Gun Shy

Last week was a pretty good one for Alpha Is Assumed.  One of my older posts on the taxonomy of lefties was strongly recommended by science fiction writher John C. Wright in a fantastic essay on The Unified Theory of Madness.  The thoughts of a friend I cited inspired a fascinating post and discussion over at Donal Graeme’s.  I attracted some new readers who informed me that they’re thrilled to have found my blog and are in the process of spending entire afternoons reading as much of what I’ve written as they possibly can.

And of course, in The Red Pill Review by Frost, a new manosphere aggregator ranked this post as # 1 for the week.  As you can see, Frost knows what he’s doing.

This type of thing is nothing for the big blogs, but it means a lot to me.  I love spreading ideas and knowing people are paying attention to them.  When this stuff happens, it leads me to believe that it’s entirely possible that I might eventually not only play a role, but play a prominent role in dissecting the mess we’re in and diagnosing what we should do about it.

I’m hitting a groove and on my way up.

So of course this week I have no desire to write whatsoever.  I’m extra-tired, pressed for time, and want to focus on other things.  Maybe catch up on some housework (there’s always something around here in desperate need of a good scrubbing), or even better:  just chill.

This is a pattern I’ve had for years, and it’s one I can finally attribute to my feminized upbringing.

My parents divorced when I was three.  At first, it didn’t seem to affect me in the slightest.  As my mother was suffering from extreme depression and horrid conflicts with her parents, I was a smiling, outgoing, bundle of joy.  I was about as friendly as a kid could be.  Among my habits was to walk up to girls my age, kiss them, and walk away.

But when I got to be about six, I found myself overwhelmed with bouts of extreme sadness.  I didn’t understand it at the time, but I could tell that things around me were starting to change.  Being “cute” didn’t count for quite as much.  Instead, other boys who were rougher than me got more attention from other kids than I did.  My home life was soft and comforting, so when I encountered almost any sort of threat, I didn’t know how to handle it.  I wanted to “tell on” kids who messed with me, but I didn’t because it would have broken some sort of code, even though I hadn’t the foggiest what that code actually was or why I would have been breaking it.

One part I do remember quite distinctly was that I didn’t want to grow up.

Growing into a man is sometimes scary for a boy, which is exactly how it’s supposed to be.  Ostensibly, I was doing everything right.  The females who were raising me and my teachers had nothing but praise for me.

Yet I could tell that something was seriously wrong.  The rules were changing.  How or why they were changing made no sense, but I knew they were.  Moreover, I knew that I wasn’t going to have anybody around to help explain to me what the hell was going on.

This mess, when to submit to authority and when to challenge it, why kids seemed to like the boys the adults didn’t like, why it felt so wrong to not climb too far up on the tree even though I was scared and Mom didn’t want me up too high either, why the things that Grandma loved me for were made fun of by the other kids, when to make sure I stood out and when to fall back, all of it was something I was going to have to figure out entirely on my own.

I didn’t feel prepared for it, and I was right.  I wasn’t.

As I got older, I got even more confused, but I figured out a way to make things seem just a little bit easier:  hold back.  Don’t draw attention to yourself.  Blend in.  Don’t rock the boat.

You see, the women who raised me believed (as women are wont to do) that the important thing is to be well-liked.  Unfortunately, for me that didn’t work particularly well as soon as I grew out of the “cute” phase.  As a male, what I was supposed to be doing was learning how to gain respect, but I didn’t even know that I didn’t know that.

Other kids bragged about what they were good at and leveraged it for respect (usually athletics), but when I emphasized how smart I was (which meant everything to my family), I was resented for it.  So, I shut up.  I got horrible grades.  I kept to myself, wore bland and unremarkable clothing, didn’t mess with anybody, and perpetually hoped that nobody would mess with me.

I hadn’t been taught that it would be vital for me to hone myself through conflict; I had been taught the opposite, that conflict-avoidance was the epitome of maturity.  If I sought out conflict (which was rare), I needed to learn to “choose my battles”.  If others sought conflict with me (more frequent), there was something wrong with them and I didn’t even need to worry about it, much less win.

They’re just picking on you because they’re jealous.

