Therefore suicide is bad, even if it relieves suffering. Therefore suicide of your family line through childlessness is bad.

Blogger Aeoli Pera December 12, 2017 7:29 PM  

Daniel wrote:There never was a guarantee that doing the right thing was going to be easy.

Exactly this. It doesn't matter what the odds of doing the right thing are, if it's the right thing you do it, and then you maximize your odds.

Blogger CM December 12, 2017 7:34 PM  

--Finding a virgin woman of marrying age in the US? Oh, come on ...--

Oh give it a rest. VD didn't even recommend a virgin for significant improvement!

This information is critical for young men entering college that they know what to look for and shouldn't wait long post-college to marry.

The younger the girl, the less partners she'll have, even so much as being a virgin. I was a virgin until 22. Point is, they exist at young ages.

Going on 9 years of marriage in a couple weeks with 3 kids. Happy, not always easy, and still having sex. A bit fat, but we did that together :p

Blogger Aeoli Pera December 12, 2017 7:36 PM  

and then you maximize your odds.

Should have said "then you just do whatever you can to maximize your odds of success" to avoid confusion.

Anonymous VFM #7916 December 12, 2017 7:36 PM  

@47

It's also technically not following the first directive God gave Adam, at least if by choice. An argument can also be made that living life with no attachment to the future or having offspring is effectively putting your life in a position ahead of God, violating the first commandment. Ultimately it comes down to intent.

Anonymous User December 12, 2017 7:42 PM  

Well done. Chronologically the first commandment was "be fruitful and multiply"

Blogger SirHamster December 12, 2017 7:44 PM  

happy one wrote:Because it's not about us, it's about our children's futures.

The one who does not have children has given his children no future at all.

Try a different argument.

Anonymous Mortis December 12, 2017 7:45 PM  

Therefore suicide of your family line through childlessness is bad.

Then wouldn't God have to give every man a wife the way he gave Adam a wife? Otherwise it's not possible to keep such a command. In fact it might be an outright statistical impossibility in places where men outnumber women.

Blogger Aeoli Pera December 12, 2017 7:47 PM  

Mortis wrote:Therefore suicide of your family line through childlessness is bad.

Then wouldn't God have to give every man a wife the way he gave Adam a wife?


Nope.

Blogger Koanic December 12, 2017 7:48 PM  

There is ultimately no way to escape the curse of Babylon except to leave, which carries its own curse. But understanding that it is a curse, one can meet it with the same stoic silence with which Jesus faced his accusers. It is no more than that which is common to man. The Son of Man had neither home nor children, and faced intimate betrayal and societal scorn. Be hard as cross nails, for your race is crucified.

Anonymous American Graffiti December 12, 2017 7:49 PM  

Churchian pastors preach that divorce is the same in the church as it is in the secular world. But that is incorrect and demoralizing. For Christians who don't cohabitate before marriage, they're looking
at 5 to 10% divorce rate.

Telling the truth might make marriage more attractive to younger Christians.

Blogger Aeoli Pera December 12, 2017 8:03 PM  

Mortis wrote:In fact it might be an outright statistical impossibility in places where men outnumber women.

When God commands you to do something, you do it. If he told me to rape someone, it would be the right thing to do, and I would do it immediately because I've read the Old Testament.

If the Children Question (CQ) is really about odds, go south and miscegenate with a Squatemalan. Not optimal, but maybe it's the best you can do.

The follow-up question, naturally, is whether having children is the right thing to do.

Blogger Matt December 12, 2017 8:17 PM  

Every married man I know hates his wife. Rich men, poor men, white men, black men, old men, young men.

Blogger Jew613 December 12, 2017 8:22 PM  

Marriage and children are good. While there are things that can be done to improve your odds I've seen too many men do these things and be divorced anyway, or be in miserable marriages with a vile harpy for a wife. There has to be honesty on the huge costs and risks a man takes upon himself when he gets married. So get married, but go in with open eyes.

Blogger Sterling Pilgrim December 12, 2017 8:37 PM  

I'm with my first wife, same race, same religion, both saved ourselves till marriage. Been together 17 years, married for 13... things are constantly bewilderingly awesome. God is good.

Blogger Bob Loblaw December 12, 2017 8:44 PM  

So yeah, random is a real thing, philosophically troubling though it is.

Troubling? Without an element of randomness there's no basis to believe in free will, and we're all just machines carrying out our programming. Unlike Einstein I'm very happy God is playing dice.

But more on topic... it's foolish to apply overall population statistics to an even for which you control a great many of the variables. Even something as basic as finding someone with a similar background and similar life goals has to do wonders for your odds.

Blogger dc.sunsets December 12, 2017 8:45 PM  

One problem is sample bias.

Divorced or people trapped in bad marriages, and assclowns, all yammer endlessly about how married men get no sex. Then the Never-dad Cads heap derision on "boring" sex with the same gal day after day, week after week, etc.

Men in happy marriages full of deep devotion are (I suspect) far too private to counterbalance all the stupid lies and misinformation by sharing what their love life is really like.

Common sense alone indicates that a woman who loves you day after day, week after week, even decade after decade, has a lot more interest in your (mutual) enjoyment than some town bicycle who acts out Debbie Does Dallas.

Maintaining passion in marriage is the same as anything else, the payoff is proportional to the investment. Then again, it seems that many men no longer know what investment is required.

Alpha isn't a game. It's far more than that.

Anonymous Tanjil Bren December 12, 2017 8:47 PM  

"Every married man I know hates his wife. Rich men, poor men, white men, black men, old men, young men."

Wow. Thirty years together (twenty of those married) you can totally take me off that list.

Blogger James Dixon December 12, 2017 8:48 PM  

> Then wouldn't God have to give every man a wife the way he gave Adam a wife?

