Percy my old chum..

You come across as a genuine no bullshit bloke, a good story teller and a man that pretty well sums a lot of the nature and spirit of this forum, a chap who can reign in some of the less useful traits sometimes displayed and keep moving on..

I have to admit I tried to listen to your podcast, but gave up as it was in competition with something else open in another window that had tits..



I shall have to have another bash at it.. I am sure it has something meaty in there, but i am a bit slow at getting the hang of allegory etc as I like the straight forward approach..

Do we need to be authentic gents to progress matters?

Course we do.

The movement seems to have a lot of folk in it who are not showing their full pack of cards and that is of concern.

I like to ride with a posse I know well enough, strangers are always an unknown quantity..

There are several tests of character that can be done on folk in the movement..

It pisses me off that most folk will fail them..

I have to admit I tried to listen to your podcast, but gave up as it was in competition with something else open in another window that had tits..

It goes on, doesn't it. Drone, drone, groan.

I can be easily distracted by tits too.

You there, at the back. Haahoo minor. Close the window and pay attention !

A very noble goal. While this is all right and true a discussion about can only serve one goal. A man for himself can decide to change, to be authentic to stay with the threads title.

While to me this is nothing more but a personal advice, I as an MRA would like to focus more on the framework that shapes society. Often I find threads here that attack society (unmorality, women´s behaviour). If we ask ourselves, why are people the way they are we will often find a logical explanation, a framework that shapes people. Frameworks are for example laws, inventions, media etc.

Now don´t get me wrong, Percy. I admire what you do and agree with you, but I would rather see people attacking unfair laws, writing petitions / politicans, write articles about the male pill and such then preaching to single persons.

We might change a handful of men and help them becoming better men, but if we are able to change the framework we will change millions of lifes.

I hope I do make sense here. This is not intended as an attack and shouldn´t sound harsh, I am just aiming for more political than moral activisim.

Quote from Percy

It goes on, doesn't it. Drone, drone, groan.

I can be easily distracted by tits too.

You there, at the back. Haahoo minor. Close the window and pay attention !

haha! its the sort of thing Id probably be able to listen to as I am driving on my long trips, but, when I am logged on, or at home generally, my attention span rarely exceeds 2 mins at best!!

I got the feeling I was reading lord of the rings again, I never managed to understand that book, I think it was about some long epic adventure and battle..

No doubt this game of ours is very similar, but, I am aware that few manage to stay in the game for long..

I have, in my head, the answer to all our woes, the final solution, the master plan..

The problem is, I can never find the discipline needed to get down to work on it and explain it properly..

The reason being, not only would it be HUGE..

It would also be dreadfully annoying to me if it was poo-pooed!!

There is nothing more dissapointing than finding that, when it comes to it, so many men fall short of what they could be if they maybe just took a leap of faith..

I think we all start off thing we have the answers, then we find out maybe we dont.. Then, as time go's on, we refine things, get a better idea, respond to critics etc.. (sometimes we get the best ideas from ADVERSE critics!)..

This MRM stuff aint big science, it aint even big sociology..

I think most of all, its just good old common sense, repackaged under a thousand differentiated brands..

Usually tweaked in some perverse way to suit a particular agenda that the author likes the sound of..

We have to be open minded, but aware of the stupid factor and the idiot brigade.

Most of all, we need to realise that if we dont come up with ideas that go along with nature, we are not going to make headway..

And when we encounter obstacles of nature that we need to overcome, we must use nature to do so..

One of our biggest challenges is to slay the "sacred cows" that many mra's will not, for strange and twisted reasons related to many years of feminist-state programming, easily let go of..

Percy:

I put strong emphasis upon Character, Authenticty, Integrity and Morality.

These are words that are easy to speak and gain nods of approval, but what they mean may have different senses to different people. One - Morality - may even be disputed.

I would like people on this forum to discuss what they see as the meaning and what they have to do with being Men.

(By the way, if someone could tell me how to get that little blue box with the rightward pointer that automatically links to the source of the quote, that would be great.)

So, Percy, you speak of Chararcter, Authenticity, Integrity, and Morality. I guess each of those words have slightly different meanings from each other, but the first 3 are quite similar to each other. The big bugaboo, in my mind, is the issue of Morality. I would say if any of the other characteristics contradict with Morality, then Morality has to win. Morality is the overriding value, and the other characteristics only have value in so far as they are expressions or subsets of Morality. Morality is like God, the one virture that all other virtures are derivative of or expressions of.

There is the annoying little problem though that it is very difficult to determine what exactly morality is, what is moral, and people differ endlessly in their interpretations of what is moral and what is not moral. Still, these problems do not substract from the fundamental importance of morality itself.

