Two Types of Men

By Nathan Payne | pablosmoglives | 19 Apr 2022


Remember in the 90s, when Bill Clinton was going through the Monica Lewinsky scandal, how everybody said they "don't care" about his personal life, as long as it doesn't interfere with his ability to do his job?  Remember Chris Rock (was it Chris Rock?) saying something about how Hillary Clinton should be doing a better "job" as First Lady, so that Bill wouldn't feel the need to fool around?  Remember when liberals weren't on a moral high horse, given to self-righteous posturing and preaching about other peoples' behaviour and personal lives, to the point that it was possible to consider yourself among their ranks, even if you disagreed with their religious views?

Neither do I.

Which is to say, I do remember it, but may as well not, for all the difference it would make today.

The last 2 American presidents, if you ignore the fact that Biden is an illegitimate president whose handlers rigged the election in his favor for argument's sake, are a perfect example of the 2 different types of men America has produced over the last few decades.  Surely there are variations on the themes, but there are only 2 basic, fundamental types:

1.  Men who do what they want, and

2.  Men who do what they're told.

That's it.  Those are the only two options to choose from, when it comes to Western and American men in the early part of the 2020s.  And Trump and Biden are the epitomes of these two basic types.

The left that said it "didn't care" about Bill Clinton's improprieties in the 1990s never gave Trump a break on everything from the Stormy Daniels debacle, to "mean tweets."

Mean tweets.  Let's devote a paragraph to this supposedly mortal, tangential sin.  Imagine being so religiously devoted to the eradication of your manufactured enemies to the point that you eviscerate the livelihood and stability of your entire country in exchange for a lack of "mean tweets."  Imagine the pride, the myopia, the hubris required to preach from on high about somebody else's "tweets," while pretending that fraud on a grand scale in the form of a rigged election is morally acceptable because it gives you want you've been told you want, even though you've never questioned it.  Imagine being so high on your own moral supply that you indulge in the hypocritical belief that "everything is illegal, but nothing is a sin."  Think about it.  Look at yourself and apply total moral relativity to every aspect of your life, and turn around and apply unyielding, merciless legalism to everybody else.  Especially in matters of real cultural significance like the content of other peoples' "tweets" on a virtual police-station bulletin board.  Imagine being that blind.  If you're given to such hypocrisy, take a long, hard look in the mirror.  You are part of the problem.  Thanks for nothing.

Anyway, I don't know who Stormy Daniels is and I don't care, but I remember watching something on a screen somewhere when those allegations against Trump were "news," and seeing Melania marching furiously ahead of Trump during one of their televised walks across a tarmac or lawn of some kind.  She was clearly pissed off.  And he was doing what any guy would do in a situation in which your wife is marching ahead of you in a state of disconsolate rage:  He was walking along behind her, neither dragging nor in a rush, maintaining his composure, not really worried about it.  Even if he wasn't the President of the United States and the embarrassing moment wasn't being live-streamed into millions of homes around the world, what else is he going to do?  Run behind her and kiss her ass?

No way.

I got the impression that the affair actually happened, regardless of anything else the ex-porn star might have been accusing him of, and that Melania knew it.  And she was making The Donald eat his shame on live TV.

Which he did, without flinching.  Like a man.

Contrast that with this guy, who is so tightly controlled and corralled that he thinks he's making a joke when he says "they're not going to let me read at all" at the :06-second mark in the video below, when he's actually confessing, however unwittingly, to the actual truth of the situation.

"They're not going to let me read at all." 

He's not even allowed to read children's books on live TV.  I have no doubt that even that makes his handlers nervous.  I'm sure it's not a joke.  I'm sure it's literally true.  They're not going to ALLOW him to read.  So, like a tool, he sits there imitating a sock puppet while his wife patronizes him by letting him "start us off" by reading the first page.  It's a moment of unabashed, unflinching disgrace that would make a dead man cringe. 

These are people who are so used to the lie, so accustomed to believing in it (because there's a benefit for them in doing so) that they have no shame in embarrassing themselves and the entire country on live TV.  They probably actually believe they're making light of it, that they're actually "joking," instead of dragging their family name and the honor of the office of the so-called "Commander in Chief" through the mud.