My very limited subset of data (exactly one instance) indicates that he does. But then I asked him.

Blogger James Dixon December 12, 2017 8:53 PM  

> Every married man I know hates his wife.

I think that says more about you than it does husbands and wives.

Next month will make 28 years for my wife and myself. Our only regret is that we've been unable to have children.

Blogger dc.sunsets December 12, 2017 9:01 PM  

35 years married. Three kids, 4 (almost 5) grandkids. More fun with each stage of life.

The grass isn't greener on the other side of the fence, it's greener where you water it.

Yeah, I know those who drew short straws, but most of the time the writing was on the wall before the wedding.

Blogger VD December 12, 2017 9:01 PM  

Every married man I know hates his wife. Rich men, poor men, white men, black men, old men, young men.

Then you don't know me.

Anonymous Radgar December 12, 2017 9:17 PM  

I've been married twenty years, and I have more children than most of you. I don't hate my wife, though she has spent many years hating me.

God already told us how this works, explicitly and typologically. Israel, the bride of Jehovah, despised and rejected Him for centuries. The man is the head of the woman, as Christ is the head of the ecclesia. Husbands suffer for the sake of their wives and children.

I won't tell you to man up, but I will tell you to Adam up.

Blogger Bob Loblaw December 12, 2017 9:21 PM  

Every married man I know hates his wife. Rich men, poor men, white men, black men, old men, young men.

Find new friends. I see no indication this is normal.

Anonymous WaterBoy December 12, 2017 9:27 PM  

Matt: "Every married man I know hates his wife. Rich men, poor men, white men, black men, old men, young men. "

Lemme guess -- divorce attorney?

Blogger Aeoli December 12, 2017 9:27 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger Aeoli Pera December 12, 2017 9:40 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger Aeoli Pera December 12, 2017 9:45 PM  

Those comments were fun but kind of a black note to end the night on. Despair is a sin, after all, I can't go giving up after all that talk earlier.

Blogger Aeoli Pera December 12, 2017 9:50 PM  

So that said, final thought: God did not give us a spirit of fear, he gave us a spirit of power and love and discipline. Has the Lord not commanded you? Be strong and courageous. Do not be afraid; do not be discouraged, for the Lord your God will be with you wherever you go.

Anonymous AB.Prosper December 12, 2017 9:54 PM  

Aeoli Pera wrote:VFM #7916 wrote:Life is risk.

It's a bad bet for some of us. But life is good, because God made it. Therefore death is bad, which is why God condemned it to the lake of fire. Therefore suicide is bad, even if it relieves suffering. Therefore suicide of your family line through childlessness is bad.


This will presume that the reader is Christian or adheres to that sort of theology. Amusingly Heathens do after a fashion, the otherworld for most is rather similar to Sheol and sucks

I don't go for that, life is mostly suffering and it just is, neither good nor evil. Bets shot you got though, you might have an afterlife, might be worm food. Might as well live as best you can.

Way I figure this civilization is worth keeping. Long long term, its doomed live every other one but its take a special kind of asshole to not put up a fight. Hell I'd have more respect for someone trying to destroy it. At least that something

happy one wrote:How have we been misinformed and mislead?

Would you sell everything you own and mortgage your future earnings and the future of your children to buy a ticket in a lottery with these odds?

Because it's not about us, it's about our children's futures.

You're asking us to have children and gamble on being able to father them to adulthood despite all the odds against us


Do you even know what this blog is about?

If you want to save Western civilization its going to require duty , bravery, self sacrifice and White people having children. A civilization that is barren won't exist period

It doesn't deserve to exist.

Let me tell you, I'm not situated for fatherhood economically , lack the social skills to score a proper wife and am a cranky middle aged eccentric quite used to his freedom.

Yet I don't give up and go MGTOW I work to find out what I need to do to change the things that make it impossible for me to fulfill my duty as a Man of the West instead of just telling this society to piss off and die

Nearly anyone can learn the basics of marriage and fatherhood. Its all out there and there are more wise men willing to give you the knowledge you need than any other generation ever had. Use them.

Matt wrote:Every married man I know hates his wife. Rich men, poor men, white men, black men, old men, young men.

You need to find a better class of people. I've seen tons of miserable married people (I live in California) but there are also people who are genuinely content, some in love, some not

It can work if you work at it.

And yes there is risk, so what?

Anonymous Richard Lion December 12, 2017 9:59 PM  

Here's a piece of scripture that nobody in the church follows.

"Do not give your strength to women, nor your ways to that which destroys kings." (Proverbs 31:3)

Anonymous Al December 12, 2017 10:08 PM  

... with an average number of sex partners ...

Which is still far too risky a proposition (according to the 23 studies done on the topic). I find it amazing that a man would actually consider such a woman. Alas...

Anonymous Sheikolyte December 12, 2017 10:32 PM  

I'd imagine class plays a huge role as well. Compare managers to staff or officers to enlisted.

Blogger p_q December 12, 2017 10:40 PM  

@78/al
That's silly, regardless of the risks present the biggest concern is whether or not you're attracted to that person. There are other secondary concerns but a man would forgive quite a lot of nasty sexual history for a very attractive woman. I don't have it on me but I recall a cdc study that had the total of married women and their sexual experience and women who only had sex with their husband made up somewhere between a 1/5 and a 1/3 of brides, it's disingenuous and/or silly to exclaim you don't understand something so common and even quite easy to understand.

If people cared so much about minimizing divorce risks it would never be so high to begin with.

