hanikrummihundursvin's profile

hanikrummihundursvin 2mo ago · Edited 2mo ago

I came across an interesting X post by a right wing Christian religious man on the topic of young people and dating and would like to share:

Jack Reacher Won't Ask Girls to Dance

I’ve had a front-row seat to the social breakdown hitting our young people. You can see it in a lot of places, but one of the clearest examples came from a mom in our church who’s helped run a homeschool prom for several years. She told me something recently that I’ve been stewing on.

When she first got involved, it was normal for boys to ask girls to dance—especially during the “snowball” dances, where the DJ tells you to rotate partners every thirty seconds. That’s the whole point: go find someone new, talk, move, risk a little awkwardness.

But this year? The boys wouldn’t do it. They stood around, clumped up with friends, goofed off, and refused to initiate. Some danced with each other, ironically of course. Meanwhile, the girls were standing around the edge of the dance floor—waiting. Eventually, they gave up and started dragging each other onto the floor. Some even went over and tried to coax the guys to come out. It didn’t work. There were 2 girls for every guy.

The DJ repeatedly re-explained the rules and purpose. Didn’t matter. Nothing changed. He was baffled by it. It didn't use to be like this.

The next day, one of this mom’s younger daughters said something that sums it all up: “I’m graduating, and I’ve never danced with a guy.” Contrast that with her older sister, who just seven or eight years ago came home from prom having danced with seven or eight different young men in one evening.

Something’s shifted. It’s not just social anxiety or awkwardness. It’s paralysis. It’s absence. And yeah—it’s unsettling.

The same trend was the focus of a recent video from Charisma on Command, titled “This Shift in Masculinity Is Scary.” It uses the Reacher series on Amazon Prime as a cultural case study. Reacher is a walking male power fantasy: big, competent, calm under pressure, lethal in a fight. And yet, in the modern adaptation, he is oddly passive with women. He never initiates anything romantic. In fact, the women have to all but throw themselves at him just to get a kiss.

This isn’t how Reacher was written in the books. And it’s not how male leads used to behave. Go back and watch The Girl Next Door or Casino Royale. Whatever flaws those movies had, the men at least wanted something—and they acted on it. Desire was visible. Rejection was a possibility. And risk was part of the reward.

That’s what’s missing now: initiative. Reacher has been reimagined into a man who wins without wanting. He gets the girl without having to pursue her. There’s no risk, no rejection, no emotional vulnerability. He’s strong in every arena except the one that requires personal agency.

And the problem is—it’s not just fiction. The video rightly points out that more and more young men are living like this in real life. They aren’t avoiding women because they’re ascetic or holy. They’re avoiding women because they’re afraid. Afraid of rejection. Afraid of misreading a situation. Afraid of being embarrassed, canceled, or misunderstood. So instead, they scroll. They lift. They build. They wait. They distract themselves endlessly, preparing for a moment they never plan to seize.

I thought this was overstated, but I digress.

It’s not that they don’t want anything. It’s that they’ve lost touch with how to act on what they want. They’ve been taught to suppress desire instead of disciplining it. They’ve learned that passivity feels safer than pursuit.

I used to think this was mainly a problem in my own circles. I’ve harped plenty on the socially stunted sons of Reformed households—the boys who can quote Theologians from memory but can’t make eye contact. But let’s be honest: this isn’t a Reformed problem. It’s a cultural one. We’re just producing our own brand of it.

A lot of young men today have rightly rejected the old “just be yourself” lie and embraced the call to “improve yourself.” That’s a good shift. You see more of them focusing on fitness, career goals, and personal discipline. But that growth often stalls out when it comes to relationships—especially with women. They’ve learned how to level up, but not how to move toward someone.

They’re told to develop themselves but warned off pursuit. So they become hesitant, uncertain, stuck. What’s needed now is the courage to carry that same sense of purpose into the social realm—to risk, initiate, and act with clarity and resolve, even when the outcome isn’t guaranteed.

So maybe we need to say this to our sons directly: If you like her, ask. If you want something, step up. If you get rejected, survive it. But don’t stand on the edge of the dance floor waiting for someone else to make the first move.

P.S. This is merely one angle of the dilemma. I know there are issues with the girls as well. Next time.