Fourth through ninth grades were hell, but during sophomore year I found a relatively comfortable niche in which I was largely left alone.  Freshman year I was a D-student, but I turned that around just in time to get nothing but A’s my last three years and get into Smart Kid University.

I finally learned that it was safe to venture out of my shell, but was it okay to go conquer my way through life, kicking ass and taking names?  Not quite.

For the feminized ethic still reigned in me, or at the very least it’s effects.  Don’t rock the boat.  Don’t push too hard.  If you’ve got to fight somebody to get it done, it’s probably not worth doing anyway.  If you’re doing what’s right, it’ll go smoothly.

Don’t make any enemies.

Obviously, this is wrong.  Every great man in history from Joshua to Washington to Edison made enemies.  There are always those who like things just as they are, so if you want to actually change something, some people aren’t going to be happy about it.  They’re might even get pissed and fight you.  As a matter of fact, they might hit you with everything they’ve got, do whatever they can to crush you, mock, belittle, and hurt you however the hell they can.

Yet my people-pleaser programming is embedded pretty deeply.  This isn’t entirely bad.  I’m able to get through to ideological enemies in ways that the more conflict-driven among us can’t.  Anonymous Conservative’s technique for triggering the amygdala to humiliate an opponent is masterful, but I’ve made similarly great strides through the opposite approach of amygdala avoidance.

Still, although I don’t piss off my enemies unnecessarily, when an enemy throws down the proverbial gauntlet and I’ve determined that SMASH! will be the most effective approach, I get an indescribable rush.

But as much as I love such conflicts when they come my way, I still have an aversion to initiating them.  I like it when somebody leaves a snarky or dismissive comment in response to something I’ve said here or elsewhere (no, that’s not an invitation to be a smartass in response to this post), but almost never will you find that I’m the one to start the flame war.

However to get where I need to be, that’s got to change.  I can’t just hope that the radfems stumble onto me here, I’ve got to take the fight to them.

I’ve pushed my way to just behind the front lines in this ideological war we’ve got going, but right before it looks like it’s my time to take a few shots, be nice kicks in and I back away.  I never consciously make that decision, but thus far it’s always been what I’ve done.

For as a child, I was trained to believe that any hit I might take would be more that I could take, that somehow some way most any potential enemy had some sort of leverage over me.  Not only was I not trained to fight, I wasn’t trained that it’s sometimes good to fight.

If I do my job, if I’m being who My Creator designed me to be, I’m going to hurt some feelings, make some enemies, and take some pretty nasty hits in the process.  It’s not exactly how Ace describes in that I subconsciously desire to be caught, I know I’ll be caught.  If I’m saying what I’m meant to say, my enemies will not be content to ignore me.  This is both frightening and exhilarating, but I know it’s what’s supposed to happen.

If I’m man enough to make it happen.  When I go toe to toe, when I get in somebody’s face, I inflict pain.

But there’s still a little six year-old inside me afraid to go into the fight alone, craving the father who’s actually going to notice if I get knocked upside the head and talk me through the hurt and teach me how to keep it from happening again.  I don’t want to stick my head up, to find myself exposed without backup.

My human father’s probably useless, but the other Father’s not.  I got backup.

But I also ask my readers, if you feel so inclined, help me along.  If you see some stupid lefty blogger in need of a smackdown, leave a comment here so I can go there and they’ll get my worst.  I don’t always notice Twitter wars, but if you’re in one and want an ally, tweet me.

And if you suspect that any of my posts might enrage the femmis at Jezebel or whatever other site, post a link to it.  I want those bitches here where I got homefield advantage.

I don’t guarantee I’ll go straight for the throat.  I match respect with respect and give fair warning if it looks like somebody’s about to cross the line.

But if they cross that line, I’ll make them wish they hadn’t.

The goal is to change minds, but some minds won’t be changed; they’ll just have a hissy fit instead.  Yet if their mind is changeable, I’m the man to do it.

So call me on my own crap.  If you see a battle somewhere and want to see what I got, tell me about it.

Internet squabbles are only a warm-up for the real thing, I know.  But the “real thing”, the Grand Battle is where I belong.  It’s time I do what it takes to get there.

This entry was posted in Alpha, Family, Feminism, Politics, Rhetoric. Bookmark the permalink.