I saw a nice table of young boomers and how many of them got/are divorced their numbers, which you assume would be higher than other demos because of their wealth and their reported selfishness, aren't as horrible among the educated.

https://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2013/article/marriage-and-divorce-patterns-by-gender-race-and-educational-attainment.htm

Divorce rates simply plummets if you're educated, whether or not their marriages are happy is a secondary question but it's unlikely for college educated people to divorce (and I honestly think it's unlikely for miserable people to stay married). The low risk is probably due to higher IQ and better impulse control and maybe because high IQ people have sex later and with fewer partners (someone with a bachelors degree is less likely to have had the average number of sex partners).

If it's due to IQ since the average college IQ has lowered the low risk associated with a bachelors degree should have weakened (unless the lower IQ college attendant drops out frequently enough to negate that).

The average at marriage is also quite high (27) for the bachelors degree crowd so that has to be factored in as well.

Anonymous Al December 12, 2017 11:12 PM  

@80

That's silly

How is it silly?


the biggest concern is whether or not you're attracted to that person

Unless of course a person finds promiscuity repulsive in a potential spouse.


There are other secondary concerns but a man would forgive quite a lot of nasty sexual history for a very attractive woman.

Perhaps those with fewer choices?


it's disingenuous and/or silly to exclaim you don't understand something so common and even quite easy to understand

You still haven't explained why it's silly.

I get that people are maybe a bit desperate to increase white birthrates, but at what point is the cost too high? A man has the responsibility of finding the best possible mother for his children, and a woman with the average (n=6-8, depending on the study) number of sexual partners would not do. I understand that some men are quick to defend marrying a non-virgin when they themselves married one, but such an undertaking (i.e. marriage) should be done rationally and advice given to others should also be rational. The Teachman study (amongst many others) is clear: if a man wants to avoid playing a (mostly) metaphorical Russian roulette, he marries a virgin.

Anonymous BBGKB December 12, 2017 11:37 PM  

Because "all marriages" includes low-percentage marriages such as second and third marriages, interracial marriages, interreligious

Just wait until this dyke in an open relationship with a chandelier sues to be married in your church

https://www.queerty.com/woman-claims-open-lesbian-relationship-chandelier-theyre-engaged-20171208

Blogger Danby December 13, 2017 12:50 AM  

Matt wrote:Every married man I know hates his wife.
37 years, 11 kids, 10 grandkids. No hatred at all. You need to hang out with a better class of people

p_q wrote:There are other secondary concerns but a man would forgive quite a lot of nasty sexual history for a very attractive woman.
Speak for yourself. What you're actually saying is that a lot of men will set themselves up for a lifetime of misery to bang a hot chick. While observably true, that's not the way to build a happy marriage.

Blogger Technocratic Union December 13, 2017 1:31 AM  

The odds are as bad as they look, Vox. You're a tradcuck.

Anonymous Jill December 13, 2017 1:55 AM  

[Modern day] cynicism is a kind of self-fulfilling prophecy.

Anonymous Mathias December 13, 2017 4:11 AM  

Hmmm, I understand the point, but for many children of divorce, it is literally the only example of marriage they have ever seen. Indeed, I have never been in close proximity to a marriage that worked. How is someone who grew up like this supposed to have the necessary cultural references and knowledge required to make a marriage work when so many people have never seen what a working marriage looks like, or how it functions, or how it is made resilient? You want people to get married, one of the biggest things we will need is lessons on HOW. Ever considered publishing a cultural guide on having a functional marriage and defending oneself from divorce, Vox? You have published a cultural guide on how to withstand and defeat SJW's so you definitely have the chops for that sort of writing. Also, if you do, I will purchase said book.

Blogger wreckage December 13, 2017 4:17 AM  

@59 I literally have no friends who hate their wives. Not one.

Blogger Bob Loblaw December 13, 2017 4:21 AM  

I imagine if Vox wrote a book advising marriage-minded men to avoid women who'd had fifty miles of hose run through them the outcry would be even greater than for SJWAL

Blogger wreckage December 13, 2017 4:22 AM  

Marriage:

1. Common cultural assumptions. Look for a woman from a compatible family.
2. Good relationship with her dad; her and you.
3. Go to church. The stats for regular attenders are very good.
4. Do not let the sun go down on your anger. It's not just biblical, relationship experts can predict marriage success with 10 minutes of observation, with near-certain confidence, by whether the couple engage with conflicts. Not fight, but raise, negotiate, and resolve. If you can argue amicably you're damn close to golden.
5. When you have the power to hurt, don't. When you could walk away, don't.
6. The marriage, like an individual, needs challenges, both to the relationship and for the 2-person team to tackle together.

Blogger wreckage December 13, 2017 4:24 AM  

Oh, and look for a woman who respects you as a man but also shows protective affection for your "little boy". If she has contempt or coldness towards either, you're toast.

Blogger wreckage December 13, 2017 4:25 AM  

(ie, your inner child or whatever.)

Anonymous Svensons December 13, 2017 5:22 AM  

You seem to be obsessed with marriage.

Believe what you want. Schopenhauer was right that if children were brought into existence by an act of pure reason, humanity would have gone extinct long ago. God knew this, so he coupled the act of procreation with pleasurable (but denigrating) lust. Apart from that, there is no reason anymore to procreate, as Genesis 3:15 has been fulfilled. The reason the prophets of old---who did not do it out of lust, but command, as Augustine correctly understood---had children was simply that this would lead to Christ being born.

Again, see Augustine's Of the Good of Widowhood and Of the Good of Marriage. Augustine even makes the case that lust within marriage is sin as well, but marriage acts as a ``pardon'', as he calls it (Christians should have sexual intercourse only for the begetting of children). Further, he knew that vain persons would object and ask ``but if everyone lived chaste lives, how will the human race persist?''. The answer, of course, is it does not need to, and that hastening the end of the world means that much more speedily the City of God will be filled. Since most people alive nowadays will end up in hell anyways (more than a billion Mohammedans, for example), there is little reason to perpetuate it.