The replies to the post range from supportive and understanding to hostile. One that caught my eye said:

I genuinely mean no malice when I type this: this showed up on the time line, I got three paragraphs in, and thought "I bet this is a Based Pastor or something." A few seconds later I figured, girldad. I'm right on both counts.

You write effeminately. You don't seem to have any fellow feeling for young men as young men. Until you reckon with that, you and your dj are going to remain confused.

A 'girldad' has either all girls or a mix of boys and girls, and holds the girls to a standard that elevates them while holding the boys to a standard that denigrates them. It's why Con Inc. tells boys not to go to college and work in factories, and girls to work in STEM.

I like this reply since it has a little edge to it, but I am left wondering, to what extent does empathizing with young men just translate to validating their crippling anxiety and fear over interacting with the opposite sex? Does that do them any good? To me a lot of the replies about fear of getting 'cancelled' just seem like an overblown and hyperbolic expression of that anxiety and fear. The real question should be why that anxiety and fear exist in the first place. And to what extent the responsibility to overcome it rests on young men rather than someone else.

32

Context

hanikrummihundursvin 11mo ago

Peterson vs Fuentes twitter drama

The entire story is shown in this thread. Someone is asking why something is 'like this', Fuentes predictably answers 'Jews', Peterson swoops in to condemn, and then the rest follows.

The AmericaFirst/Groyper movement seems to have finally found another 'gatekeeper' to poke. After Charlie Kirk rather expertly adjusted his rhetoric to fall outside the AF/G firing line.

To avoid doing another dissection of Peterson: he certainly seems to have been bitten by the Zionist bug. For all his posturing as a rational and reason minded clinical psychologist when talking to feminists about feminism and the difference between the sexes, the merits of individualism and focusing on immediate short term goals and family, he seems completely unhinged when it comes to semitism.

Bullies thrive on weakness, and whilst it might not be nice to push peoples buttons like this, I'm left wondering just why Peterson is such a rabid philosemite. The trolls can only do what you allow them to get away with, as Charlie Kirk demonstrated by defusing the avenues of attack. Peterson seems to be doing the opposite of that.

As a further question, is this part of the right wing sphere dying? I'm not sure how Peterson is doing. Last I heard he did a rather big media deal with Ben Shapiro and the Daily Wire. Whilst the AF 'conference' or whatever it's called, didn't do so well.

-10

Context

hanikrummihundursvin 5d ago

I've never had a single person tell me it's easier to have a wife. In fact it's the one thing I hear most guys complain about at work.

6

Context

hanikrummihundursvin 11mo ago · Edited 11mo ago

The discourse around conspiracy seems like a gift from the heavens for any 'pro-institution' person. What an embarrassing gaff for the Secret Service.

Seeing a bunch of old men and fat assed women who look like school teachers running around the stage was embarrassing enough. But as the details emerge, it seems like it would have been hard to do their jobs worse. I was under the impression that a rooftop was a complete no-go zone when a VIP like this is around. Let alone that a guy with a range finder is allowed to prance around without anyone asking him what he's doing.

If there is no conspiracy I would like the discourse to move away from that and towards a recognition of how bad the Secret Service has to be to let this sort of thing happen.

19

Context

hanikrummihundursvin 2mo ago

I presume this is the type of observation I will be hearing about until the day I die.

Most people seem to have no idea what a trans person is or what trans rights are. So when even the slightest personal inconvenience arises, the good folk will balk at the notion and do their best to shield themselves and their immediate environment from the thing they've been advocating for most of their lives. You could make the same observation for nigh every policy.

13

Context

hanikrummihundursvin 2mo ago · Edited 2mo ago

But that's what a trans person is and that's what trans rights are in practice. Anyone who is squeamish about these things is by definition transphobic. As well as being, pardon my French, hysterical and ridiculous. As if your male coworkers suddenly turn into a physical danger as soon as you have to share a porcelain bowl...

There's an entire progressive dialect invented to get past these hurdles. Followed by a ruleset that should allow any well-meaning actor, who is concerned with the rights of trans people, to get along with their day without allowing their transphobia to negatively affect trans people as they try to exist.

Unisex toilets exist all over the world. This is transphobia masquerading as misandry. It should not be allowed to stand in any case if we are holding ourselves to any egalitarian modern standard.