24 Responses to Gun Shy

  1. Pingback: Gun Shy |

  2. donalgraeme says:

    Reading your post, Martel, made me think of this:

  3. Mojave Rose says:

    Loved this post… just discovered you via the link you mentioned from Wright’s blog. Don’t worry about the scrubbing being a feminine thing… it’s a Zen way to get your head together. I, and my daughter, all went through similar childhood issues, though we did both have a dad to help us along. Further proof of the importance of intact families, and why the left really doesn’t support that structure. I have few female friends, probably because, as with my daughter, I “don’t do perky”. My husband would trade me in if I did. Keep up the good work and supporting those who can think logically! They are our society’s only hope!

  4. deti says:


    Great post. And other than the parental divorce, it sounds like you and I got pretty much the same messages growing up.

    I got the following messages growing up too, which dovetails pretty much exactly with what you listed here:

    “Fighting and conflict are always bad. You must seek compromise and avoidance of conflict wherever possible. If you must back down to avoid conflict, then do so. You must never fight, even if you are being attacked or bullied physically, mentally, or emotionally. You are never, ever to defend yourself or stand up for yourself, even to respond in kind. If you are being bullied, you must get an authority figure to help you, because you cannot handle it yourself. You must never confront an attacker head on. You must always, always turn the other cheek.”

    “Fear is a normal human emotional response that cannot be mastered or overcome. Fear can only be responded to and managed. If you are afraid of something, it is only a sign of healthy caution, and you should use this as a guardrail to your conduct. You should avoid and stay away from things that make you afraid. You should not attempt to master or overcome fear, because that could lead to injury, death or sin.”

  5. peregrinejohn says:

    Unlike you and Deti, I have no clue why I avoid conflict. My upbringing isn’t to blame, so I figure it’s something later, especially since it didn’t always bug me so much. It’s not the conflict that bothers me, really, it’s the aftermath. Having to deal with social nonsense and inconvenience caused by petulant children in adult bodies. That’s probably it: the avoidance comes of living in a place where it’s more productive to be a secret agent than a cowboy, if you take my meaning.

    Anyway. Nicely done, as ever.

    Congratulations on the notice from respected peers and new readership. It’s well deserved!

    • Martel says:

      Vox once said that Alphas seek out conflict, or at the very least don’t shy away from it. It therefore goes to show that the mindset I describe in this post is intrinsically connected with blue-pill thinking in general.

      We’ve haven’t just been misled in regard to the womenz, we’ve been misled about masculinity overall. Therefore, your conflict-avoidance tendencies are probably connected with whatever else led you to your (forsaken, of course) other beta tendencies.

      • peregrinejohn says:

        Well, on the way out if not exactly forsaken. Heh. Each day I go to my FB feed and see what lunacy is out there. There are 3 groups: 1, my far-flung friends who have interesting adventures; 2, the people I like and respect whom I wish I could spend more time with, geography permitting; and 3, the socially convenient or necessary people who remind me that I’m not as dumb as I sometimes accuse myself of being. That last crew tempts me daily to deliver truth in its most cutting forms. Resisting it (chanting “I am not the asshat whisperer” to myself) has become a useful form of self-discipline. I’m unsure whether that’s avoidance or aversion, but it boils down to wanting to kick their asses while dreading the crapstorm that would follow.

        Either way I gotta buck up and get some unavoidable conflict out of the way before it causes me any more grief and idiocy.

        For what it’s worth, from Vox’s hierarchy’s point of view, I’m a Sigma who tried to Beta himself long ago and almost thereby went Gamma. The remnant Beta traits I have are mostly nothing more than the effects of laziness.

  6. RS says:

    I have a similar problem that expressed itself differently as I grew up. I didn’t have a father for the first seven years of my life until my mom remarried and, boom, instant father. My dad wasn’t used to kids so his way of dealing with us was to be loud and quickly punitive– something I wasn’t used to. I have three brothers so I was used to growing up with the masculine way of dealing with things and I don’t know how to do the people pleasing thing. The women I know aren’t really fond of a plain spoken person like me so I tend to get along with men better– but I don’t pursue friendships with men because I’m married and think it would be inappropriate. To me my childhood experience just reinforces how important a dad is throughout a child’s life. You can’t just grab some guy and plop him into place and expect everything to be okay. I could have used consistency as a child and prioritize that in my kids’ lives.