Who cares if whites die out? That this world will end knows both the atheist and the Christian, but the latter has hope that something better will replace it, whereas the atheist is left with a meaningless universe without hope. If the caretakers of the world go extinct, maybe this will lead to speeding up the end of the world.

As Gomez Davila wrote:

'The modern Christian feels professionally obligated to act jovially and jokingly, to show his teeth in a cheerful grin, to profess a slavering friendliness, in order to prove to the unbeliever that Christianity is not a “somber” religion, a “pessimistic” doctrine, an “ascetic” morality.
The progressive Christian shakes our hand with the wide grin of a politician running for office.'

Also quite fitting in the current political climate:

'That patriotism which is not a carnal adhesion to specific landscapes, is rhetoric designed by semi-educated men to spur the illiterate on towards the slaughterhouse.'

(He read in eight languages, including Latin and ancient Greek, lived a quiet, rather secluded life with his wife and three children and was surrounded by 30.000 to 40.000 (sic) books. Even Rabbi B can't compare.)

Blogger wreckage December 13, 2017 6:40 AM  

@92, you're not the Messiah, no matter what the voices in your head tell you.

Blogger wreckage December 13, 2017 6:42 AM  

Also, you quote Davilla, but ignore the fact that he was married and had 3 kids, which he would certainly have told you was the good and necessary process of a life well lived. He would call your post arrogant and unseemly.

On the other hand, if you know of an English translation of his entire corpus, I'd be much obliged...

Blogger sapopular December 13, 2017 6:57 AM  

"Clemson University: Expecting people to show up on time is racist"

http://www.theblaze.com/news/2017/04/14/clemson-university-expecting-people-to-show-up-on-time-is-racist


Strange times...

Blogger Damaris Tighe December 13, 2017 7:09 AM  

Svensons wrote:You seem to be obsessed with marriage.

Believe what you want. Schopenhauer was right that if children were brought into existence by an act of pure reason, humanity would have gone extinct long ago. God knew this, so he coupled the act of procreation with pleasurable (but denigrating) lust. Apart from that, there is no reason anymore to procreate, as Genesis 3:15 has been fulfilled. The reason the prophets of old---who did not do it out of lust, but command, as Augustine correctly understood---had children was simply that this would lead to Christ being born.

Again, see Augustine's Of the Good of Widowhood and Of the Good of Marriage. Augustine even makes the case that lust within marriage is sin as well, but marriage acts as a ``pardon'', as he calls it (Christians should have sexual intercourse only for the begetting of children). Further, he knew that vain persons would object and ask ``but if everyone lived chaste lives, how will the human race persist?''. The answer, of course, is it does not need to, and that hastening the end of the world means that much more speedily the City of God will be filled. Since most people alive nowadays will end up in hell anyways (more than a billion Mohammedans, for example), there is little reason to perpetuate it.

Who cares if whites die out? That this world will end knows both the atheist and the Christian, but the latter has hope that something better will replace it, whereas the atheist is left with a meaningless universe without hope. If the caretakers of the world go extinct, maybe this will lead to speeding up the end of the world.

As Gomez Davila wrote:

'The modern Christian feels professionally obligated to act jovially and jokingly, to show his teeth in a cheerful grin, to profess a slavering friendliness, in order to prove to the unbeliever that Christianity is not a “somber” religion, a “pessimistic” doctrine, an “ascetic” morality.

The progressive Christian shakes our hand with the wide grin of a politician running for office.'

Also quite fitting in the current political climate:

'That patriotism which is not a carnal adhesion to specific landscapes, is rhetoric designed by semi-educated men to spur the illiterate on towards the slaughterhouse.'

(He read in eight languages, including Latin and ancient Greek, lived a quiet, rather secluded life with his wife and three children and was surrounded by 30.000 to 40.000 (sic) books. Even Rabbi B can't compare.)



Epic nihilism, Mr.Svensons

Blogger VD December 13, 2017 7:51 AM  

The odds are as bad as they look, Vox. You're a tradcuck.

You're a statistical innumerate. And a liar.

Blogger FrankNorman December 13, 2017 7:59 AM  

Again, see Augustine's Of the Good of Widowhood and Of the Good of Marriage. Augustine even makes the case that lust within marriage is sin as well, but marriage acts as a ``pardon'', as he calls it (Christians should have sexual intercourse only for the begetting of children).

That's rather different from what the Apostle Paul taught on the matter.

Anonymous JeremiahEmbs December 13, 2017 8:05 AM  

For the armchair theologians: The first commandment listed in Genesis was not be fruitful and multiply. It was "let there be light." And God's commandment to man and woman to be fruitful and multiply and REPLENISH the earth by definition means the earth already had "plenishing" so chronologically it wouldn't be the first anyway. This jives if you check the verses previous as you'll find God commanded a lot of things before man to do things. And check the other books of the Bible and you'll see he made angels befor.e men so we can assume they were commanded to do lots of stuff and this occurred when the earth's foundations were being laid. Job 38

But none of that is relevant because the whole premise that not having children is a violation of God's commandments for people today is wrong. The Apostle Paul said a married person desires the things of the world (which the Bible says not to desire) so that they may please their spouse and so not being married so that you can serve God is better. This is explained in first Corinthians seven.

Also see what the disciples said when Christ explained to them that divorce is adultery.

They said if that is true it is GOOD for a man not to marry and Christ didn't correct them and instead reinforced the idea explaining how some men are eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven's sake. He also explained this would not be the norm and was for the few who could receive it saying not all men could receive the saying except to those it was given, which of course primarily included the apostles. Peter of course, the falsely claimed first Pope (an office the Bible forbids recognizing and so it does not exist) was the only Apostle mentioned as being married.

