Post: #1

http://podcasts.joerogan.net/podcasts/stefan-molyneux

They talk about single moms and issues facing boys in school.

Great stuff.

Post: #2

Watch out for Molyneux. He has the locution of a real tough guy but in the end I wouldn't call him a friend of masculinity.

Post: #3

I'm almost through this episode. This and the David Choe episode from last week are the best I've heard in recent memory. Molyneux is a beast.

Not sure what ladderff is referring to^.

Post: #4

(09-26-2013 09:49 PM)calculus Wrote:  I'm almost through this episode. This and the David Choe episode from last week are the best I've heard in recent memory. Molyneux is a beast.

Not sure what ladderff is referring to^.

Agreed. He's a pacifist, but his arguments are thorough and consistent. His podcasts have helped me to be more introspective, and intellectually consistent.

Post: #5

I have no intention of starting an online holy war between
anarcho-capitalists and everyone else. For anyone who has only
seen a podcast here or an essay there of Molyneux's, he does seem like
a thorough and consistent polemicist, and a man's man, with a deep &
effective voice, emphasis on being rational, etc.

But. Whether you have had a positive or a negative reaction to Molyneux,
some things about his views may not be obvious. He's not another
straightforward Lew Rockwell-style right-anarchist (whatever you happen to
think about that). Molyneux believes that "statism" (which means, anything
except AC), is the result of childhood "abuse." He has produced videos
like "The Bomb in the Brain: The True Roots of Human Violence" which
advances a full-bore social constructionist argument about the origins
of violence. (Most forum-goers here are rightly hostile to the social constructionist
view.) The source for these views is apparently Lloyd deMause's
psychohistory,
which you can see right there at the link is derived from the Frankfurt
School—basically one of masculinity's XX century archenemies! I mean
these are people many of whom think that if we could get little boys to
wear dresses, everything from war to crime to bad weather would be made
a thing of the past.

Speaking of the Joe Rogan interview: Molyneux has said that when the
anarchist utopia arrives, men will no longer be interested in contact
sports; according to 'psychohistorical' analysis, violent sports are
the reenactment of childhood trauma wrought by "abusive" parents. But as
for me, I like hockey, I love my parents, and I don't think it's because
they brainwashed me through abuse in childhood.

Don't fall for Molyneux too quickly. I know that he's
done some podcasts about the state screwing men over and destroying the
family and so on, which is great, and they can even be quite rousing,
but underneath, he's quite hostile to game, to the pursuit of hot chicks,
and to any expression of masculinity that he doesn't see fitting into his utopia.

Post: #6

(09-28-2013 09:46 PM)ladderff Wrote:  I have no intention of starting an online holy war between
anarcho-capitalists and everyone else. For anyone who has only
seen a podcast here or an essay there of Molyneux's, he does seem like
a thorough and consistent polemicist, and a man's man, with a deep &
effective voice, emphasis on being rational, etc.

But. Whether you have had a positive or a negative reaction to Molyneux,
some things about his views may not be obvious. He's not another
straightforward Lew Rockwell-style right-anarchist (whatever you happen to
think about that). Molyneux believes that "statism" (which means, anything
except AC), is the result of childhood "abuse." He has produced videos
like "The Bomb in the Brain: The True Roots of Human Violence" which
advances a full-bore social constructionist argument about the origins
of violence. (Most forum-goers here are rightly hostile to the social constructionist
view.) The source for these views is apparently Lloyd deMause's
psychohistory,
which you can see right there at the link is derived from the Frankfurt
School—basically one of masculinity's XX century archenemies! I mean
these are people many of whom think that if we could get little boys to
wear dresses, everything from war to crime to bad weather would be made
a thing of the past.

Speaking of the Joe Rogan interview: Molyneux has said that when the
anarchist utopia arrives, men will no longer be interested in contact
sports; according to 'psychohistorical' analysis, violent sports are
the reenactment of childhood trauma wrought by "abusive" parents. But as
for me, I like hockey, I love my parents, and I don't think it's because
they brainwashed me through abuse in childhood.

Don't fall for Molyneux too quickly. I know that he's
done some podcasts about the state screwing men over and destroying the
family and so on, which is great, and they can even be quite rousing,
but underneath, he's quite hostile to game, to the pursuit of hot chicks,
and to any expression of masculinity that he doesn't see fitting into his utopia.