-4

Context

hanikrummihundursvin 2mo ago

If you think your coworker is a weird pervert then you need to take that issue up with your supervisor. Not wave it around as a hypothetical at the expense of human rights for trans people.

Restrooms aren't just a place of vulnerability for women. They are also a place of vulnerability for trans people. There need to be some pretty strong material arguments made for why trans people should be barred from the bathrooms of their experienced sex that go beyond TERF'ist misandry. That is, if we want to ground our position in reality rather than phobia.

I don’t think it’s reasonable to say “this guy just said he was a woman two minutes ago for the first time, so sorry granny, he gets to be in your changing room and see you naked.” With a process that involves time and effort, I get it.

Gender dysphoria and being trans is not treated with 'two minute' levity anywhere I know of.

-10

Context

hanikrummihundursvin 3mo ago

Musk representing himself as a powerful man is a break with the conventional institutional 'representatives'

The strength of the 'institutional representation' system is how intangible it is. Lies get woven into 'official' reports that get represented as fact based on 'scientific consensus' by completely replaceable 'spokespeople'. And when someone seeks to fact check these representatives and what they say they are met with the rhetorical equivalent of cold hard brutalist concrete: "Are you saying science is wrong? Do you not believe our intelligence communities? Are you anti-intellectual? Do you not believe in physics?!"

To this extent academia and media are just PR firms that wash dirt off of policy positions for the people in power. Like immigration being fantastic and without any flaws. Or that we can't share one last moment with grandma on the hospital bed due to risk of spreading COVID, but that we can protest against racial inequality by joining a giant street protest, rubbing shoulders with hundreds if not thousands of random people.

So, in fairness to Musk being incorrect sometimes: So to was the prior system sometimes incorrect! And just how incorrect it got and how impossible it was to fact check is practically why we have Musk where he is now.

I'm not sure what Hanania is after here, other than whining about the fact that X doesn't boost his posts when he links to his substack and that he wasn't picked up to be involved with any of Musks projects. Or that mass media has allowed people Hanania considers lesser than himself to reach heights of clout and upvotes he can only dream of... All things directly or indirectly mentioned in the article. To that extent the entire thing is just an embarrassing pout from the author. I mean:

The right-wing clubhouse Musk has created is just repulsive to anyone who is independently minded. I wasn’t surprised when Musk unfollowed me...

Yeah... At risk of breaking the rules: lol. lmao even.

23

Context

hanikrummihundursvin 7mo ago

There's nothing nasty about making fun of the people who practice murdering their children so they can continue having careless sex with no consequences.

What does Fuentes being controlled opposition even mean? As you said yourself, "bodily autonomy" arguments are vapid. Laws are made that govern this type of stuff. It' already 'your body, my choice' and it always has been. Why sanctify the democrat crocodile tears by buying into the idea that 'your body, my choice' is a nasty thing to say? Oh, you can't have unprotected sex and then murder a baby to rid yourself of the consequences of your good time? Boohoo.

-4

Context

hanikrummihundursvin 11mo ago

If the GOP was smart they would do the opposite. Full scorched earth Womp Womp's.

I can't believe that GOP and friends don't have guys crafty enough to weave a narrative of law and order, back the blue and whatever else out of this.

Don't make the shooting an issue, make the media and Democrats the issue. They are attacking a sacred institution, these hallowed halls of law and order and blah blah blah. Show teeth. Don't be weak and limp wristed. Blame the Democrats and media for the shooting. Whatever you do, don't let the foot off the gas. Organize pro police protests, do whatever. Everyone is sick and tired of this play. No one respects it. People just go through the motions because it's the only game in town and they're forced to participate.

7

Context

hanikrummihundursvin 1mo ago

He's a jew who did some holocaust denial work in the 90's. It's of great cathartic importance for some people here to notice and comment on his woes.

12

Context

hanikrummihundursvin 2mo ago

Cases of criminals raping their fellow inmates is not an argument against trans rights any more than interracial rape is an argument against civil rights.

If you want to argue that being raped by penis is worse than something else, you should start by looking at men's prisons. If you want to argue rape in general is the problem, female inmates rape eachother more than male inmates.

Individual cases are irrelevant to the scope of the discussion, which is human rights for trans people. When we are talking about prison populations and criminals the discussion will get dragged into an unsavory quagmire with a lot of negative connotations that transphobic people try to associate with the concept of trans rights. This is a dishonest guilt by association tactic that's not relevant to the actual discussion of the topic. Proven by the fact that people refuse to engage in similar rhetoric regarding race.

