These are two posts I made over at Dalrocks place once that I think can be of value to there pill community:

Samsons problem stems in large part that he judges women on the basis of a masculine moral standard not a moral standard that is fitting for a woman.

Something a friend of mine from Thailand told me illustrates this. She complained that Thai women, behaved so much worse after emigrating to the country where we live now than they did in Thailand. She told me how sweet and nice and good so many of them had been there and how they did things here that they never would have done in Thailand. The change in behavior was bigger for Thai women than for Thai men.

The reason for this change of behavior is that when a Thai woman moves she looses the constant presence of a male power that curbs her potential for immoral behavior and brings out her best behavior. This male power is a combination of husbands, fathers, brothers, men in general and almost most importantly the monks and the way the monks uphold the RULES of Buddhist morality as Thai people see them and the way men in general assert them. Because of this male certainty regarding rule based morality women in Thailand feel a certainty about the moral direction that stems from men and they submit to it. When they do they become more feminine and loving.

When a woman is without male influence and support, directly through people or indirectly through very solid moral and social norms, she must rest more on her own male side in order to provide solidity and direction to her life. Drawing on her male side ilk this makes her less feminine, less loving, less happy, resentful, bitchy etc. It also can never be as strong as the direction and support she could have gotten from strong men in her life and strong male originated norms in society. This makes her less moral and more inclined to act badly in all sorts of ways.

It is a trap to view the contrast between a woman with and without male influence as an in genuine expression of morality or goodness. It is tempting to think that if she behaves good only when men make her behave good than she isnt actually being good, she isnt actually moral. It is tempting to think that because you are unchanging and solid in your moral direction her conditional behavior means she is not good. This is wrong because the feelings, the loving felinity she acts from when under male guidance are genuine feelings and genuine love and empathy. It is just that she needs the male support FROM OUTSIDE to feel this way. When the male support from outside is sufficient she can lay her male side to rest and then her feminine nature blossoms at its best and she BECOMES the loving, nurturing doting and sacrificing woman that you used to believe was the admirable goodness of womanhood. It IS real when she feels and acts that way but it also is CONDITIONAL. I believe a lot, maybe most of the anger and bitterness of men in the sphere towards women stems precisely from this feeling of women’s goodness not being real and moral because it is not unchanging but dependent. Men like to see wether things are sold and unchanging to asses what its real nature is. If it is not in fact always the same thing, men dont respect it and dont see it as real. Applying such a standard towards women is never correct and only leads men to feel betrayed and disappointed in women. Women are more indirect in the way towards being good but no less real or worthy.

Although men have a more unchanging, rock solid sense of ethics and character than women it is actually a fallacy to see it as unwavering to the degree many tend to think. Without female influence, and especially without GOOD female influence, men degenerate too. Men need the presence of women in their lives that INSPIRE them towards purpose. If men do n to have women to care about they tend to sink into more nihilistic and hedonic and purposeless lifestyles. Women are also necessary to soften men and draw out mens empathy. They do so by being very feminine, loving and more EMPHATIC then men. The constant pointing out of how bad this or that makes someone feel or just the value of peoples feelings is a constant hidden training of men that is vital for their development of empathy. The estrogen in women soften the the principled and unforgiving rawness of testosterone based approaches to life. So while you are morally guiding her, she is secretly, without even understanding so herself, TRAINING YOU and giving you your reasons for purpose.

In this back and forth dance between feminine and masculine both genders can mutually reinforce good or bad but both are DEPENDENT on each other for a healthy development that leads to actually living good moral lives and have the feelings that actually lead to being good. You just have to see the structure of the dynamic in order to find peace with it and appreciate it.

Let me explain why shit tests are a good thing and even leads to men not only realizing the highest potential for they alpha/the power or strength aspects of their personality but also their highest moral potential.

When a woman tests a man he will often start to fail the tests because he wants comfort. He wants things to be easy so he tries to please her by supplicating. This is a betrayal of who he is as a man and the direction and purpose and leadership that somewhere in him wants to come out. When he fails the test he gets a seemingly incomprehensible negative reaction. This dynamic will keep up forever until the man stops supplicating and finds his own center and direction. Once that is in place he will pass the test because he no longer betrays himself. It is the difference between giving in and hoping to be let off the hook easy, which is in effect seeking motherly forgiving energy and to stay in a masculine energy and increase it because masculine energy increases when challenges are successfully met. It is in a sense growing up and being a man, to not try to make mommy be nice to you.

If you look around the sphere you will find that many men there love where they are in their lives AS MEN. They have found their masculine core and their direction and they never want to betray it again. They don´t want to be let of the hook but enjoy dynamic with women because they can stand strongly in their masculinity and just be amused by the test. They have overcome their fear of feminine punishments and they enjoy it. Most guys are not there yet, just working towards it, but it is a common place to end up in once you develop your game enough and do enough masculinity work. And why have the guys ended up there? Because women punished them for passing tests relentlessly until he men found their own strength and cut the cord to mommy energy.