Christ specifically said some people will have to hate their wives and other family members to follow him which is why Paul said if the unbelieving depart let them depart.

So we must assume that being unmarried is more profitable to the kingdom of God than being married just as Paul said.

The false doctrine of the opposite belief stems from not understanding how Christians breed. We do not replicate physically. We replicate through the new birth in Christ that occurs in an individual who receives him and is born again by the seed of the word of God. (John 1:12, John 3, I Peter 1:23, II Corinthians 5:17).

Anonymous JeremiahEmbs December 13, 2017 8:38 AM  

The point of the article that risk factors are not correctly figured in the gross is sound, but the analogy used is wrong.

Getting divorced should be compared to losing a needed job which is so needed that devastation will occur in a man's life if he loses it, not to not being hired for a medicore minimum wage job or medium range job in the first place which would the kinds of jobs that would be included in any numbers related to employment. So the analogy is false and leads to major problems when comparing the two.

For example: According to God once getting divorced is adultery and you can not be remarried without committing adultery so it's not as simple as finding an unmarried woman and marrying her. You can work any job that doesn't violate God's commandments or your conscience that you are able to do and can train for it if you are not currently qualified, but once a woman is married God says that's it for her. She's never available to another man who follows God's commandments again.

God's commandment is very clear. Statistically those who have been divorced can no longer be counted in the numbers of available spouses. The situation is worse once a Christian takes the red pill of what Paul was talking about when he said if you are bound to a harlot is one flesh just as if they were married. That means Christians ideally should regard virgins as the only viable spouses just the Levites were commanded to do. That kind of hell fire preaching would peel paint off the walls which is why apostate preachers don't even mention it.

Also the comparison to hiring is pretty silly as in a divorce you loose everything, but when turned down from a job you loose nothing unless you are already in debt. It's a minor setback. Jobs have turn over and generally get easier if already worked before. Women don't. You get paid to work at a job, you loose money when divorced and in fact marriage is far more expensive than living alone. Not getting a particular job doesn't usually put a man at risk of suicide, getting divorced does (I have extensive numbers on this - divorce only affects men in this way statistically). Not getting a job doesn't mean an almost automatic loss of half of your property plus child support for 18 years. It doesn't mean the loss of your wife who the Bible calls one flesh with you. It might hurt your pride a little but it doesn't subject you to the endless humiliation of being cucked. It doesn't mean your kids are placed at risk of being harmed by another man your ex will introduce them to. And so on. So the risk/reward is not even comparable. You can try try try to get different jobs with ZERO risk except some lost time. You can try marriage ONCE and you are done.

Plus let's talk numbers. If all the population of Canada where child bearing aged single women they couldn't even supply one-third of the wives needed for the current single male population of China because of the sex selective abortion causing an imbalance of men to women in the population there. And once India is included... well you get the idea. So we must assume most men in the world will NEVER be married or even have sex. Those are just facts. And this is why Christ said, "Take heed, and beware of covetousness: for a man's life consisteth not in the abundance of the things which he possesseth." Because guess what? You may not even have a wife or children. And you are still worth no less to God. And lest any think I am incorrectly connecting his comments about covetousness to the subject of marriage, divorce, remarriage, and sex...

Exodus 20:17, Romans 7:7, Romans 13:9, Matthew 5, II Peter 2:14

Blogger dc.sunsets December 13, 2017 8:42 AM  

The scientist in me obsesses about identifying what elements are key to finding and traveling Happiness Path.

One pillar is that most of us thrive in a stable, mutually-supporting, complementary relationship. Loneliness kills people early. I see no way to be happy if enduring crushing loneliness, and "the bro's" just isn't remotely able to fill that role. Men and women are obviously different, and the best marriage is where a man is really GOOD at being a man, and the woman is really GOOD at being a woman. Just because our times are making men less masculine and women less feminine doesn't mean anyone has to settle for it.

When we're young, life ahead is like a long corridor full of doors. At 10 or 12 most of those doors are still open. As life progresses we reach stages where we may want to pass through an "occupation" door or a "relationship" door. But just as spending ones 10-through-17-year-old years eating chips and playing video games closes one future "occupation" door after another, engaging in casual sex, openly criminal behavior or other high-time-preference social actions closes forever certain "relationship" doors.

Women or men who attempt to bang their way through their HS, their dorm or the phonebook embed memories and habituate to behaviors that preclude later happiness. There may be exceptions to this, but I've not seen one. Just like stupidly engaging in risk-taking behavior can result in a crippling injury, stupid social behavior cripples ones future social relationships.

Pretty Woman is a lie. And anyone who thinks the PUA's Never-dad Cad routine leads to happiness from 40-80 is a moron.

We're surrounded by toxic, filthy, evil pop culture messages that warp our minds. But as in every other arena, the more difficult the challenges, the greater the honor of conquering them. I pity those who already crippled themselves listening to the lies, though. We all either conquer our impulsive mind's attempt to follow that Pied Piper or we don't.

Blogger szopen December 13, 2017 8:47 AM  

The same for rates of cuckoldry. In so called "manosphere" there are numbers circulated, which have nothing to do with reality, based on self-selected samples. In reality, your chances for divorce or being cucked for certain classes are close to zero.

Anonymous Michael Maier December 13, 2017 8:51 AM  

I need to read things like this. It gives heart and it's needed.

God bless you, Vox. This blog is an insane place but it's given me a lot of hope. My thanks.

Blogger wreckage December 13, 2017 10:10 AM  

@103 I find the madness unaccountably encouraging.