Why do you say he's hostile to game?

Post: #7

As you might guess I'm not really a regular listener but I gave Miley Cyrus and the Slutwalk of Family Collapse a listen because the title contained some manosphere themes and I wanted to see how he'd tackle them.

I am obviously with him as being against the slut-ification of society and the collapse of the family, and there are several things he says in the video that I think are right or close-to-right.

Why this ends up mattering for game: Molyneux chastizes men for being interested in pretty/sexy women—he believes that we like pretty girls because that's how we've been conditioned by our abusive families in a statist society. He talks about hyperaggression in boys but philosophically it's not just "hyper"aggression that he's against—he is also opposed to perfectly normal masculine feelings. Want to sleep with lots of women? Around here we tend to think of that as pretty normal, but if you have any success with that goal, Molyneux says you are "selfish narcissistic sociopathic man-boys." We have enough people telling us what we're supposed to want: we don't need this guy doing it just for the sake of his political dogma.

Post: #8

(09-29-2013 10:05 AM)ladderff Wrote:  As you might guess I'm not really a regular listener but I gave Miley Cyrus and the Slutwalk of Family Collapse a listen because the title contained some manosphere themes and I wanted to see how he'd tackle them.

I am obviously with him as being against the slut-ification of society and the collapse of the family, and there are several things he says in the video that I think are right or close-to-right.

Why this ends up mattering for game: Molyneux chastizes men for being interested in pretty/sexy women—he believes that we like pretty girls because that's how we've been conditioned by our abusive families in a statist society. He talks about hyperaggression in boys but philosophically it's not just "hyper"aggression that he's against—he is also opposed to perfectly normal masculine feelings. Want to sleep with lots of women? Around here we tend to think of that as pretty normal, but if you have any success with that goal, Molyneux says you are "selfish narcissistic sociopathic man-boys." We have enough people telling us what we're supposed to want: we don't need this guy doing it just for the sake of his political dogma.

You've made some interesting points about the man, I'm currently just getting into his podcast and find myself agreeing with him on many issues. It's good to hear someone give a balanced opinion on him and his views, I'll look into him further

Post: #9

Resurrecting this thread, as I've been listening to this podcast today.
Have to say I'm very disappointed to see how much white knighting bs Rogan is coming out with in this episode.
Especially considering how solid and red-pill he was at times in his Gad Saad epidode, which I saw recently.
I'm not sure what to make of Rogan, he's obviously a very well read, accomplished self made man, but it's very frustrating how he shifts his opinions and positions depending on who he's interviewing.
One week he's red pill, while the next week he's talking like a beta male bitch, making excuses for womens' poor behaviour.

Post: #10

Interesting. I was reading the other day that at least one of the early feminists was associated with the anarchist movement in the early 20th century. I don't know how close modern anarchists are to the ones who assasinated McKinley, but I thought it was interesting that McKinley's killer's girlfriend Emma Goldman was a prominent feminist later in life.

Post: #11

Rogan follows Roosh on twitter. That says it all. He's VERY aware of Red Pill rhetoric.

He's torn between commercial success and speaking the truth.

Eventually I believe he will speak the truth.

Post: #12

Red pill =\= fame.

Rogan can't be a nigger household name and ten suddenly start to drop un-PC beliefs. He is whom he is. A alpha at heart whom is bathed in the blue pill.

He's like Alex Jones but for stoners.

Post: #13

(07-18-2014 09:10 AM)kosko Wrote:  Red pill =\= fame.

Rogan can't be a nigger household name and ten suddenly start to drop un-PC beliefs. He is whom he is. A alpha at heart whom is bathed in the blue pill.

He's like Alex Jones but for stoners.

Damn thats a good line.

Post: #14

(07-18-2014 09:10 AM)kosko Wrote:  Red pill =\= fame.

Rogan can't be a *B*igger household name and ten suddenly start to drop un-PC beliefs. He is whom he is. A alpha at heart whom is bathed in the blue pill.

He's like Alex Jones but for stoners.

Whooooops on that auto type.

Post: #15

^^^ The other word you used was a bit out of context haha