A Rational Discussion of the Trad-Con Narrative

2019/03/31

A Rational Discussion of the Trad-Con Narrative

Lately you might have noticed that the Traditional Conservatives have been pushing a narrative about the virtues of sacrifice and defining manhood as being in service of women. I believe that this narrative is pushed in response of men freeing themselves from the plantation of marriage and defining themselves what is manhood. The narrative that men should give up on their newly earned freedom and to take a bad deal willingly because men feel accomplishment in servitude as been pushed many Trad-Cons, like Glenn Beck, Steven Crowder and Tucker Carlson.

In this presentation, I will break down this narrative using simple common sense. To be honest, it almost feels like I’m kicking a low hanging fruit.

How many times have you heard the narrative lately about the Titanic? It seems to be the go-to argument of all Trad-Cucks lately. As if the Titanic was an ideal of manhood we want to immolate. Let’s talk about the Titanic for a second.

At no point in history as the disposability of man ever been as clearly spelled out. They could have installed a big-ass neon sign saying ‘’MAN’S LIVES DON’T MATTER’’, it wouldn’t have been clearer. ‘’Women and children first’’. This was the captain’s order which meant that we will not even consider saving a single man’s life until we have saved every women and children on this boat. It meant, we prefer sending out half empty life boats then to save a single man.

Often we are being sold the image that every men stood stoically on the bridge waiting for the end. This is not true. If you really listen to the story, men were losing their shit on the bridge. Some officers even had to shoot shots in the air to control the crowd, some say they shot some men. The worst part is when people today hear that, they are probably thinking ‘’Oh thank god they brought these men back to their senses’’ instead of ‘’well now they are forced to wait for death at the threat of a gun’’.

Can we, at some point, look at this event for what it really was? It was a bunch of Trad-Cucks who sacrificed the lives of countless men to the altar of Vagina.

We all know that the right thing to do would have been a policy of first come first served. Saving entire families instead of creating orphans and widow (who probably ended up in poor farms with criminals and the mentally ill to keep company to their children).

The argument I’m hearing a lot lately is ‘’we need to save the women to continue the species’’. Seriously??? Dude, that argument made sense 200 000 years ago when mankind was nothing more than a few tribes struggling to survive in the Savannah. Back then, a pack of lions could have ended humanity; back then it made sense to protect the women at all cost. 

Have you seen the voting demographics? Women are the majority of humans on Earth, and we are 7.6 billion people on Earth. We are not at risk of extinction. Eggs are not rare anymore; they are cheap by the dozen. Anyone who pulls out that silly non argument needs to wake up to the current year and realize that they are only following an outdated evolutionary behavior that is now obsolete and that is instilled in young men by their parents and society for the wrong reasons.

We also need to point out that fathers teach their boys to defend women in hopes that this will increase the chances they will have grand children. They teach their boys the same tactic they used to procreate: Which is to worship the Vagina in hopes of getting pussy. 

What they do not realize is that their son, pumped full of testosterone and willing to take risks, will endanger his life for any woman. We cannot underestimate the stupid shit a young man will do for pussy. There is no limit to stupid in that domain. However, by risking his life, the young man increases his chances to die from stupid shit before passing down his genes and thus causing the end of his genetic lineage.

Instead, we should teach young men something that has value. We should teach them to be rational.

Sacrificing your life for any woman is not logical. You have been conditioned to do so. There is an endless amount of stories of men charging to the defense of a Damsel in distress with no concern for his well being. Often, you have never even spoken or see that woman in your life, yet you are willing to stand between her and a guy twice your size. I can’t blame these young men because I used to do the same when I was younger, but then I started to analyse the situation and realize that this behavior did not make any sense.

This is not an instinct that men are born with. This is a thought behavior.

If we look at more primitive life forms on our planet, such as ants, we realize that even they evaluate their genetic proximity to the Damsel in distress before deciding if he should sacrifice his life to save her.

If the future Queen’s life is at risk, the drone will sacrifice without a second thought for his well being. The drone is more likely to sacrifice for the Queen of the next generation than the current Queen or the Queen of the previous generation. If a drone of the same colony is at risk, the drone is more likely to save that drone than a Queen from another colony.