I think another issue to consider is the contrast between conforming to the values of the group, and individuality. It seems to me that any large group of people will tend to develop a "group think" or culture and that those who do not adhere to the "party line" will be ostracized and attacked for their disobedience to some extent. The group wants to preserve itself and protect itself, after all. At the same time, the group will certainly have problems and dysfunctions within it, and only when members of the group express their individuality and go against the groups culture will the group be able to overcome its problems from within.

So, a group needs conformity to have unity and strength and a common purpose, but at the same time a group needs to have individuality, or you might say rebellious elements, or else the group will succumb to its inner demons and be unable to correct its own errors, that will grow over time if corrective action cannot be taken.

It seems to me that Authenticity emphasizes the value of individuality, honors the role that the rebel has in a group. Character and Integrity supports more the communal values, the elements of agreed upon common purpose. Character and Integrity can indeed be consistent with rebellious behavior, but it also fits well with upholding group values. Character and Integrity is especially helpful in reducing conflict and creating a sense of trust among people.

Morality stands outside as the fundamental issue, the master principle that all other virtures must conform to and obey.

As far as what this has to do with being men, I would say that men have a particular set of masculine duties that, as men, we have a responsibility to uphold. We have a male sex role to act out that is fundamentally important to the well being and functioning of society. I would go so far to say that men are the creators of the order and overall structure of a society, and that if men fall down in their obligations as men society will descend into a state of disordered chaos where it is every man for himself.

Women cannot succeed in an environment that is lacking in male created orderliness and protection, and children cannot succeed in such an environment either. The male duty is fundamental to a well ordered society.

It is the content of what this male duty entails that seems to be the great stirrer of controversy on this forum. I throw my two bits in, trying to convey to the others here what I believe the male duty consists of. I am hoping that my efforts in that direction do not fall on deaf ears.

@ST2
In the post you want to quote there is a quote button in the bottom right corner. Click on this and you have the right reference.

First off, thank you Percy for the podcasts. I was thinking earlier this evening how much I would like a discussion of all this. Spooky possum.

At this point I have tried to respond twice, both times getting a message that I had logged in previously, hit the back button, and of course the whole post disappeared.

I really think I was heading toward becoming a better man, but now I'm so fucking frustrated that I'm barely rational.

I'll try again tomorrow.

i am not sure what exactly it is your saying Percybut i can tell u the ways i believe myself to be authentic;

i have never been a follower and never will be

i don't care what ppl think of me and never have

my life is not like everyone elses,but i have seen,gone and done things-that most ppl will never ever do

i am authentic because i am me and always will be me


is that what u mean?

Authenticity? Percy did you check and make sure we're allowed to talk about this? My copy of womens rules don't say anything about authenticity. And these other ideas you are going on about like honesty, honor, integrity and such? You're going to be in deep yogurt when Mom gets home.

Percy, I think this discussion is the most important thing going on. The podcasts are great.

Right from the start, Parsival in inundated by woman rules. Rules that were based in fear and selfishness.
Where does one find rules that are not based in a womans fear and selfishness?

I suppose you could talk to other men, except for the woman rule that say's we're not supposed to show compassion and understanding to men.

I guess we could go to the Bible, but the womens rules exclude that.

I suppose we could go to college, but they seem to be all about woman rules.

What's a poor farm boy to do?

Time to break the rules.

I think a good starting place on this would be a discussion of woman rules and man rules. Woman values and man values. Man values and God values.

But as long as our minds and hearts are infected by woman rules, it will stop any progress. It is like a computer virus that keeps the right questions from being asked, and the right answers being found.

An example of this would be: Whom does the grail serve?

To which ingrate answers God and man.

If one were to question my answer would it be on the basis of womens rules? Would it be on the basis of womens values?

Is that answer politically correct? Is it idealogically sound?
What conditions would woman rules and values put on my answer?

I'll admit it...I'm thoroughly confused by the "women's rules" issue...should men be playing by their own rules, and women their own set of rules? Or should "the rules" basically be the same for all of us? And who decides the rules...some say (ST) that women cannot succeed in a world that is not organized by men. So should men make all the rules? Who's making the rules right now?

What's all this rule nonsense?

Is it nonsense?

Do we walk to the beat of our own drummer, or the drummer who's the same sex as us, or do we follow a leader who plays a beat that both men and women can respond to???

I once read somewhere that rules are the guidelines we live by that we change as we go along..

Kids need rules, as the grow up, they get able to make their own rules..

Pity that few kids are allowed to grow up with any rules other than the ones imposed by big brother and nanny.. Prefferably, dont let them grow up, keep them infantilised forever and in need of the meta parent, even when they become parents themselves..

Within 3 generations, the state has wrecked the family unit more effectively than any other entity in human history..

I doubt that the black death even took such a heavy toll..

According to womens rules am I allowed to believe in God?

If so what kind of God am I allowed to believe in?