    I think I understand your sadness. I have spent most of my life in a forced isolation because we moved a lot (11 schools in 12 years) and if it wasn’t for my husband and kids I’d probably end up as an old cat lady. Thank goodness for my husband. And I’m very grateful for the internet. It’s nice to find sites like yours that speak to people who share our values. That’s hard to find in the “real” world.

  7. Acksiom says:

    >I love spreading ideas and knowing people are paying attention to them.

    Except, of course, for when you don’t.

    Anytime you wanna pick up where YOU left off with me, why. . .you just go right ahead and do so.

    Meantime I’ll just sit here laughing at your ever-so-conveniently ego-shielding memory gap about it all.

    • Martel says:

      No memory gap, dumbass. The issue was that you gave every impression of becoming entirely unhinged, and multiple readers offline told me that they thought that something was seriously wrong with you.

      And considering you accused somebody who was being perfectly reasonable in their disagreement with you as “SHOVING THEIR FINGERS IN THE BLEEDING INFECTED WOUNDS” I can’t blame them. Even if she were being twice as nasty as you accused her of being, she still wouldn’t have been half as vitriolic as you.

      I’ve seen you leave the same type of comment at Captain Capitalism’s, something about him “losing” an argument with you and being afraid to debate you or something. Whatever your disagreement with him might have been, I’ve seen you disagree with both Sunshine Mary and with me, and in both cases you turned into a whiny little bitch who demonstrated no capacity whatsoever to disagree with somebody without hurling childish nonsensical insults. I give CPT Capitalism the benefit of the doubt, and I’m certain that anybody who follows the link and dispassionately reads the link in this comment will agree with me.

      “Debating” you isn’t challenging, it’s annoying. If you have anything more of value to provide to either me or my readers, it’s hidden beneath a mountain of emotional garbage that I don’t want anything to do with. You show up randomly when you think one of your potshots might bother somebody, disappear, and then show up again the next time you think your nonsense might have some sort of emotional effect. I have every reason to believe that in real life you’re nothing but a drain who stabs at others’ apparent weaknesses in hopes of inflicting some sort of reaction, as if their anger or annoyance is required to make you feel like something about you actually matters.

      But as long as you continue to act this way, you don’t matter. You’re a pathetic leech who needs to grow the fuck up.

      • Acksiom says:

        >And you’re going to have exactly the same problem when others come up with arguments you can’t emotionally handle, just like I have.

      • Acksiom says:

        So you’re admitting that you need to be jollied and cajoled into facing facts. If I don’t explain things to you in just the right, soft, gentle way, you’ll ignore everything you can’t disprove or even just acknowledge.

        [shrug] That’s what it is. It’s no different here than it would be at a feminist blog. You’re resorting to exactly the same excuses they do when a men’s libber shows up and calls them out on their bullshit.

        Any time you want to actually address my actual points as actually made, you go right ahead and do so. Nobody’s stopping you, let alone forcing you to resort to airy handwaving ad hominem like you do.

        Every time you ignore my actual arguments, you just prove me right.

        Every time you ignore my actual arguments, you just prove me right.

        Every time you ignore my actual arguments, you just prove me right.

      • Martel says:

        I won’t have the same problem with lefties. Despite my beliefs regarding your emotional volatility and whatever your opinions of me, I still saw you as basically an ally. There’s lots more I’ll allow myself to do with an outright ideological enemy.

        Your argument basically boiled down to Sunshine Mary is a weenie for not agreeing with my policy voiciferously enough, and I was a weenie for letting her get away with it. The topic of discussion for that post was NOT the frequency of cuckoldry, but whether or not my solution was a good idea. If somebody believes that it happens only in theory (which is obviously untrue), but they think we should implement what I advocate just in case, we’re fundamentally on the same page.

        But even if I were every bit as chicken-shit as you claim, IT HAPPENED SEVEN MONTHS AGO. The very fact that this remains a problem for you in the slightest indicates that something’s wrong. I’ve had bloggers evade me, and I simply move on. I’m sure there’s more to your life than being dissed by Martel. Focus on that. Even if I’m the complete poopy-head you claim me to be, doing what you’re doing isn’t accomplishing a damn thing. And even if it were, so what?