Learning to pass tests as a skill helps you but it only gives a partial reward. Womens prime power is their sensitivity and receptiveness and on SOME LEVEL they will always feel malcontent when their man, and men for the most part, are not where he/they should be. And they will respond to that. Learning to decently pass tests and find your masculine center halfway helps. But it will never get the same reaction as when you are truly where you should be as a man and AUTHENTICALLY passing the test without even noticing it was their because you have fulfilled your masculine potential and realized as much of its power as you can. Women never let you rest. When learn to handle one level with a woman and she feels secure with you at that level, she will allow herself to start feeling more finely tuned and she will find new weaknesses and prod at them with tests and emotionality. She then elevates the game to a new level and you must move along and grow more in order to handle it. Mens weakness is their complacency and their desire to rest and stagnate if they see no reason for growth. Indirectly the reason for growth is women/pussy. So when you try to rest at a higher level women will start to push you even more. They are like unforgiving gurus or drill sergeants never giving you a rest until you have become the man you need to be. Who was leading who again?

The first level women test you at is power and amoral masculinity. This is because she needs to survive. There is not much point to morality if the moral person dies and no one with a morality at that level will survive. Women are survival artists and use extreme adaptability skills to bend themselves to adapt to whatever life throws at them. Men are more like experiments that nature throws out to see if they make it or not in this or that version. So, once she has found a man that has enough survival power, enough alpha, guys tend to think she will be happy but she won`t. Being Christian you should know that the feelings of being a moral person and doing good things offer higher potential good feelings than being selfish. Women want those feelings too. When they are safe enough to have them. So when a man is alpha enough for her she will move her testing over to the moral level. And in the same way she through that, over time, made a man realize his alpha, she will be able to make a man find his own masculine moral center which he can lead her with. It only matters when there is enough alpha underneath. It also has to be a MALE morality. It has to have solidity, strictness and consistency etc. Once that is in place and you and men in general can hold the masculine standard strongly enough for her she will respond like receptive felinity always does and bring out the loving empathic feelings that is the feminine counterpart to the level of your masculine morality.

It might be tempting to draw the conclusion from all this that everything is always the mens fault for not leading their women properly and all that crap. This is wrong. Just as felinity is neutral and just is so is masculinity and as you can not blame femininity for reacting the way it does you can not blame masculinity for the reacting the way it does. If the masculine is sleeping for some time that is what it is supposed to do at that time in the back and forth dance of feminine indirect growing of men and male direct leadership of women. You could just as well blame women for not having properly indirectly grown the men yet. It just isn`t the time. No stage in the dance of life is more right or wrong than the other. Lower stages must be gone through to get to the higher.

But men need to wake up as soon as they can and lead and they are doing so NOW. HERE. What the sphere is doing is not just turning individual men into the men that can lead individual women but finding the moral direction of society and then providing a strong enough masculine guidance on a societal level for women to have the masculine support in general they need to bring out the best of their feminine. Guiding women is a process on many levels and what one man can do with a woman is only half the job. The rest of the job is guiding women through the norms women pick up from EVERYONE. By upholding a standard for good behavior for a woman the manosphere is providing the masculine support that allows a woman to lay her “insufficient” masculine side to rest and bring forth her feminine loving goodness without the presence of ONE man to guide her at this moment. This is exactly what Thai men and Thai monks have done so well. That women are disorganized bouncing balls of unthinking femininity in many ways but they have huge respect for the strictures of masculine morality when the monks or men lay down the law. I´ve seen the same submissive contentedness in Thai women when they come back from the temple and the monks have given them some strong messages about what to do and they follow up on it with a discipline that seems almost masculine while still remaining extremely feminine and that is because they are acting not from themselves but the masculine directions the monks gave.

Have a look at a couple of videos by the Thai artist Palmy. She is the perfect example of what a woman that has enough masculine support on all levels expresses and behaves. She oozes and radiates loving feminine energy. If Samson could be the kind of man she deserves there is no way he would complain about women.

I challenge you to find me ONE artist in the west that expresses feminine contentedness and the resulting overflow of love filled feminine energy as Palmy does. This is not a CRITIQUE of western women by saying thai women good western women bad. It is a critique of western society by pointing out that we are not abel to produce that level of womanhood. Men have to step up in order to become the individual men and give the societal signals that allows women the possibility to become like Palmy. Which in fact IS what we are doing right here right now. Crushing churcianity is a vital part of this for example. Sending women home from church with the current messages makes them move away from what can be seen in the Palmy videos. Dalrock is THE man that does the best job at changing the church so that its preasts can as good of a job as the Thai monks at guiding women into leaving church closer to Palmy than Amanda Marcot. The signals women are getting in the sphere are the beginning of rebuilding the entire guiding system that produces Palmys.

It is important that women can`t just say it is all your fault for not guiding me. Make me, make me, make me or it is all your fault. The reason is part of the way men guide women is by challenging the women and holding them RESPONSIBLE and ACCOUNTABLE for their actions. So when you get messages about what a woman should do and you understand that you are responsible for doing something about it. The strict messages from the sphere are accountability and responsibility messages and the monks in Thailand do the same. That is leadership.

Palmy:

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=palmy+Rhythm+of+the+Times+concert&oq=palmy&gs_l=youtube.1.1.35i39l2j0l8.838.1533.0.2705.5.5.0.0.0.0.121.579.0j5.5.0