"The false doctrine of the opposite belief stems from not understanding how Christians breed. We do not replicate physically. We replicate through the new birth in Christ that occurs in an individual who receives him and is born again by the seed of the word of God."

Statistically false. Christianity overwhelmingly runs in families, as promised in scripture:

"Proverbs 22:6New King James Version (NKJV)

6
Train up a child in the way he should go,
And when he is old he will not depart from it."

You have decided, though, to discard all of Proverbs and many of the Psalms, as well as accounting all of God's blessings on the patriarchs as evil. Marriage and children are absolutely foundational blessings from God, as attested to by the entirety of Scripture. Cue legalistic nitpicking; buddy, I AM autistic and I know symptomatic behaviour when I see it, so don't bother.

However the expansion of the Kingdom was best served by rapid dissemination among the surrounding peoples in Paul's time, and the best way to achieve that, and indeed to survive the fulfilled prophecies against Jerusalem, was to be unattached.

Blogger Alexandros December 13, 2017 10:58 AM  

Someone should run the actual numbers to give younger generations a modicum of hope in this fallen age.

Anonymous Antoine December 13, 2017 11:25 AM  

@Alexandros

Here are your numbers: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DLqE8oaXkAAxPIq.jpg

Anonymous BBGKB December 13, 2017 12:17 PM  

I remember calculating the odds that I would be the one to get the only 2 black felons shot (dead on arrival) by cops in one month in a particular DieVerseCity.

The odds if going by 3 hospitals would be 1/9 for the same hospital x 40+ similar employees across all shifts so 1/9 x 1/1600 =1/1440

Odds considering 6 hospitals would be 1/36x 1/1600 = 57, 600.

Odds reduced by both black felons being shot on weekends within 1 hour of bars/strip clubs closing, in the crime area nearby that cops like to shoot black felons at brought it down to near 50% odds.

Anonymous TheFirefly December 13, 2017 5:17 PM  

Since it apparently didn't go through:

"I haven't run the numbers..."

And I doubt you would want to, given that the conclusion you've come up with fits your narrative.

If you think so little of your audience that you think we'd believe "85%" to be a reasonable number (both as an estimate and as a reasonable risk), perhaps your services on behalf of Western Civilization may best offered elsewhere? I don't think we need any more dysgenic pressures in society, least of all from the side that purports to promote Christian morality.

This is a sign that the West has lost - that the "Men of the West" are being encouraged (or worse) to marry sluts in order to 'save' it. If anything, encouraging the "Men of the West" to marry such women is only reinforcing that immoral behaviour. After all: "if the 'Men of the West' have to marry me, must I really practice my faith (i.e. Christianity)?" If anything, that suggestion is anti-civilizational, both on a behavioural level and on a genetic level. It is effectively Churchianity.

Promiscuity is one of the major causes of what got us into this mess in the first place. Carrying on as if nothing has happened only ensures that it will continue.

I never expected Vox Day to turn into the typical Christian Answers forum-goer, and somehow he has. What strange bedfellows arise these days...

Anonymous JeremiahEmbs December 13, 2017 8:22 PM  

To Wreckage: The fact you are using the so-called New King James version of the Bible proves ignorance of doctrine & the Bible. Not only does that translation destroy the pronouns of the Bible which are necessary to understand a text translated from a classical language but it's a blasphemous mess, especially in the footnotes which are so full of false doctrine the book is plainly heresy. And it fosters a weak, cucked Christianity & fails to warn men of the danger they are facing without Christ. It avoids the word "hell" every time it can for instance. (The translators know they are going there & the word makes them a little hot around the collar.)

I've written 16 commentaries on the book of Proverbs & for about 20 years practiced reading it each month & read the entire book of Psalms 2 days ago & have taught those books & the entire Bible my whole life even in collegiate level lectures, I'm doubtful I'm ignoring those books.

Proverbs warns us about evil & stubborn women & against having sex with them or even against living with them even in marriage many times & the book is one of the principal texts that Christian MGTOWs refer to when justifying their single lifestyle.


Christianity can not run in families as you don't become a Christian by birth & faith is not an inheritable trait or else there would be no atheists at all. Each person CHOOSES to be a Christian consciously at some point in their lives being BORN AGAIN by the word of God becoming a new creature in Christ. ALL Christians are converts & before we are ALL children of the Devil. The clustering effect of converts seen in families is because the children have equal EXPOSURE TO THE WORD OF GOD for the Bible says "faith cometh by hearing & hearing by the word of God." In healthy churches there are as many new converts from godless families as those who had been raised in Christian homes. Geographical clustering occurs also outside of Christian families in locations where missionaries are sent so genetic traits have ZERO to do with a person's reception of Christ. It's the OPPORTUNITY to do so that makes the...

Anonymous JeremiahEmbs December 13, 2017 8:23 PM  

...difference so you are observing a CULTURAL effect, not a genetic one. And that cultural effect is present anywhere evangelism is taking place which is one of the reasons the Bible says, "... he that winneth souls is wise." (And that is part of a memory verse I learned before I was the age of thirteen which is in the book of Proverbs.)

The word of God trumps any demographic deficit as every positive social & political revolution is proceeded by a spiritual revival & every decline in a society (even those in genetically homogeneous ones like those in Sweden & Amsterdam) by a decline of Biblical Christianity & an embrasure of atheism. Genetics are irrelevant to the destiny of nations. Whites were barbarous pagans rolling in mud until Christ & even the talented Venetians had few things of merit until Savonarola taught them to throw off the chains of dark age unbiblical Catholicism & embrace the gospel by faith alone leading to the works of Buonarroti & Titian. In fact the very first person to receive Christ by faith in the New Testament was the Ethopian eunuch who was reading the word of God. He simply needed the passage explained to him.