        Furthermore, your tendency to show up when I seem vulnerable somehow shows me that this isn’t about making a rational case for whatever, you’re hoping to inflict some sort of wound. You think I dissed you, so you want to drag me down.

        You won’t. Move on. It happened months ago. There’s more to life than taking jabs at Martel.

  8. Acksiom says:

    >I want those bitches here where I got homefield advantage.

    Why? It sure as hell isn’t doing you any good against me. And you’re going to have exactly the same problem when others come up with arguments you can’t emotionally handle, just like I have.

  9. Pilgrim of the East says:

    long time reader, never commenter here.
    While I understand you, I don’t think it’s a good idea – that old “arguing on the internet is like competing in paralympic games – even if you win you’re still retarded” is true. Do you really believe that by tearing them down, you can change their opinion? Very unlikely… And just think about the time you waste by it – you answered Acksiom in 5 paragraphs – you surely didn’t write it in like 30 seconds…
    Debating somebody on internet is usually next to impossible(except some discussion boards) – if you argue on their site, you’ll lose by mere number of criticism you can’t realistically manage to answer all. If you tear them down here, you’ll get some ego boost from back-tapping of your fellows, but the real effect will be minimal, because most people who read it here have similar opinon, at most they’ll nod their head, that you said it better than they would.

    This comes from my experinece as someone, who has been quite eloquent(not in english, though) and able to destroy discussion opponents. But lately I’m discovering that being sarcastic and insulting them in sophisticated ways isn’t really Christ-like (not even mentioning name calling – Matthew 5:22 – *hints at beginning of your Acksiom answer*) and compatible with calling to love our enemies. I stopped to try(or at least I’m trying to stop) to destroy every oppenent, and instead just point their argumentation flaws and unless they have some good arguments I don’t react to them just trying to win… I won’t win many arguments, but I’ll save much time and refrain from sin – and thats imho quite a good tradeoff for mere egoboost…

    So my advice is – just delete commenters who don’t debate properly, empty arguing won’t do any good… Blackknighting in discussions may seem noble, but it isn’t really different from whiteknighting.

    • Martel says:

      I know what you’re saying but must disagree for a couple of reasons.

      I’m well-aware of the difficulty of changing minds just through writing. The Anointed especially don’t give up their views easily. Arguing with them in person is like wrestling a greased pig, but on the internet they’ve got even more means of escape.

      Nevertheless, there is value in SOME internet dialog, including some of the flame wars. People lose their jobs over tweets, the black twitter mob can descend on people and intimidate debates into going their way. What happens on the net doesn’t directly affect what winds up on TV, but it does have a relationship.

      I won’t persuade the Anointed by getting into flame wars with them, but if I get in some good hits against them, it makes me more well-known. As I become more well-known, neutrals, “independents”, people who sort of agree are more likely to read my more reasonable stuff, and those minds can be changed.

      Other sites are great at getting the notice of the femmis in that they’re great at flaming. However, once the femmis go to those sites, there’s nothing but more flames. If I can somehow manage to get the attention of my enemies and lure them here, I can then engage them in actual discussion, at least those few among them who actually can be engaged. It’s only a few, but one heart, one mind at a time.

      In real life, I’m incredibly persuasive. I have an instinct for when to go for the throat and when to be soft and understanding. But my problem in real life is that I haven’t been assertive enough with my views–I’m great at finishing it the way I want when it starts but a bit to hesitant to start it.

      So being more bold on the internet I also see as practice for getting myself to speak up just a bit more quickly in real life. If I manage things properly, it might even give me more tangible opportunities to spread this stuff verbally.

      Sometimes ripping into people isn’t Christ-like, but sometimes it is. I’d rather nobody ever need to be insulted, I’d love to engage in nothing but civil debate. Unfortunately, most debate isn’t civil, minds are changed for the worse because of the vicious nature of some of my adversaries, and I feel called to do something about it. At least more than I have.

      So I appreciate your sentiments, and I’m fully aware of the potential snares of using anger used improperly. However, there are plenty of problems with not using anger at all, of surrendering territory to the Enemy, too. Some of us are best when holding back. I’m not. I’ve got to get in the ring or I’m not doing what I was meant to do.