But when it comes to humans, it would seem that sacrificing your life for any woman, even if there is no genetic proximity is alright. For those Trad-Cucks who keep pushing for the argument of ‘’saving the species’’ do you not realize that there is a problem here? Don’t you realize that this is a behavior that is not conducive of the continuation of the species?

If the life of someone in your family or someone close to you is at risk, then it makes sense to protect that person. You also have to take into account the level of danger in question. If you only risk to be slightly hurt to save the life of a stranger, than it would make sense to help that person. However, if you risk losing an harm to save that person the situation is completely different.

If you listen to the Trad-Cucks, you rush to the defense of a woman and get shot by a gangster on a moment’s notice without any hesitation. If not, you are not a man. They even say why if you listen well. They say that they could not look their father in the eyes if they didn’t go defend the Damsel. Like I said, this is not an instinct, it is a thought behavior.

Now let’s address the elephant in the room. (I'm not talking about Big-Red =P)

I believe we all had the experience when we were young of a guy in our classroom who was picked on by bullies. Some of us went to help that kid, thinking that if you are 2 then the bullies would walk away and leave the kid alone. However, while the bullies are looking down on you thinking of the method they will use to squash your face, you look behind you and see the other kid running away, leaving you behind. At that moment you learned a very important lesson about human nature.

The same concept applies in your adulthood. Would you rush to save someone who will run away and leave you behind to save his hide?

I think I can speak for most men. When someone uses you and abandons you at the first sight of danger, you are very unlikely to come to that person’s defense in the future.

Let’s add women to the equation. Women expect and demand that men risk their asses to save them, even if these women are the architects of their own demise. Even if a woman ignored every warning that men gave her and deliberately put herself in danger’s way, she still expects men to rush to her defense so she can walk away unscathed, not taking any responsibility for her actions and having learned nothing.

But do women rush to the aid of men?

Most Trad-Cucks would point out that men are stronger and that women can’t fight as well as men (I’m sure you have noticed by now how much I appreciate Trad-Cucks). But there are more ways to fight than with your fists.

This is because people do not understand human nature. Yes, men are stronger than women; they have the hormone of the Gods that make them stoic in the face of danger; then are more agile than women and are more coordinated than women. Men have evolved to hunt and to fight. But this doesn’t mean that men have more power than women.

You know very well that if women were turned on by men who moved around by jumping on their asses, we would have a serious hemorrhoid epidemic to deal with.

Women are the members of the species that select the genes that will be passed on to the next generation. Over millions of years of evolution, this has led to the evolutionary behavior to always favor the women. This means that women have incredible social and political powers. Women could do much more to change society with words than any bloody revolution could ever hope to do. This means that women can easily defend men with words without any risk of adverse effects to them.

When you look at it this way you realize that women could stop the suffering of men in the West without even breaking a sweat. But are they doing it? No they are not. They are throwing legions of men under the bus to get a few perks the government is throwing their way.

There are a few women how are fighting for men. I think we can all things of a dozen women, out of 3.7 billion women on earth who stand up for men. We are talking around 3.2E-9 of women will rush to the aid of men. Anyone who has done some math in his life knows that this number is statistically insignificant. But even that 3.2E-9 of women are rattling the cage more than men ever could.

So, let’s look at this from another angle. What if we were to use the ancient Greek city state model? What if we only came to the aid of those who are contractually bound to come to our aid? What if men only protected, physically, the women who protected men, verbally?

I know that countless men would go into harm’s way to protect Alison Tieman, Karen Straughan or the Grin Reaper and I think they would deserve it.

So as men, let’s set a standard. Let’s make these 3 women the standard of the women who are unrelated to us that we would rush to aid. The other women who do not rise to this standard better hope they have a relative in close proximity when shit hits the fan.

If we did this and stuck to our principals, we could end gynocentrism in a week.

Of course, the Trad Cucks are going to cry about the rate of female mortality increasing by a few percent, but I think this is an acceptable price to pay.

Gato Villano