The alt-right is as much obsessed with race as the communists are at ignoring it. They must remember that even racially homogeneous nations of high intelligents like the Japanese are wallowing in socialist hell without the gospel stagnated & in decline. Spiritual beliefs make up a "culture" (the root of the word being "cult" meaning to cultivate, nurture & propagate, & religion from "cultus" L. or "culte" F.) & only one religion has ever brought freedom to any people for where the spirit of the Lord is there is liberty & ye shall know the truth & the truth shall make you free & Jesus is the way, the truth, & the life. Converts are more important then than children. 1 Corinthians 4:15 For though ye have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers: for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel.

Blogger wreckage December 13, 2017 10:10 PM  

@110; oh I don't care about race at any kind of personal level. I'm just pointing out that the numbers contradict your assertion, so either God is wrong or you are.

@108, the numbers have been run. See link provided by another commenter, above.

@109, I used a search engine. I get something like 30 translations side by side. As I predicted, you have not addressed the point made by me and by scripture, but have instead spouted credentials and made a genuine ad-hominem; which is to say an attack on me that does not in any way address the argument.

If genetics are irrelevant to all human behaviour, why do we have genes at all? Is God an idiot? Did he screw up when he coded impulsivity, temperament, IQ and time preference into our DNA, and now has to wave a magic wand daily to unmake the results? Perhaps he was wrong about gravity too?

Your literalist and absolutist division of the unity of man into Flesh and Spirit smacks of Jewish mysticism, not a proper synthesis of Christianity.

Anonymous Mr. Rational December 13, 2017 11:21 PM  

You go, Wreckage.

Blogger wreckage December 14, 2017 4:34 AM  

Before anyone starts on, I do not have an anti-Jewish bone in my body, to the dismay of some. But if you're going to be a Kabbalist, you should own it. Don't be shy, there's even devout Pagans commenting here.

Anonymous JeremiahEmbs December 14, 2017 6:48 AM  

Actually Wreckage you were the one who attacked me personally suggesting I was displaying autistic behavior when I wasn't. I was perhaps pedantic in my original comments but not autistic. And when I am pedantic there is a reason which I explained already; which is the matter of false doctrine being introduced by applying a commandment to Christians that was for other people. And I explained that Christ and the Apostles including Paul made clear does not apply today and in fact say the reverse; that is being single and abstinent is better for serving the kingdom of God. That's not autistic at all. That's called being correct and making a point. I did address the issue you brought up in the passage and rather well showing that Christianity is not inheritable and explaining that Christianity spreads equally well when people are exposed to the word of God which can occur in families or through evangelism of those of any age even that for those raised by non-christian parents. The verse you cited has nothing to do with the topic at hand, but is rather about child rearing and contains within it a subtle reference that a prodigal son WILL stray walking away from God initially but return AFTER his backsliding if his initial training is good which is why Jesus used that story to illustrate the difference between two types of children raised in a godly home; the one displaying constant fidelity and the other being inconsistent in his young adulthood and he furthered that discussion when talking about lost sheep. The verse specifically relates to the instruction of males anyway, as most of the verses in Proverbs do, and the question at hand is whether there are enough available WOMEN that the odds of securing a godly wife are better than some suggest. The book of Proverbs in chapter 31 makes it clear that there are not as they are as rare as rubies. I did not attack you personally; I simply noted that your use of a plainly corrupt version of the Bible proves beyond any reasonable doubt that you know nothing about the word of God. That is clear as the first step in proper discipleship training is covering the topic of Bible translation and the transmission of the text. Again as I explained without the pronouns such as "thee" and "thou" the meaning of the original text is lost in translation as modern pronouns do not have enough noun cases so that ALL modern translations, regardless of how many you use, are ALL terrible. Besides that the footnotes are terrible and blasphemous. Furthermore ALL modern translations of the Bible, even the so-called New King James, are translated in part (as in the New King James) or almost entirely from a corrupt text manufactured by the Satanic members of the Ghostly Guild, Westcott and Hort, and the Nazi Kittel, and Nestle-Aland, and the United Bible Society, who all used German textual criticism (German rationalism/atheism) to attack the authority of the majority text in favor of forgeries that were in the minority. Furthermore the New King James Bible is itself a forgery as King James has been dead for around 400 years and could not authorize a translation today. This kind of forgery is also seen with so-called "Webster" dictionaries that are made today. Back to Sunday School my friend.

Anonymous JeremiahEmbs December 14, 2017 7:24 AM  

As to your question about genetics there is no Biblical evidence whatsoever that a person's genetic makeup determines their behavior. The historical record is that some of the kings of Israel, who shared the same bloodline and so serve as the best study, obeyed God and some did not. There was no observable pattern to their behavior. The behavior of their parents and how they were raised had no observable effect either which goes to the previous discussion. Some people do what is right and some don't. Behavior is a CHOICE. In fact the Bible says God will hold all men equally accountable for obeying God's commandments regardless of bloodline saying as many as have the law as do not will perish with or without the law and to the Jews were given the law, and that there is NO DIFFERENCE between the Jew and the Greek except that to the Jew was given the oracles of God so that they are more well informed, but that even the Gentile has the law of God written upon the tables of his heart and so are held accountable for their obedience to God as though they had the law. Again this is rather basic Biblical doctrine you are obviously ignorant of so again I must point out your deficit. Read the book of Romans.