Does He have to be nice?

Am I allowed to take action based on my religious faith?

What kind of action would womens rules allow?
Would it have to be a nice action?
Would my action need to be spoken of in politically correct terms?
What if the action is dangerous?

Are these some questions young Parsival asked?

ST, you analyse some of what I spoke of well. But you go off into conclusions that are 'inflated'.

would go so far to say that men are the creators of the order and overall structure of a society, and that if men fall down in their obligations as men society will descend into a state of disordered chaos where it is every man for himself. ST

Women are just as good at creating 'Order' and 'Structure' as man are. They are busy finalising the 'Women's Order' right now that extends and solidifies women's rules.

The issue is, is that order and structure a millieux for men to grow in? I do not see it as even a possibility. Most of the MRM do not think so either. That's why we are here taalking about it.

Same for men's 'order' and women. Can a woman grow to be a Human Being in a totally masculine world? I think not.

As for the similarities of meaning for Authenticity and Integrity, they have quite different hues and purposes. Integrity works with the authentic, integrating the original parts into the whole.

Morality can be seen in a variety of ways and I hope someone might start a discussion on that. I have already made an analogy that is 'neutral', as an aid: that of navigation tools and techniques. It is not for me to 'Impose' a solution holus bolus, but for men to discover.

Tera asks sound questions, albeit slighty dismissively:

should men be playing by their own rules, and women their own set of rules? Or should "the rules" basically be the same for all of us? .....do we follow a leader who plays a beat that both men and women can respond to??? Tera

The answer of course is in the question Percy didn't ask: Who does the Grail serve?. The 'leader' is that amalgum of Authenticity and Integrity, not a 'person' or a gender. The 'leader' is inside all of us and is common to all of us.

There has to be room for both men and women to agree on the majority of 'rules' of conduct, rather than imposing them or being manipulative. Most need to be simply human and concerned with the Human Condition, but I see plenty of scope for gender specific ones which can be 'informed' by the other gender without coercion.

The 'Rules' we see, Tera, are not prescribed or set out on stone tablets. They are the 'generally accepted' ways of going about things - especially between the sexes and socially - that have been handed down, shaped, manipulated, largely by women. If you do not notice them it is because they fit women like a silk shift. (Parzival was told by his mother to wear just that, a silk shift, under his armour).

I'll admit it...I'm thoroughly confused by the "women's rules" issue.....What's all this rule nonsense? Is it nonsense? Tera

Your state of mind is open to see. Confronted with an unpaletable truth you want to reject it, but you are confused and suspect that there may be something to it. Keep thinking; keep looking. But don't be the lobster who uses an elbow to test the temperature of the water. You are amongst the first usually to admit to the existence of double -standards and the total chaos that female imposed double-standard rules have wrought, especially when set in the concrete block of the Law.

My intent partially is to show how men, too, follow the double-standard path in their own way with equally disasterous result.

Right from the start, Parsival in inundated by woman rules. Rules that were based in fear and selfishness Ingrate

I made it clear that Herzeloyd loved her son and made her - and his - world in a way she new how, to protect him. She had no ill intent. They were based on fear but not selfishness. Her fear was rational but misguided as she could not foresee the result. It was informed by a woman's view of the masculine. Her heart was in deepest sorrow.

Parzival moved from her world into a world of men who had no idea how to be men. That was the sickness of the Kingdom for which the Holy Grail was the only cure. My podcast may have been fairly hard on women and their rules but surely you can see that the men were just as bad, failing young Percy right from the start by not teaching him properly and encouraging the 'armour is more important than the man' aspect. Every man was a potential 'enemy' and was automatically treated that way. He had to learn for himself that such a world view was destructive of the very men who could find the Grail.

The tale was created from a mind that was recognising a transition in consciousness. That was 800 years ago and another change in consciousness is occuring right now.

I once read somewhere that rules are the guidelines we live by that we change as we go along.. Haahoo

Rules are for the guidance of wise men and the restriction of fools. The rules we learn (imposed on us) when we are young are often appropriate for us. A three year old is told to 'hold mummy's hand' when outside the gate. That is sensible and protective. It is not a rule that works for a fifteen year old. We have to let go of old rules when they are no longer useful. This is what women (Tera) must learn.

And men.

It is of little use looking outward to the chaotic world to find a man's way to live. The Authentic way is inside you. Your task is to find it and when you do, ask the right question. Who does the Grail serve.

Ingrate is full of questions:

According to womens rules am I allowed to believe in God?

If so what kind of God am I allowed to believe in?

Does He have to be nice?

Bugger what a 'gender' wishes God to be or believe in. There are some men's rules which coerce belief too. Every Religion - that is the codified struggle toward understanding the ineffable - recognises that 'God' lies deep within. Look there.

What we think of as 'nice' is 'partisan'.