      Thanks for commenting. I see what you’re saying but very respectfully disagree.

  10. Eric says:

    Most leftist commenters, with a few exceptions, use troll tactics. My approach is to keep in mind that while the format is a 1-on-1 exchange with an Alinskyite troll, you’re actually speaking to an unseen audience and for a public record. Stay focused on the content you want to communicate to that audience and place on the record. It helps to analogize trolling leftist commenters to an opponent who talks trash in a basketball game. You can’t ignore them because they are competing with you. However, you need to remember that the object of the game isn’t to win at trash-talking, though you may use some of that if it helps your mission.

    Think like a soldier. The object of the game is your mission: your team defeat the opposing team in the larger social contest. Personal benefit should derive from the accomplishment of your mission.

    Martel: “I found myself overwhelmed with bouts of extreme sadness.”

    I identify with this post. I have anxiety and depression. I’ve retreated into a shell and quit when my personal sense of safe space or comfort zone has broke down. By doing so, I’ve lost irreplaceable life/career opportunities of the fortunate and earned kind. It’s enormously frustrating to look back and see the clear trend that my temperament, and not outside events, other people, or lack of personal ability, has been the chief cause of my failures.

    Positive Masculinity is essential. Anxious, sensitive boys need to be taught to expand their capacity for conflict – that the wounding and scarring from challenging and fighting are necessary pieces of growing to robust manhood. The scarring is how we become men. Moreover, pain, discomfort, defeat, and failure are normal, and healthy building blocks when processed constructively. Embracing them as teachers fosters our innate strengths as men. Fearfully avoiding those things stunts our growth and limits what we accomplish with our lives.

    • Martel says:

      A good summary of how to approach. Too often we’ll make one of two errors. We’ll either get caught up in the trash talk and forget about the game, or we’ll ignore the trash talk altogether and fall for Alinskyite villianization tactics.

      Instead, I call them on the trash so as to neutralize it while using the trash I give back to guide the frame of the discussion towards something substantive. I show that I won’t put up with irrelevant crap while offering to be perfectly civil if they demonstrate the ability to reciprocate.

      If I’ve succeeded in re-framing the discussion, then we can actually get somewhere. If I haven’t, I’ll make it more than clear that I’ll humiliate them far more than they could ever hope to humiliate me.

      This way I frame myself as alpha for any readers, but I also show I’m not naturally a prick but I’m more than capable of acting like one when necessary.

      It sucks to look back at all those missed opportunities, doesn’t it? But it’s never too late; we haven’t screwed up tomorrow, and we’re not destined too no matter what we were taught as kids.

      Like I’ve said recently in some comment somewhere, natural alphas need to be taught right from wrong, natural betas need to be taught the harsh realities of a rough and tumble world. At present, we’re failing miserably on both counts resulting in a world full of wimps and barbarians. Neither has any hope of maintaining civilization.

      • Eric says:

        We need many more good men in charge and spread throughout the fabric of our society. Unfortunately, the prevailing PC orthodoxy that indoctrinated us is that good man is nice guy. That’s wrong. As Stingray likes to say, don’t be nice, be civil.

        I recently made this observation:
        A nice guy is not the same as a good man, although a good man often has nice-guy traits and the two types are often interchanged. A good man is proud, self-controlled, strong willed, self-aware, clear sighted, and capable. He is good because he is ethical, not because he is nice. A good man is bedrock and oak. He creates order.

  11. I’ve seen your comments on many of the blogs I frequent, but only just now found your personal blog. I’ve added you to my roll sir. Keep up the good work.

    • Mojave Rose says:

      Ditto… or, as I’ve learned over the years, Lazarus Long was right… “Never attempt to each a pig to sing. It wastes your time an annoys the pig”. (If you don’t know Lazarus, see Robert Heinlein)

    • Mojave Rose says:

      Sorry, that was in response to “Pilgrim”

  12. You actually make it seem so easy with your presentation but I
    find this topic to be actually something which I think I would never understand.
    It seems too complex and very broad for me. I’m looking forward for your next post, I’ll try to
    get the hang of it!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s