The man academy

[180]

Manhood Academy

This site has the most amazing and riveting E-Book for any man who wants advice who wants to create order and control in their lives.

Of all the books I've read, PUA material, and philosophical debates, this particular FREE e-book addresses the contemporary problems of men in the post modern feminist movement.

It addresses issues of our cultural emasculation and actually gives definitive and practical advice to improve upon it. I've already started using some techniques such as approval and disapproval and I've been getting great results.

It's like finding the holy grail for men.

[Plays With Life]

Originally Posted by 180

I've already started using some techniques such as approval and disapproval and I've been getting great results.

How does that technique go? If you want someone to do more of something, you give them approval; if you want them to do less of something, you give them disapproval ?

[180]

Originally Posted by Plays With Life

How does that technique go? If you want someone to do more of something, you give them approval; if you want them to do less of something, you give them disapproval ?

Mostly been using disaproval. I'm more of a doormat type person so for example my friend has been saying stuff that annoys me like "Oh some of us have jobs" (I'm unemployed atm). And I was just like "You know, your manners is like a 14 year old boy, I can't believe you have to talk like that when you're 26. It's something to work on if you ever want to have a girlfriend" (He's never had a gf). So that pretty much shut him up.

Oddly enough, I would never be this assertive, but the e-book really shows how to do it within reasonable limits. I imagine this would work well with women but for anyone trying to assert respect, it's almost... surreal advice.

[James Fletcher]

I read the welcome page, and so far I like what I see.

I just downloaded the E-Book, and I may just sit here and read the whole thing in one sitting!

[machoman]

Just read few random pages so far and looks different and interesting.

[KaleidoskopicVision]

That site design is pretty damn awesome. The way they rail against feminism is pretty biased from the get go though. The way they describe women as being obsessed with the superficial is just hilariously bigoted, especially when they went on to compare the way women think to the way children think (without rational forethought and only interested in momentary gratification of their desires). Sure I've met women like that, but I've met men like that too. It's a maturity thing, not a gender thing.

So happy I don't get into this whole war of the sexes BS.

[KaleidoskopicVision]

I'm at the section where they claim strip clubs defraud men out of their hard earned money. Hilarious! This book is meant to be humorous right? This is the same old patriarchial argument of "men should not have to control their sexual appetites" that is used in the defense of rapists and misogynists who blame women for "dressing slutty", a woman's 'sluttiness' being entirely subjective to the man's perceptions.

They go on to say that a woman's priorities will surprise you, with this list which is meant to impress upon us men just how low the female sex drive is in comparison to ours and how so very unfair that is to us sex hungry men, Behold, a list of women's priorities:
1. Getting enough sleep
2. Reducing stress
3. Finding time to relax (arguably the same as #2)
4. Eating healthfully
5. Drinking the recommended amount of water
6. Finding time to exercise
7. Having enough sex

Wow! All the way after making sure you sleep at night and don't starve! Let's make a list of my highest biological priorities.

1. Getting enough sleep
2. Reducing stress
3. Drinking water
4. Eating well
5. Exercising my body
6. Satisfying sexual desires

I regret repping you before opening this ebook, 180, it's absolute dualistic unenlightened crap.

[aelle]

I've taken a look around their forums. Holy crap, never mind the misogyny, the homophobia alone makes me want to hurl. These people are toxic.

[Mariana Trench]

At some point in the book there's a "Universal set of principles" argument. Hello fundamentalist circular logic. Never mind that early on it argues against democracy, presumably for oligarchy.

Beyond that, it's hard to take seriously. Even with my uber conservative background I find myself going, "You're making a joke, right?" as I flip through the book. It reminds me of Landover Baptist.

[supertom]

That place needs a dominatrix.

[Steel]

I'm halfway through the book and I don't find it as bad as some of you said, actually.

[KaleidoskopicVision]

Originally Posted by Steel

I'm halfway through the book and I don't find it as bad as some of you said, actually.

That's possibly due to a misogynistic world view. I thought it couldn't get any more blatant than it did. Mind sharing what value you've extracted from it so far? Maybe I missed something.

[Criseyde]

Originally Posted by supertom

That place needs a dominatrix.

Can't rep you again.


Since I have decided to focus on creation instead of analysis, here's my question for you, 180, and for anyone who finds value in that website. Can you envision a world in which men and women interact and work together synergistically, so that everyone is happy with their role and the whole is greater than the sum of its parts?

[Brutha]

For a book that presents itself as being about finding your authority it starts out a lot by establishing the claim that men are victims. It would be much easier to read if it would just skip that part.

It's interested that the shedule of his own week that he presents in the part about time management plans out nearly all time but doesn't mention time that he spends with a girlfriend.

[Steel]

Originally Posted by KaleidoskopicVision

That's possibly due to a misogynistic world view. I thought it couldn't get any more blatant than it did. Mind sharing what value you've extracted from it so far? Maybe I missed something.

I'm enjoying the explanation they give about the correlation between order and attraction. So far, it seems a good and constructive view on how to become a more attractive man. Actually, I find it more benign than the view of other authors, in the sense that this view actually takes into account the woman's pleasure and happiness and does not confine itself to a selfish system that present itself as a mere seductive process towards our goal of attracting someone.

Also, I agree with the authors that modern feminism is being harmful to society; not just to men, but also to women as well. I can't ignore the fact that societal perception and enforcement of wrongly held beliefs is detrimental to both sexes.

Oh, and I don't consider myself a mysoginist, since I don't hate women (in fact, quite the opposite!).

It's interested that the shedule of his own week that he presents in the part about time management plans out nearly all time but doesn't mention time that he spends with a girlfriend.

The Ad hominem argument can't fail to make an appearance.

[KaleidoskopicVision]

Originally Posted by Steel

I'm enjoying the explanation they give about the correlation between order and attraction. So far, it seems a good and constructive view on how to become a more attractive man. Actually, I find it more benign than the view of other authors, in the sense that this view actually takes into account the woman's pleasure and happiness and does not confine itself to a selfish system that present itself as a mere seductive process towards our goal of attracting someone.

Also, I agree with the authors that modern feminism is being harmful to society; not just to men, but also to women as well. I can't ignore the fact that societal perception and enforcement of wrongly held beliefs is detrimental to both sexes.

What harm, specifically, is feminism doing to society? Personally I do not find the way he presents 'feminism' in the ebook as a rational and perceptive perspective at all. For example blames the practice of beautification for rape and objectification of women and blames the perpetration of the practice on feminism and hypocritical 'slutty women who had it coming' when many feminists have specifically gone against that trend of objectifying women (which is usually perpetuated by advertising industries in the first place, not feminists). He then goes on to imply that a man who cannot control his sexual urges to the point of raping women has no one to blame but the woman who "enticed him". If that isn't the epitome of cowardly rationale I don't know what is.

Originally Posted by Steel

Oh, and I don't consider myself a mysoginist, since I don't hate women (in fact, quite the opposite!).

A misogynist is not necessarily someone who hates women. It is someone who marginalizes them and places them in a hierarchy based on sex. You may love women because of sexual attraction but you can still most certainly be a misogynist. Most misogynists are sexually attracted to women, attraction to someone hardly means you are treating them fairly.

[supertom]

Originally Posted by KaleidoskopicVision

A misogynist is not necessarily someone who hates women. It is someone who marginalizes them and places them in a hierarchy based on sex. You may love women because of sexual attraction but you can still most certainly be a misogynist. Most misogynists are sexually attracted to women, attraction to someone hardly means you are treating them fairly.

Yes, almost all men I know aren't conscious about this. It really needs addressing.

[Steel]

Originally Posted by KaleidoskopicVision

What harm, specifically, is feminism doing to society? Personally I do not find the way he presents 'feminism' in the ebook as a rational and perceptive perspective at all. For example blames the practice of beautification for rape and objectification of women and blames the perpetration of the practice on feminism and hypocritical 'slutty women who had it coming' when many feminists have specifically gone against that trend of objectifying women (which is usually perpetuated by advertising industries in the first place, not feminists). He then goes on to imply that a man who cannot control his sexual urges to the point of raping women has no one to blame but the woman who "enticed him". If that isn't the epitome of cowardly rationale I don't know what is.

Kaleidoskopic, of course it's stupid to say that a rapist is blameless. A rapist is a criminal.

Still, a woman dressing provocatively in dangerous areas isn't exactly blame free, since her appearance instills criminal behaviour. Is it fair? No. I mean, what would you say to me if I paraded myself, alone, in a dangerous neighborhood, at 3 in the morning, flaunting my gold Rolex, with my wallet full of 100$ bills? I shouldn't be mugged because of that, and I wouldn't be exactly looking for that, but we live in the real world. I would be mugged.

Also, rape laws are becoming muddy waters to navigate. Sex with a alcoholized girl? Rape. Sex with a 17 year-old, despite consent? Rape. Rape, rape, rape.

One in Four

Is this real life, lol? One in four women have survived rape/attempted rape?

By no means I defend rapists, but the "all men are rapists" attitude going around is not helping either.

Also, the female objectification trend is a by-product of the sexual liberation intended by the feminist movement.

A misogynist is not necessarily someone who hates women. It is someone who marginalizes them and places them in a hierarchy based on sex. You may love women because of sexual attraction but you can still most certainly be a misogynist. Most misogynists are sexually attracted to women, attraction to someone hardly means you are treating them fairly.

I treat women fairly; I don't give a hoot about men's movements, feminism or whatever. As far as I'm concerned, people can do whatever they choose to do. Don't mistake what I think about society beliefs with the way I act.

[supertom]

Still, a woman dressing provocatively in dangerous areas isn't exactly blame free, since her appearance instills criminal behaviour. Is it fair? No. I mean, what would you say to me if I paraded myself, alone, in a dangerous neighborhood, at 3 in the morning, flaunting my gold Rolex, with my wallet full of 100$ bills? I shouldn't be mugged because of that, and I wouldn't be exactly looking for that, but we live in the real world. I would be mugged.

I think rapists use that excuse a lot, he projects his own desires on it her to justify his actions, like she was using her body to taunt sexually impoverished men.

I dont see how her appearance would instill criminal behaviour, I've seen lots of hot girls and turn on by them but I've never thought it was a invitation for entitlement of her body, Somehow I never managed to force my perception and what i want onto what she wanted

There's a point when the man thinks with he penis argument gets idiotic, if we can't control ourselves when we're horny and god knows how many times a day we are than we would be better handing society over to woman who seem to have better self-control.

Also, the female objectification trend is a by-product of the sexual liberation intended by the feminist movement.

It's from the men's movement a few thousands years ago

[machoman]

After reading 40 pages of this book,I would say it has equal BS:Valid points.

[180]

Well I think all of us don't agree with everypoint the authors make about feminism, but there are a lot of valid points I can't disagree with.

For one, women are just less logical in my experience and from hearing seeing it from others. Yes it's a stereotype but as the author says, women are less likely to side with valid conclusions if it doesn't meet their side of the arguement. In fact, even dave chappelle talks about this in his comedy.

I don't think this is true for every woman, but I've never had a conversation with a woman who was more concerned with the truth rather than what was in it for her to win the argument.

There are things I disagree with as well, such as comparing feminism to slavery, I think it's both uncessary and out of scope.

But a lot of the philosophy and the whole concept of "order" as the source of attractiveness makes a lot of sense. And the principals of pain and pleasure align perfectly with behavioral psychology it's almost irrefutable evidence of control. As a teacher, it sort of dawned on me that I've been giving too much rewards and not administering pain for behaviors I dislike, and this has been almost enlightening for me who's always been too afraid to critize the bad behavior around me.

I think it's a great read for doormats, even women... but you'll have to skip 100 pages in the beginning because all the anti-feminsim will undoubtely spark disagreement and possibly even rage.

[supertom]

Originally Posted by 180

For one, women are just less logical in my experience and from hearing seeing it from others. Yes it's a stereotype but as the author says, women are less likely to side with valid conclusions if it doesn't meet their side of the argument.

I honestly believe that the "women are illogical" is something men use to Invalidate her side of her argument, Assume hes more right but also starting deciding whats right for her too.


They seem just as logical in my advanced maths class which was mostly female and despite their illogicality they managed to kick ass on those exams.

[Plays With Life]

Originally Posted by 180

For one, women are just less logical in my experience and from hearing seeing it from others. Yes it's a stereotype but as the author says, women are less likely to side with valid conclusions if it doesn't meet their side of the arguement. In fact, even dave chappelle talks about this in his comedy.

Clearly you've never met women (as I have) who are entranced by the study of logic.

I agree that it's a stereotype. In my experience, it hasn't been true. To the point that I don't even know where the stereotype came from.

In fact, I don't even know, now, what people who say this mean when they talk about "logic". It sounds like, "that person didn't do what I think is the right thing for them to do - well, they're just illogical!".

[180]

Originally Posted by supertom

I think rapists use that excuse a lot, he projects his own desires on it her to justify his actions, like she was using her body to taunt sexually impoverished men.

I dont see how her appearance would instill criminal behaviour, I've seen lots of hot girls and turn on by them but I've never thought it was a invitation for entitlement of her body, Somehow I never managed to force my perception and what i want onto what she wanted

There's a point when the man thinks with he penis argument gets idiotic, if we can't control ourselves when we're horny and god knows how many times a day we are than we would be better handing society over to woman who seem to have better self-control.



It's from the men's movement a few thousands years ago

I don't know the metaphor is pretty spot on. While you could say a rapist was going to do it no matter what, provactive clothing is what entices the criminal. For example, I drive my car through a bad neighborhood. If it's a stationwagon, there's a low chance it will be robbed, even by chronic criminals. Now let's upgrade it to a BMW. The chances SKYROCKET that it will be stolen. People who aren't criminals may even think about stealing it. Now unlock the doors, even more people will consider stealing the car.

Behavioral psychology shows people are affected by situations much more than their personalities. It's scary to know but Phillip Zimbardo has commented on numerous studies to show that people are capable of stealing kill, and raping if the conditions are right and conducive to it.

For example, I would not rape a girl if she was surrounded by 30 cops and was wearing a carboard box. But many men would think about it if they had a mask on, she was alone, she was hot, wearing skimpy clothing, and no chance of being caught. The pool of men would increase going from never to rape. Most men think they are incapable of rape, but I actually know of a case of a previous friend who thought that way but ended up finding a drunk girl in his room and raping her on sight. He was drunk, she was passed out and she was "hot". So he did it. The conditions led to him becoming the filth he had despised.

Women aren't culpable for rape, but they are responsible for the skimpy clothing, which iattributes and undeniably contributes to the conditions that lead to rape. I'm not to be blamed if I am bullied at school because I look like a nerd. But I look like a nerd is a central cause of being bullied.

I find vehement feminism as repulsive as everyone else. Slutwalks are an excuse to act irresponsible and not take responsibility. It's more of this victim mentality. If a man were to get beaten up for wearing a yankees uniform in Boston (which has happened) most people tell the guy he was stupid for wearing the uniform in the first place. He's not to be blamed for getting beaten up, but he's acting stupid and bringing it upon himself. When i see people defend slutwalks, I often think of a man wearing a pocket protector, suspenders, heavy set glasses, and then asking others "why you making fun of me"?

[180]

It's my personal experience that women have been less logical. But again that's a personal experience and I wouldn't expect yours to be the same. But then again, to be frank I don't meet many men from this generation who are logical either. Even on this forum bar maybe Brutha.

The "illogical" aspect the book talks about is mainly in reference to arguing with women. Take a look at the section on mischaracterization and don't tell me you've never seen that before....

[Steel]

Originally Posted by supertom

I honestly believe that the "women are illogical" is something men use to Invalidate her side of her argument, Assume hes more right but also starting deciding whats right for her too.


They seem just as logical in my advanced maths class which was mostly female and despite their illogicality they managed to kick ass on those exams.

He is not saying women are stupid. They aren't. What he's saying (I think) is that concerning some matters they will tend to react from an emotional point of view vs a logical one.

[Plays With Life]

Originally Posted by 180

The "illogical" aspect the book talks about is mainly in reference to arguing with women. Take a look at the section on mischaracterization and don't tell me you've never seen that before....

Well, I wouldn't really know about this. I don't tend to get into arguments with women (or anyone else).

In my experience, though, virtually every person who gets into a heated argument tends to argue reactively. I haven't seen that more prevalently in women than I have in men. I have seen it more prevalently in adults than I have in children. Children don't seem to have as many beliefs that need vehement defending.

[Focus Driblet]

I have not read much of the book, but I've read the forum before. Yes most people here are correct that they (or the most active posters) for the most part seem to have a pretty negative view of women. But it might still be that the things in the book will work (yes, both for the man and the women he'll be involved with). People seem to be judging the book by its cover, and when we are talking about being rational/irrational, that doesn't seem like a very 'rational' thing to do.

Of course it's not worth it to sift through it if the views in it gives you great discomfort, and it might be that adopting the techniques and philosophies in the book might bring with it some of the more negative stuff that they are talking about (or insistently preaching, as it comes across sometimes).

[supertom]

Originally Posted by 180

I don't know the metaphor is pretty spot on. While you could say a rapist was going to do it no matter what, provactive clothing is what entices the criminal. For example, I drive my car through a bad neighborhood. If it's a stationwagon, there's a low chance it will be robbed, even by chronic criminals. Now let's upgrade it to a BMW. The chances SKYROCKET that it will be stolen. People who aren't criminals may even think about stealing it. Now unlock the doors, even more people will consider stealing the car.

Behavioral psychology shows people are affected by situations much more than their personalities. It's scary to know but Phillip Zimbardo has commented on numerous studies to show that people are capable of stealing kill, and raping if the conditions are right and conducive to it.

For example, I would not rape a girl if she was surrounded by 30 cops and was wearing a carboard box. But many men would think about it if they had a mask on, she was alone, she was hot, wearing skimpy clothing, and no chance of being caught. The pool of men would increase going from never to rape. Most men think they are incapable of rape, but I actually know of a case of a previous friend who thought that way but ended up finding a drunk girl in his room and raping her on sight. He was drunk, she was passed out and she was "hot". So he did it. The conditions led to him becoming the filth he had despised.

I guess the difference between me and you might be, I strongly believe in the powers of Self-determination and that it has the ability to overcome whereas you believe that circumstances make decisions.

Women aren't culpable for rape, but they are responsible for the skimpy clothing, which iattributes and undeniably contributes to the conditions that lead to rape. I'm not to be blamed if I am bullied at school because I look like a nerd. But I look like a nerd is a central cause of being bullied.

I find vehement feminism as repulsive as everyone else. Slutwalks are an excuse to act irresponsible and not take responsibility. It's more of this victim mentality. If a man were to get beaten up for wearing a yankees uniform in Boston (which has happened) most people tell the guy he was stupid for wearing the uniform in the first place. He's not to be blamed for getting beaten up, but he's acting stupid and bringing it upon himself. When i see people defend slutwalks, I often think of a man wearing a pocket protector, suspenders, heavy set glasses, and then asking others "why you making fun of me"?

I honestly don't think most men can tell the difference from their judgement and reality, they think that a good enough judgement entitles them to use violence. Therefore Its best if guys don't choose what women should wear, even if a woman is invisible a man with distorted perception will find some excuse.

Every mature girl I've has told me its for self-expression and i believe them, expressing your sexuality and beauty isn't an invitation for violence.

IMO the same men who are cruel towards women are the ones that are also cruel towards towards other men, its about stopping them, which makes things better for guys also.


BTW yesterday i actually met a person who was THAT big of a nerd, he's essentially gone from being Paul Pfeiffer to Tony Montana.

[180]

I think it would be hard to convince each other, but I can agree to disagree.

Although I vehemently disagree lol. As a behaviorist, I'm all for enviroment affecting behavior, and I can surely understand why you wouldn't agree, especially since you lean more towards a humanist view of psychology.

As for the slutwalk, well, there's a difference between what is expressing your sexuality and beauty versus what people will most likely mug and rape you for. Again, if someone wants to exhibit their sexiness by testing the border and closing the gap between naked and decent, that's their decision, however they cannot for the life of them not bear the responsibility of their actions.

IF someone decides to dress like a slut, which incites sexual activity in men, they should know the consequence of their action. I have the choice to go to work fully clothed in a suit, or half naked as I choose, but the reactions people give to me are wholly my responsibility. If I go to an interview dressed like a scag, I can't blame others if I get thrown out. This goes to the idea, if I dress in bright pink and someone calls me a fag, sure it's their fault and it's totally uncalled for, but irregardless of moral principals, I BROUGHT it upon myself.

For women, who dress as sluts, yeah that's your choice, but you take the responsibility of what you wear and the consequences that follow.

Now, did a man rape her because of what she was wearing? We'll never know, but is an attributable cause? It may as well have been, and for women/men to vehemently disagree without certainty is arrogance. Nobody is in the mind of the rapist and nobody knows.

There's a likely and unlikely chance that what she was wearing had a bearing on if she was raped or not. But I see women act as if it's their right to act stupid and dress like sluts and claim that their entitled and not take responsibility for the result.

This society is too feminized to the point it's become almost like the black racial card, where any comment even slightly grazing "racism" becomes this moral polarizing topic completely abscond of realistic propositions in favor of idealistic pantywaist dreams.

And often even more I see men like my uncle who's clearlly a femi-nazi defend women at every corner as if equality in all facets of life is ideal in a clearly unequal world. I believe in respect and kindness to all people irregardless of gender, religion, and race, but to ignore the inherent biological differences is absolute ignorance and deleterious to the inherent pros and cons of having differences in the first place. Women are born to bear children and men are born to support, and this mixed conglomeration of roles just messes up everybody. I'm going to deep I'll stop, feel free to disagree further, I love to debate.