I'm not surprised people object when they don't know what trans rights are, nor what transphobia is. The modern prison system is a crime against humanity. It places people in terrible conditions that facilitate further suffering and strife to no one's benefit. Those who choose to argue against trans rights rather than argue in favor of a better prison system betray their transphobic bias and abdicate any moral highground they may have pretended to occupy.

-4

Context

hanikrummihundursvin 5d ago

I understand the point but in relation to Jeff Bezos you are not explaining how having a wife is easier than having paid assistants do all of the things that need to be done.

1

Context

hanikrummihundursvin 7mo ago

Here's my good faith answer: They won't.

Demographically there is no future 'Republican' party. There are no measures in place to turn the tide of the browning of America. What you'll get is a third world political schema. The playbook runs the same direction everywhere: Brown identitarianism. The democrats can literally do nothing and everything will be golden.

The Republicans will change their tune and move towards 'respectable' and 'sensible' third world politics. A regimented and what they hope to be invisible caste system where specific institutions that separate the good from the bad are solidified and protected. The future 'democrats' exist to destroy this with more extreme class and ethnocentric propaganda.

There's no sense in presuming anything else. Demographically the country is being held together by a bunch of 40-80 year olds. White children are already a minority. On top of that the history of American conservatism is one of nothing but losses. There is not a single thing on earth they have managed to conserve. The only thing democrats need to do is keep on keeping on. Which is what happens regardless of who wins the elections as seemingly every single politician loves nothing but an endless stream of brown immigrants.

1

Context

hanikrummihundursvin 11mo ago

With supporters like these, who needs enemies. The point is that you don't cave in, instead you show you actually stand behind the thing in its moment of weakness. Precisely because it's being attacked by your enemy.

-2

Context

hanikrummihundursvin 4mo ago

I'm having some vocabulary issues expressing this but:

I think people with actionable plans based on a theory of how the world works will generally place anyone who does not have any of that in the 'enemy' category. Coming in as Captain Hindsight after the fact to point out that this, this and that had negative outcomes so 'we were wrong for doing that so lets scrap our entire political project' is just, matter of factly, a very juvenile position to hold.

Being in charge is hard. In order to make policy you have to believe in something about the world around you. You then put this worldview to the test when implementing policy and change based on it. Hopefully the changes have the intended effect, but if they don't, quitting isn't an option. You can't scrap your worldview just because it's not infallible or without problems. To that extent both 'left wingers' and 'right wingers' will identify the same strain of short sighted 'centrist' conflict aversion as cowardice and sedition against their cause.

I would ask: Are they wrong? Do you have a solution for the problems that drove western societies towards the 'woke' and all of the precursors? If not, what is your point here? Should we do race communism slower? Should we do fascism more moderately? The vanguards of the left and right would both ask these question. If your answer affirms their worldview they might not brand you as an enemy, but if your answer is just a thinly veiled excuse for the enemy position then they will lump you in with that crowd. What else should they do?

'Classical liberalism' failed completely in solving the problem of the population group gaps within American society. You can approach the reason for as to why in multiple ways, but you have to engage with that fundamental problem. If you don't there is no point to anything you say as far as the political vanguards are concerned. They have to deal with reality.

12

Context

hanikrummihundursvin 11mo ago

I think this is a typical case of boomer right wingers not recognizing how far behind the curve they are. They don't get to decide what is socially acceptable in the bio-leninist coalition. Those things are already long decided on before they are performed publicly.

5

Context

hanikrummihundursvin 13d ago

Isn't one of America's political platforms to go to war with Iran? Seems like a good reason for Iran to get a nuke...

1

Context

hanikrummihundursvin 4mo ago

Immigration discussion is two faced. You are either talking personally about individual people, in which case the average conflict averse person will have nothing bad to say to anyone's face, or you are talking broad statistical trends that factor over larger populations, in which case the argument against immigration is a very clear and resounding 'not very good'.

These two positions are held at the same time, but never in the same room.

28

Context

hanikrummihundursvin 4mo ago

If anything Trump is doing now is giving you pause, what kind of America do you envision where you do not feel similarly towards whatever person it is that could push forth some kind of HBD driven policy? How would anything going on now not pale in comparison to that?

One of the reasons I assume centrists are not dealing with reality is because they never formulate their viewpoint into a political movement. Even if it's just an online larp on X. It never goes further than personal opinions and browbeating their left and right sides within the Overton Window.

I don't think it's a coincidence that when they actually do go into real politics, like Carl Benjamin did a few years ago, that they end up moving towards firmer ground, be that on the left, or in this case the right. Same thing happens all the time in countries with multi-party systems. The big 'left and right' parties scoop new 'not on a side' political parties up into government coalitions, they serve that sides interest and then implode next election. Or, like happened recently with my local Pirate Party, they refuse coalitions and instead slowly drift towards the left until there's no point in having them, and then they implode.

I can go on 'lefty twitter' and see what the various factions on the left are up to, same for the right. Both groups have animating theories for how the world works and what is best to do based on that. They can have fundamental differences with each other about what the world around them actually is. They stake their claims, dig their heels in and stand for something. I can't go on 'centrist twitter' and see what the propositions are from their side. What is their view on the fundamental problems and what answers do they hold? Moderate re-education camps? Racism 0.5?

At the heart of the left-right divide is a fundamental difference in how people see reality. There is also a shared understanding of the inherent necessitated logic that drives both theories. Both parties recognize this. 'Centrists', for the most part, do not. Which is why they seem endlessly bewildered why the two sides are so hostile to them.

14

Context

hanikrummihundursvin 4d ago

Having a wife is a job in itself - my coworker every day.

4

Context

hanikrummihundursvin 9d ago · Edited 9d ago

A first impression: If we take a lot of leftist dogma as being true and discard obvious analogs to reality and claim they might be inaccurate, then we might just be able to explain why our ideology is seemingly not mapping on to the world around us.

Now queue the arguments through analogy, 'what if's' about reality, and a mountain of research motivated entirely by a need to collapse all genetic gravity into a neat environmentalist fold.

Scott Alexander seems to have a good eye for strategy. The article is effectively just an advertisement for a few plucky anti-hereditarian rebels who want to expose the fatal flaw of the hereditarian Death Star. Scott speaks highly of the effort, but obviously signals that he is going to wait until the rebels actually fire a torpedo into the thing. And there in lies the problem for the rebels.

For every alleged fatal flaw exhaust shaft that the hereditarian Death Star has, environmentalism has less than nothing. Every proposed theory has failed to explain the big problems. So... What's the point? What exactly are we doing here?

21

Context

hanikrummihundursvin 2mo ago

And a racist would disagree that any rights are being violated by not letting a colored go to a white only bathroom.

Trans activists were originally promising none of this situations will ever happen.

It's a dishonest association regardless of what some trans activists said or not. If a criminal who happens to be trans further commits crimes in prison then they can be dealt with like other criminals who do the same.

You seem to be assuming that the case for trans rights requires no justification, and any disagreement must stem from lack of knowledge. I disagree, and believe the case for "trans rights" is simply unsupportable.

Then we have an obvious disagreement. I would argue you could much more readily say the same for civil rights in America. The cost and scale is far greater, yet it's easily glossed over by the proponents of civil rights and desegregation. Doing the same for trans people is trivial in comparison.

Again, I completely disagree, and believe this renders the concept of "crimes against humanity" meaningless.

Reading first hand accounts followed up by official definitions of crimes against humanity, you don't have a rational leg to stand on when you say this.

You have to look no further than what happened with El Salvador's crime rates to see that the benefit to the rest of society is quite obvious.

What exactly about the prisoners suffering makes the streets they no longer occupy safer?

0

Context

hanikrummihundursvin 11mo ago

There are a lot of right wing boomers in the world. Be that by birth or spirituality. I don't remember the last time any of them at any time in the past 80 years could make any relevant change to the course of history. It seems like it doesn't matter how many 'SJW Owned Compilation's there are, or how many boomers watch them and cackle.

4

Context

hanikrummihundursvin 4d ago

You and your fellow 'wife guys' need to focus on what the argument is rather than circling the wagons around your own marriages.

2

Context

What is this place?

Why are you called The Motte?

New post guidelines

Rules

Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats

hanikrummihundursvin

hanikrummihundursvin