Join John Adams, world renowned Intl Matchmaker, Monday nights 8:30 EST for Live Webcasts!
And check out Five Reasons why you should attend a FREE AFA Seminar! See locations and dates here.
View Active Topics View Your Posts Latest 100 Topics FAQ Topics Mobile Friendly Theme
Discuss and talk about any general topic.
10 posts • Page 1 of 1
We all hate America but some of us are traditionalist expats and some of us are liberal expats. I'm curious what makes a person a traditionalist or a liberal.
- By traditionalist I mean someone who rejects sluts and supports marriage.
- By liberal I mean someone who accepts sluts and rejects marriage.
I consider myself a traditionalist. My hypothesis is that three childhood factors affect person's outlook:
- dating women
- male peers
- parent's marriage
A person becomes a liberal expat when b) or c) occur:
a) rejected by women
b) accepted by male peers
c) witnesses their parents in a stable marriage
Children who see a stable marriage feel a sense of freedom to explore alternative lifestyles because they have a safetynet to fall back on. Also men who are accepted by male peers never sense that anything is wrong with society itself. They see rejection from women as an isolated problem that can fixed while still preserving society as a whole.
A person becomes a traditionalist expat when d) or e) occur:
a) rejected by women
d) rejected by male peers
e) witnesses their parents in a unstable marriage
When children from divorced families see the consequences first hand they understand that total freedom has a price. This is not something you wish to impose on your own children at any cost. Also when you are rejected by both women and male peers you can no longer argue that part of society is okay, you need to reject society as a whole.
I suspect that d) or e) alone can make a person a traditionalist. But both d) and e) strongly pushes a person to being a traditionalist. I fit the criteria of a), d) and e).
I will add a simple poll to measure this.
Once I was around 20 years old, I started making male friends. And my parents relationship has always been stable. They never divorced and my home-life was good for the most part. The main thing is I was rejected by women repeatedly.
I felt society was extremely dysfunctional even when I had my peers to talk to. They would even agree with me sometimes, in private. My experience is that liberalism begets liberalism. So most of the liberal types I have on facebook were raised by single moms or something like that. Another factor is that these types don't receive rejection from anyone. Their parents might be divorced, but they are accepted by both men and women in society.
Also, the more attractive someone is, the more likely to be accepted. Rotten societies care about looks above all else, an indication of how vapid and superficial they are. So more attractive people tend to be liberal types in my experience. Being less attractive leads to rejection, which leads more men into realizing something is wrong. But these are all anecdotal, so I don't have actual numbers for this. Just what I've seen throughout my life and it is the best interpretation I can come up with.
Make the most of going abroad while you still can.
I was just rejected by women. I had no problem with men and my parents had a stable marriage.
The problem I had with men was later, when I discovered that they couldn't be trusted and would stab me in the back. So I rejected modern men rather than the other way around.
I am curious, are there any liberal expats here who were universally rejected by women? I doubt it. In the modern world, being liberal requires being shallow, and modern women like shallow men.
First of all, I would say I'm definitely a traditionalist.
Having said that, my parents never divorced and I did have some success with girls in my youth; not in terms of dating, but having them be sexually attracted to me. So I guess I don't fit into any of the conventions in your poll.
The reason why I'm a traditionalist probably has to do with my religious upbringing more than anything. ...
Those 2 paradigms are just a creation to further the divide and conquer playbook by our rulers for world domination, a civilization cannot maintain on a even keel of morality without the family structure and intact families.
The state has created this left right illusion to get people to accept the state as the ultimate moral compass and provider.
Look at what is left of America and where it's going. THE ALL POWERFUL STATE! sums it up best. It will all collapse eventually and sooner rather than later because nature is coming up to bat.
By the way America went bankrupt over 80 years ago and exist in name only, it's a crown colony.
Time to Hide!
Not all women like shallow men, it's like idiots attract idiots and because most people are idiots you end up with idiot couples which translates into a mostly idiot civilization over all. A small minority created what we call the modern world but our rulers prefer more idiots over thinkers because they are much more easily managed.
Time to Hide!
I've always been a Traditionalist, or "Renaissance Man" as I like to call it. However, when I discovered how the world really works, I became a sort of "red pill non-fundamentalist traditionalist". I still believe in marriage/families and the selfless, intrinsic virtues of the Christianity that I adhered to throughout my 20s, but I am in the process of making some pragmatic adjustments based on the red pills that I've come to swallow. I reject most aspects of Liberalism, and can see how it subconsciously infected my own self in the past (even being a sheltered conservative/religious type couldn't fully unplug me). I also am leaning towards rejecting fruitless nihilism, PUA-types, for example. In a way, I highly admire individuals like Roosh, but even Roosh himself admits that his strategy is only a band-aid solution in a dysfunctional world. I also can't stand traditionalists who still have their heads in the sand. The super-conservative ones (even if they are red pill aware) I think are still simply unrealistic. I'm also just not attuned to that level of Conservatism. Like I said, I'm a pragmatist. It's been a real journey for me the past 2-3 years, I still don't have everything resolved, but I'm thankful for now possessing the awareness, the self-improvement, and a realistic game plan that I lacked in the past. I technically qualify for A), B) and C), but I've outgrown/rejected some of my male peers myself and I can see some of the flaws in my parents otherwise stable marriage that I don't want to have in my marriage someday.