I doubt it.  It would be better if they believed they were joking.  But they know what they're doing.  The real kicker, the true insult, is that they expect us to believe it.  Beyond merely thinking we will believe it, they expect us to.

Extremely disappointing, at best.

0006f01b3c90a9da62d3d59cddd4fef96bcedeccf6632f2803aefee0981ac19b.jpg

So this is what we get:  Men who do what they want, or men who do what they're told.  There doesn't seem to be much gray area in this regard.  There might be.  I don't see it, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.  But let's not spend any more time paddling around on the surface; the reason there is a massive surplus of dudes who do what they're told is the hyper-prevalence and cultural dominance of the feminine wannabe victim class.  Abusive, wannabe victims bludgeon the culture with their would-be helplessness to the point that it's practically impossible to find a healthy relationship that isn't burdened, at best, with the looming specter of divorce rape, in which a man is legally obligated to support his abuser for years on end, if not for life.  If men were truly the oppressors, like they are in most Muslim nations, this wouldn't be remotely possible.  The fact that it's not only possible, but has become a STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE that is so common most people don't even see it, indicates that women are the actual oppressors in Western society, not men.  See: Joe Biden.  Feminism is the dominant cultural trend, not masculinity.  Thus the constant moral condemnation of "toxic masculinity," which is a common phrase, and the total absence of the phrase "toxic femininity," which is a phrase that is almost never heard.

The complete disenfranchisement men are subjected to and expected to accept explains the prevalence of the ever-growing "MGTOW" movement.  It's the only place a man can be a man, unself-consciously, without being forced to apologize and effectively sit at his wife's feet while she reads children's books on TV (not even the president is exempt).  MRA (Men's Rights Activists) issues are fundamental.  Until the laws are actually equal, nothing will ever change.

Well, they got what they asked for.  Demanded, rather.  I wrote that song a long time ago.  The line, "don't deny it, you know it's true, you wanna have your cock and eat it too" wasn't conceived in a vacuum of ladyhate.  People who are still dumb enough to malign such sentiments as "misogynistic" are high on their own moral supply, and would do well to consider the ways in which they've rendered themselves obsolete by their own myopia and pride. 

They would do well to consider the possibility that there is more than one way of looking at something.  But they can engage in such multi-faceted, critical thinking on their own time, or not, as they see fit.  As I've been saying for years, the best way to absolutely ensure, with 100% accuracy, that you will be wrong about something, at some point, is to never consider the possibility that you're wrong.

Never consider the possibility that you're wrong, or could be, and you will be wrong about something, eventually.  Perhaps even a few things, or more.  You don't have a choice.

I hate cheating.  It is one of the worst things you can do to someone.  In fact it's the only permissible reason the Bible gives to divorce someone ("Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery" Matthew 19:9).  God hates divorce, but is aware:  If he/she cheats on you, it's over.  Forever.

I hate cheating.  But I would like a president who was at least capable of it.  Perhaps Biden's inability to do it in his own life has forced him to inflict this sinful desire on the rest of us.  Because if there's anything the Biden family is cheating on, it's you and me.  If there's anyone they're committing political adultery on, it's us.  Liberals didn't care about the Lewinsky scandal in the 90s (and neither did I), and now, they don't care about cheating on us.  While they are hypocrites in maligning Trump for activities they considered unworthy of mention in Clinton, they have remained consistent in the impropriety of cheating on us, at least.

Give me a furious ex-supermodel marching in front of a serial Chad any day of the week, over a guy that isn't even allowed to read children's books on his own front lawn.  Even if he did allow it to be stolen for him.

Thanks for listening.

61000a01fc724477aa10c54b9b46a78aa1688c210d9f54b243cdc0c71c704656.jpg

How do you rate this article?


14

7

Nathan Payne
Nathan Payne

I am a songwriter and bandleader who travels the world in search of the golden ticket. http://www.pablosmoglives.com


pablosmoglives
pablosmoglives

Replacing my blog at http://pablosmoglives.wordpress.com

Send a $0.01 microtip in crypto to the author, and earn yourself as you read!

20% to author / 80% to me.
We pay the tips from our rewards pool.