Now you can ask God why he made genes, if such a thing even really exists as you may understand it, for genetics was a Nazi concept, and they were and are natural liars as bad as the Communists both being socialists and children of Satan, and genetics (like DNA and the theory of evolution) has many lies attached to the study of it and what we are told about it. Remember the Nazi party didn't die, but instead was absorbed into our political and scientific community through Project Paper-Clip and there are many malthusian genocidal maniacs who support murdering babies that influence each and every scientific paper you read, especially in the field of genetics. The alt-right is woefully ignorant of these things and is falling into the trap of the binary choice between Nazism and Communism and failing to study the Bible which refutes both.

But you may look at Matthew 10:30 which says, "But the very hairs of your head are all numbered." and Job 37:7 which says, "He sealeth up the hand of every man; that all men may know his work." and look into God's law for how that eye witness testimony against a man are to be diligently investigated as best as possible to either confirm or refute the testimony as explained in Deuteronomy and Leviticus for the possible answer to your question. It's elementary Watson. We are just far too confident in those methods of investigation which are actually far more statistical than factual, but that's another topic and I don't want to spam up Vox's forum. The topic at hand is the chances that a man may find a suitable wife.

Blogger VD December 14, 2017 8:18 AM  

genetics was a Nazi concept

That would be news to Gregor Mendel, who died in 1884.

Anonymous Mr. Rational December 14, 2017 9:17 AM  

VD wrote:That would be news to Gregor Mendel, who died in 1884.
It makes sense if Nazi is a brand rather than a political party/doctrine.  That allows anyone to be a Nazi (just like anyone can now be Hitler).

Save for a few larpers, it's a brand used by the left against its enemies.

Blogger wreckage December 14, 2017 11:03 AM  

@114, You should note that I said I was autistic. I was attempting to fend off exactly what you then vomited forth; a mass of exacting attention to unconnected details. It's characteristic. It's also a massive cognitive strength when harnessed correctly.

However, given the rest of your commentary, I think I was being far too kind. Autism can be a very constructive neural abnormality; you are exhibiting disordered thinking, which is not, as far as I know, linked to autism.

For what it's worth, I am not alt-right, and I at some level, think I agree with some of what you said, but when you come out with this:

"But you may look at Matthew 10:30 which says, "But the very hairs of your head are all numbered." and Job 37:7 which says, "He sealeth up the hand of every man; that all men may know his work." and look into God's law for how that eye witness testimony against a man are to be diligently investigated as best as possible to either confirm or refute the testimony as explained in Deuteronomy and Leviticus for the possible answer to your question. It's elementary Watson."

And I come right back around to disordered thinking. Or, you're just not proof reading your paragraphs, but even then there's a needle-jump in sensibility.

In any case, I do not mean to be too unkind. You're right to reject the false dichotomy; but you're wrong to forget that Vox just spent the last 2 months excoriating the modern Nazi movement at every possible level.

Anonymous The Firefly December 15, 2017 12:04 AM  

@111

"@108, the numbers have been run. See link provided by another commenter, above."

I see two possible URLs: one undermines Vox's argument, the other undermines it massively. Which one are you referring to?

Blogger wreckage December 15, 2017 6:57 AM  

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DLqE8oaXkAAxPIq.jpg

Percentage ever married who have never been divorced: 98%

50% of marriages might end in divorce, but not 50% of people end up divorcees.

For examples of the variability of the odds:
Professions with lowest divorce rate:

Medical Scientists – 9.11
Other Scientists – 8.79
Legislators – 8.74
Audiologists – 7.77
Dentists – 7.75
Farmers – 7.63
Podiatrists – 6.81
Clergy – 5.61
Optomitrists – 4.01
Agricultural Engineers – 1.78
http://www.wf-lawyers.com/divorce-statistics-and-facts/

Anonymous The Firefly December 15, 2017 11:13 AM  

@120

Yes, but that's a single partner for each of them (i.e. themselves). That's the ideal, and unsurprisingly it is the lowest divorce rate to be found on a single dimension.

Blogger wreckage December 15, 2017 11:57 PM  

@121, sure, and Vox argument as I understand it is that there is marked variability in divorce rates. Those later stats I put up are from a site that certainly can't be said to be understating divorce rates - it pegs the overall rate at 68% - but look at the variance by profession. Pretty damn strong links to IQ and impulsivity; alternatively, to socio-economic status; depending on your analytical rubric.

Anonymous JeremiahEmbs December 16, 2017 12:15 PM  

VD: Not a surprise to Mendel. I'm sure he knows a lot of things now including how fire feels when you can't get away from it (however the term genetics wasn't used until the 1900s as far as I know - but I'm being pedantic again). But maybe it's news to you. I don't know. I figured you would have done your research on this since everyone who has read up on it knows Mendel’s influence on Nazi thought and how the field of genetics is entirely dominated by racists spouting off provably false Nazi theories who still perform their Satanic rituals of child sacrifice and beaker striking to this day in homage to their fore-bearers. The Nazi racial theories were just those of the German Rationalists and Fabian Socialists, all of whom were evolutionists, and who had a HUGE influence in apostate Germany prior to Hitler. Hitler mentioned reading books and tracts which formed his ideas. And the Fabians were the most prolific tracting society of socialists at that time and they were profound racists which founded Planned Parenthood through Sanger and the KKK. It's obvious Nazis existed before Hitler and that socialists love to rebrand themselves every so often but their favorite term is "scientists" because that hides their ideology which is based on lies under a veil of authority and helps them secure government funding.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/creating-the-master-race

https://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10007062

http://www.sfgate.com/opinion/article/Eugenics-and-the-Nazis-the-California-2549771.php

Anonymous Mr. Rational December 16, 2017 1:29 PM  

JeremiahEmbs wrote:Not a surprise to Mendel. I'm sure he knows a lot of things now including how fire feels when you can't get away from it
MPAI, {$CURRENT_YEAR}{$CURRENT_DAY} example.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts