The Problem w LDS Men

[FrankOne]

The problem as I see it is that our church has decided to put a bunch of effeminate men in charge. How many people love the stories of Captain Moroni or Samuel The Lamanite. These men kicked butt. They weren't afraid or milquetoast in what they thought or how they acted. Now we have a "prophet" who posts cute little pictures of him in his sweet sweater swinging on his swing set. Oh how inspiring. NOT. He doesn't inspire me as a man. Why can't a bishop grow a beard? To masculine? To aggressive? How come all of the leaders of the church are CEOs, MBAs, Doctors? How many of these men could change their own oil or punch a charging water buffalo in the face? The church has become super lame. That's it. It's boring. There's no inspiration from these professional religious leaders. Why go to church and hear another talk about how awesome Rusty is when I can stay at home and do something that is actually fulfilling as a man

they say that a picture paints a thousand words but the above 200 or so words paint a masterpiece!

[Erastothenes]

While I realize that the painting of 0-2 Moroni is not real, it is a representation of the story which involves him. Now compare that to today's church leaders and their swing sets/vacuum cleaners. Yes I realize that Nelson is like 200 years old and can't go around swinging swords but I just can't understand how people fawn and fall all over these weak "leaders."

President-Nelson-Swingcut-1024x508.jpg (146.48 KiB) Viewed 304 times

images.jpeg (7.76 KiB) Viewed 304 times

moroni.jpg (105.9 KiB) Viewed 304 times

[endlessQuestions]

Bless you. But you haven’t said anything here that would cause me to envy you, including your BMI. But, I wish you the best.

I wish the same for you.

"thinking that as someone born in the 1960-1970s that there's something unique and impressive about me having a wife and kids".

This is a frightening statement, BT. Because there is something that is indeed unique and impressive about building, providing for, protecting, and presiding over a family. Something eternally important, and of great consequence.

I will clarify what I meant. I know having children and a wife is important (and I know having wives is important to the polygamy audience here). What I meant was, if I lived during a prosperous time that saw the "healthiest middle class the world has ever seen", I wouldn't really use having a wife and kids as part of an example of being exemplary because that's such a common thing for people who experienced childhood and young adulthood at that period in time.

But, I can see that Tmac has cultivated a good life as a strong man through hard work that continues on today. Because of where he is coming from and the qualities he has built his life on, I can see validity in his criticisms of what he views as a decrease in masculinity among men. I disagree that by and large active LDS men are feminine softies. I can see soft, I feel that's out of a desire to emulate Christ. I don't see a wide-spread problem of feminine men in active Mormonism at all from interacting with loads of active LDS men. I see some that are extra-cordial, extra friendly, trying very hard to really live qualities of being inoffensive and humble (I see some that are extremely naive and to be fair I'm naive on things). But now I'm repeating things I've already said in this thread.

I'm sorry for saying immature things. I like sound criticism and discussion of LDS doctrine, theology and institutional rot. The nit-picking of everything about LDS I generally don't look at because I generally find it uninteresting and mean-spirited/unproductive criticism. I also am tired of the debate of masculinity, what counts as healthy masculinity and the attacks of men on the internet and in general modern discourse.


Joseph Smith never publicly said anything malicious about anyone to my knowledge. I know he criticized people, but I can't think of any documented instance of him lashing out and being vile to someone. Nephi was beaten up by his brothers and outside of demonstrating God's power by pushing them aside with an extended hand, he never physically attacked them back. When they plotted his death, God didn't tell him to grab Laban's sword and meet them in battle. God told him it was time to separate.

These are men of God and I believe these acts of being smitten and trying to respond in a higher way lead to the kind of man that ends up in Zion (I just want it to come, I just want God's prophecies to happen which seem to involve better people) and I think most men and women would look at these acts and call the men doing them to be push-overs if they weren't stories attached to someone viewed as a modern prophet and/or stories associated with historical scripture. As much as I love old-fashioned America, I don't think United States norms and sensibilities of any era of it will form the DNA of the prophesied Zion community. But I'm sure some people have quotes from Brigham-era leaders or maybe even Joseph quotes that may say the contrary. That wouldn't change my view but I'd be willing to see validity in their perspective.

"They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain: for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord, as the waters cover the sea."

What would a man living in that place be viewed as by the world? From men and women on the left side of politics/ideology and men and women on the right side of politics/ideology. Would the man in that community, upholding that standard be viewed as soft? Not masculine? Feminine? Weak?

I'm far from the biblical expert Niemand is so I hope he corrects me if I'm wrong but I'd bet the scriptures call on us to behave more like the lamb aspect of Christ than the lion aspect of Christ (vengeance is the Lord's) and I think if a man truly does that, he will be viewed as weak, a push-over, walked over and disregarded by men and women. I almost hope I never get married as I write this message. I've rarely known women I think would honest-to-God choose the boring, meek, humility-seeking individual the scriptures seem to scream God wants out of people. That really irritates me but that's the world. That's life.


I fundamentally disagree with what makes up and what counts as masculinity in the eyes of God. I'm sorry for producing embarrassing messages on what I view is a forum that has sincerely done good for the work God began with Joseph Smith.

And EndlessQuestions you have really done amazing detective work. It's neat to have seen it unfold. You seem to have a role of needing to research and to expose. Others, like Reluctant Watchmen, have a real fire for speaking up on different views on LDS history and modern doctrine errors leading people astray. I'm not good at voicing my thoughts without getting heated. I think my role is to watch others speak.


I can now see how some of my LDS criticism has come off as irritating or nit-picking to other users, particularly the user with the Darkside of the Moon album cover as their avatar. He told me once in a thread I made that the LDS church criticism can be too much sometimes, though I felt my criticism was worth voicing in that thread and that it was worth making (disbelieving they'd offer up everything in their vaults unmolested). I hope if I ever make a thread or comment criticizing LDS history again that it's worthwhile and not re-treading the same material or just looking for something to complain about.



I'm really nobody.

You are not nobody.

Except in the sense that we are all all nobody.

When compared with Him who is Somebody.

You are a good man.

With a lion’s heart.

And if you hang in there.

He will bless you in ways you cannot imagine.

We are friends here.

So stick with it.

Your love of truth shines through.

And God inevitably rewards those who love truth.

[blitzinstripes]

Masculine men would stand against tyranny and false teachings. Of course that can't be tolerated.

9721851_2.png (203.82 KiB) Viewed 290 times

[farmerchick]

The bad news is hard times are on the way...and the good news is hard times are on the way....lol...

[Jonesy]

Masculine men would stand against tyranny and false teachings. Of course that can't be tolerated.

9721851_2.png

It’s better to be a warrior in a garden than a gardener in a war. We need to be warriors and learn to tame it, but I feel like we are taught first instead to be calm, docile, and gentle.

[tmac]

We are taught to be: Unquestioning Followers. Compliant. Sheep. Slaves.

That is what LDS men are taught and raised up to be.

[Light Seeker]

Could the problem with men in the church today be the same problem that Adam had in the Garden of Eden?

Or Pierce and the Casita.

[JohnnyL]

I agree. There is a major lack of leadership. I know very few leaders, men or women. I see plenty of women these days who are trying to be overachievers, but very few actual leaders. There is a huge leadership vacuum.

As alluded to in another pending thread, if/when a genuine Davidic Servant does appear, in terms of leadership, it should be a stark contrast with anything we have seen in recent memory.

I must have hit the leader jackpot, lol. Most (yes, not all) of the Church leaders I've known have been great leaders and good men for other men.

[tmac]

I agree. There is a major lack of leadership. I know very few leaders, men or women. I see plenty of women these days who are trying to be overachievers, but very few actual leaders. There is a huge leadership vacuum.

As alluded to in another pending thread, if/when a genuine Davidic Servant does appear, in terms of leadership, it should be a stark contrast with anything we have seen in recent memory.

I must have hit the leader jackpot, lol. Most (yes, not all) of the Church leaders I've known have been great leaders and good men for other men.

So, please provide some good examples of how they actually lead, instead of mostly just follow. What are the fruits of their great leadership?

[JohnnyL]

The problem as I see it is that our church has decided to put a bunch of effeminate men in charge. How many people love the stories of Captain Moroni or Samuel The Lamanite. These men kicked butt. They weren't afraid or milquetoast in what they thought or how they acted. Now we have a "prophet" who posts cute little pictures of him in his sweet sweater swinging on his swing set. Oh how inspiring. NOT. He doesn't inspire me as a man. Why can't a bishop grow a beard? To masculine? To aggressive? How come all of the leaders of the church are CEOs, MBAs, Doctors? How many of these men could change their own oil or punch a charging water buffalo in the face? The church has become super lame. That's it. It's boring. There's no inspiration from these professional religious leaders. Why go to church and hear another talk about how awesome Rusty is when I can stay at home and do something that is actually fulfilling as a man

"Our Church"? It seems like you're complaining that men who aren't like you are chosen by God to be Church leaders.

"Effeminate men"?

These men go out to the world weekly, preaching the gospel of Jesus Christ, and try to spread his word to all nations. Then they come home, rest a day, and get back to it again (Alma rested quite a bit, too.); how about us? How many people have we shared the gospel with recently, especially when it wasn't easy?

Most of these men were great professionals, providing for their families; how about us?

They help their wives, the connect with their children; how about us?

President Nelson ("Rusty") was top of his profession; how about us?

He raised lots of children in the gospel; how about us?

He wakes up at 2:30am to receive revelation for a few hours, then wakes up early and gets to work for a full day; how about us?

I guess we just have different definitions of "man".

That's all right, Jesus inspired few as a "man", I'm guessing the leaders of the people looked down on him for not being manly (even his apostles did sometimes).

I'm pretty sure that not only could many of them change a tire or two, but they could pay other "REAL men" to do so while they made a lot more money doing other things. ("Unmanly" President Hinckley built much of his own house.)

Some have dealt with incredible amounts of pain, suffering, difficulties, and more, all the while doing their best to fulfill their covenants.

Two of the least "manly" presidents of the Church had beards, one a very long and impressive one, lol.

"punch a charging water buffalo in the face" Crap, I failed the man test... Do you have to live to tell about it for it to count? I had a chuckle. Though President Kimball and President Benson might have done something like that to a bull or cow, who knows.

P.S. Boy, it's going to suck when we find out Captain Moroni had a baby face with fuzz at best..

[JohnnyL]

For about 10 other topics like this one (and the LDS Women one), search "dalrock" and take a look at the threads.

[Wolfwoman]

I watched the video. What I got from it was that the problem with LDS men is that they don’t go hunting and camping enough with their buddies.

Sorry, but no. I don’t think that’s it….

[tmac]

I think this is an accurate assessment, and actually describes me fairly well.

Every man needs...

1) A battle to fight
2) An adventure to live
3) A beauty to love

I would add: 4) Loved ones (spouse, children, grandchildren, etc.) to provide for

Without those things, which help provide a vision for my life, my motivation wanes, and I become pretty bored.

My personal motto is: “For me, Life is an Adventure, and That’s the Way I Like it.”

For me it has been a very, very long time since the Church itself offered much adventure. In fact, the Church has soundly condemned some of the more liberty-oriented adventures I have engaged in.

[HVDC]

We are taught to be: Unquestioning Followers. Compliant. Sheep. Slaves.

That is what LDS men are taught and raised up to be.

Which the bullies among us take full advantage.

There is or at least was a real problem with bullying in the church.

I told my kids to take three steps:

Tell them to stop.

Tell an adult.

Beat their @#$ until someone stops you.

My kids aren't really fighters.

And they weren't jocks or farm boys.

But no one bullied them after step three.

Easier prey elsewhere.

Plus they became the cool kids.

And no one bullied the younger ones at all.

Too bad.

Some adults are bullies too.

Skip step two.

Sir H

[Subcomandante]

I have seen this video. I think he is right about men not being encouraged to be real men in the church.

He says that every man needs...

1) A battle to fight
2) An adventure to live
3) A beauty to love

If these things are ignored, EQ falls flat.

We have examples of masculine men in the scriptures, but when we are told to perpetually stand down, follow the leader, be good global citizens, get a stupid shot, etc., it has the effect of corroding masculinity, leaving men without vitality.

I mean, could this guy not be mistaken for a church leader?

I know Agustin Carstens...the man was the leader of the Bank of Mexico...and was extremely out of touch with the realities on the ground in Mexico...how much more so around the world???

[mudflap]

a possible solution to languishing EQ's around the world.. Freedom Cells:

The number of eight participants is drawn from the research of Bob Podolsky and
his book, Flourish!: An Alternative to Government and Other Hierarchies.
Podolsky is the protege of researcher John David Garcia, who spent 20 years
researching how to maximize the creativity of a group of people working together
on a joint project. After performing hundreds of experiments, he came up with an
optimized model based on groups of eight, which he called an octet or octologue.
The idea is that a shortage of individuals would leave the group limited in capability,
but with too many people, the group becomes bogged down by disorganization and a
lack of focus. Podolsky recommends forming octologues made up of four men and
four women guided by specific ethical tenets.

Although Freedom Cells are also promoted as groups of eight individuals
collaborating together, they differ from octologues in that they are heavily focused
on decentralization. While Podolsky outlines a detailed vision of how an octologue
should operate, I hope to provide examples of applications for FCs, without telling
other FCs how to operate. The needs of each community will naturally differ.
Beyond a general agreement to respect each other’s right to be free of coercion, I
believe FCs should not be monopolized by the vision of a single cell. I caution the
reader to remember that these ideas are a guide and not the final word on the literally
limitless possibilities

In the beginning, individuals can work together to accomplish goals such as every
group member having three months’ worth of storable food, encrypted
communication, and a bug-out (or Exit and Build) plan, and ensuring that
participants have access to firearms (or some form of self-defense) and know how to
use them safely and proficiently. All the while, cell members make themselves
readily available to render mutual aid to their cell in whatever form that might be
necessary. After you have established seven to nine people within an FC, individual
members should be encouraged to then go out on their own and start another FC,
especially if the original members are not living in proximity to one another. Having
cell members who live reasonably close to each other will allow for a quick response
time in emergency situations.

~ Title : How to Opt-Out of the Technocratic State 2nd Ed, by Derrick Broze, pg 51.

Imagine if you were part of an 8 member group of people from church that you could call on for mutual aid, going fishing, building a shed, babysitting kids, sharing produce from your garden, etc?

[tmac]

a possible solution to languishing EQ's around the world.. Freedom Cells:

The number of eight participants is drawn from the research of Bob Podolsky and
his book, Flourish!: An Alternative to Government and Other Hierarchies.
Podolsky is the protege of researcher John David Garcia, who spent 20 years
researching how to maximize the creativity of a group of people working together
on a joint project. After performing hundreds of experiments, he came up with an
optimized model based on groups of eight, which he called an octet or octologue.
The idea is that a shortage of individuals would leave the group limited in capability,
but with too many people, the group becomes bogged down by disorganization and a
lack of focus. Podolsky recommends forming octologues made up of four men and
four women guided by specific ethical tenets.

Although Freedom Cells are also promoted as groups of eight individuals
collaborating together, they differ from octologues in that they are heavily focused
on decentralization. While Podolsky outlines a detailed vision of how an octologue
should operate, I hope to provide examples of applications for FCs, without telling
other FCs how to operate. The needs of each community will naturally differ.
Beyond a general agreement to respect each other’s right to be free of coercion, I
believe FCs should not be monopolized by the vision of a single cell. I caution the
reader to remember that these ideas are a guide and not the final word on the literally
limitless possibilities

In the beginning, individuals can work together to accomplish goals such as every
group member having three months’ worth of storable food, encrypted
communication, and a bug-out (or Exit and Build) plan, and ensuring that
participants have access to firearms (or some form of self-defense) and know how to
use them safely and proficiently. All the while, cell members make themselves
readily available to render mutual aid to their cell in whatever form that might be
necessary. After you have established seven to nine people within an FC, individual
members should be encouraged to then go out on their own and start another FC,
especially if the original members are not living in proximity to one another. Having
cell members who live reasonably close to each other will allow for a quick response
time in emergency situations.

~ Title : How to Opt-Out of the Technocratic State 2nd Ed, by Derrick Broze, pg 51.

Imagine if you were part of an 8 member group of people from church that you could call on for mutual aid, going fishing, building a shed, babysitting kids, sharing produce from your garden, etc?

I like the idea. But I am concerned about anything that uses the label “cell,” because anything labeled or perceived as any kind of cell will be surveilled as a domestic terroristic threat. Just shows how far gone the MSM and TPTB are. Next thing we know, freedom and liberty will be considered and treated as four-letter words too.

[HVDC]

a possible solution to languishing EQ's around the world.. Freedom Cells:

The number of eight participants is drawn from the research of Bob Podolsky and
his book, Flourish!: An Alternative to Government and Other Hierarchies.
Podolsky is the protege of researcher John David Garcia, who spent 20 years
researching how to maximize the creativity of a group of people working together
on a joint project. After performing hundreds of experiments, he came up with an
optimized model based on groups of eight, which he called an octet or octologue.
The idea is that a shortage of individuals would leave the group limited in capability,
but with too many people, the group becomes bogged down by disorganization and a
lack of focus. Podolsky recommends forming octologues made up of four men and
four women guided by specific ethical tenets.

Although Freedom Cells are also promoted as groups of eight individuals
collaborating together, they differ from octologues in that they are heavily focused
on decentralization. While Podolsky outlines a detailed vision of how an octologue
should operate, I hope to provide examples of applications for FCs, without telling
other FCs how to operate. The needs of each community will naturally differ.
Beyond a general agreement to respect each other’s right to be free of coercion, I
believe FCs should not be monopolized by the vision of a single cell. I caution the
reader to remember that these ideas are a guide and not the final word on the literally
limitless possibilities

In the beginning, individuals can work together to accomplish goals such as every
group member having three months’ worth of storable food, encrypted
communication, and a bug-out (or Exit and Build) plan, and ensuring that
participants have access to firearms (or some form of self-defense) and know how to
use them safely and proficiently. All the while, cell members make themselves
readily available to render mutual aid to their cell in whatever form that might be
necessary. After you have established seven to nine people within an FC, individual
members should be encouraged to then go out on their own and start another FC,
especially if the original members are not living in proximity to one another. Having
cell members who live reasonably close to each other will allow for a quick response
time in emergency situations.

~ Title : How to Opt-Out of the Technocratic State 2nd Ed, by Derrick Broze, pg 51.

Imagine if you were part of an 8 member group of people from church that you could call on for mutual aid, going fishing, building a shed, babysitting kids, sharing produce from your garden, etc?

I had several close friends.

We were that tight.

Then one by one marriage.

To girls who mostly mutually knew each other.

Who subsequently couldn't get along.

You can guess the rest.

We are still friends.

But we don't do anything together.

Sir H

[mudflap]

a possible solution to languishing EQ's around the world.. Freedom Cells:

The number of eight participants is drawn from the research of Bob Podolsky and
his book, Flourish!: An Alternative to Government and Other Hierarchies.
Podolsky is the protege of researcher John David Garcia, who spent 20 years
researching how to maximize the creativity of a group of people working together
on a joint project. After performing hundreds of experiments, he came up with an
optimized model based on groups of eight, which he called an octet or octologue.
The idea is that a shortage of individuals would leave the group limited in capability,
but with too many people, the group becomes bogged down by disorganization and a
lack of focus. Podolsky recommends forming octologues made up of four men and
four women guided by specific ethical tenets.

Although Freedom Cells are also promoted as groups of eight individuals
collaborating together, they differ from octologues in that they are heavily focused
on decentralization. While Podolsky outlines a detailed vision of how an octologue
should operate, I hope to provide examples of applications for FCs, without telling
other FCs how to operate. The needs of each community will naturally differ.
Beyond a general agreement to respect each other’s right to be free of coercion, I
believe FCs should not be monopolized by the vision of a single cell. I caution the
reader to remember that these ideas are a guide and not the final word on the literally
limitless possibilities

In the beginning, individuals can work together to accomplish goals such as every
group member having three months’ worth of storable food, encrypted
communication, and a bug-out (or Exit and Build) plan, and ensuring that
participants have access to firearms (or some form of self-defense) and know how to
use them safely and proficiently. All the while, cell members make themselves
readily available to render mutual aid to their cell in whatever form that might be
necessary. After you have established seven to nine people within an FC, individual
members should be encouraged to then go out on their own and start another FC,
especially if the original members are not living in proximity to one another. Having
cell members who live reasonably close to each other will allow for a quick response
time in emergency situations.

~ Title : How to Opt-Out of the Technocratic State 2nd Ed, by Derrick Broze, pg 51.

Imagine if you were part of an 8 member group of people from church that you could call on for mutual aid, going fishing, building a shed, babysitting kids, sharing produce from your garden, etc?

I had several close friends.

We were that tight.

Then one by one marriage.

To girls who mostly mutually knew each other.

Who subsequently couldn't get along.

You can guess the rest.

We are still friends.

But we don't do anything together.

Sir H

lol.

Used to go camping with my brother-in-law (now deceased) and our dogs. We'd go all kinds of places - city of rocks (but in winter), West Desert, Logan Canyon, Peter Sinks, Box Elder Canyon. Whenever he'd get frustrated with his wife or her family of girls, he'd look at me, and with a look of disgust, just say, "Women!"

boy oh boy, she didn't like that. neither did my now-ex. I was like, "would you rather we say what we're thinking out loud, or just stick with "Women" and let the rest be left unsaid? She opted for the latter, and it turned into a joke the women would let us "get away with" without too many consequences....

my wife (now) doesn't do anything that makes me want to say, "women!", so I guess there's that. But....

She also doesn't get along well with most "other women" (a.k.a. "Relief Society"), finding them to be vindictive, subversive, manipulative, and just plain mean (yes, I'm talking about LDS women). RS can be a cesspool of washed-up cat-lady feminists.... I think it's them, not her. She thinks men are much easier to get along with - not so catty; simple creatures.....

In general, it seems to me that if you really love your husband, you'd want to see him happy; even if that means biting your lip around his friends' wives so he can enjoy their company once in a while.

[Erastothenes]

The problem as I see it is that our church has decided to put a bunch of effeminate men in charge. How many people love the stories of Captain Moroni or Samuel The Lamanite. These men kicked butt. They weren't afraid or milquetoast in what they thought or how they acted. Now we have a "prophet" who posts cute little pictures of him in his sweet sweater swinging on his swing set. Oh how inspiring. NOT. He doesn't inspire me as a man. Why can't a bishop grow a beard? To masculine? To aggressive? How come all of the leaders of the church are CEOs, MBAs, Doctors? How many of these men could change their own oil or punch a charging water buffalo in the face? The church has become super lame. That's it. It's boring. There's no inspiration from these professional religious leaders. Why go to church and hear another talk about how awesome Rusty is when I can stay at home and do something that is actually fulfilling as a man

"Our Church"? It seems like you're complaining that men who aren't like you are chosen by God to be Church leaders.

"Effeminate men"?

These men go out to the world weekly, preaching the gospel of Jesus Christ, and try to spread his word to all nations. Then they come home, rest a day, and get back to it again (Alma rested quite a bit, too.); how about us? How many people have we shared the gospel with recently, especially when it wasn't easy?

Most of these men were great professionals, providing for their families; how about us?

They help their wives, the connect with their children; how about us?

President Nelson ("Rusty") was top of his profession; how about us?

He raised lots of children in the gospel; how about us?

He wakes up at 2:30am to receive revelation for a few hours, then wakes up early and gets to work for a full day; how about us?

I guess we just have different definitions of "man".

That's all right, Jesus inspired few as a "man", I'm guessing the leaders of the people looked down on him for not being manly (even his apostles did sometimes).

I'm pretty sure that not only could many of them change a tire or two, but they could pay other "REAL men" to do so while they made a lot more money doing other things. ("Unmanly" President Hinckley built much of his own house.)

Some have dealt with incredible amounts of pain, suffering, difficulties, and more, all the while doing their best to fulfill their covenants.

Two of the least "manly" presidents of the Church had beards, one a very long and impressive one, lol.

"punch a charging water buffalo in the face" Crap, I failed the man test... Do you have to live to tell about it for it to count? I had a chuckle. Though President Kimball and President Benson might have done something like that to a bull or cow, who knows.

P.S. Boy, it's going to suck when we find out Captain Moroni had a baby face with fuzz at best..

How many boys today look up to any of the leaders of the church? How many of these men have done anything to look up to. I recall as a young man having this old school Vietnam Vet as our YM leader. He was tough as nails yet had a strong testimony. He had us doing things that scared us but made us stronger. Nearly every boy went on a mission because he was an example of doing hard things and sticking with it. Now. Less than half of the boys in my stake are fulfilling a full mission. Of those that go a ton come home early because "it's hard. And I miss my mommy." Men have become weak and effeminate. It's a lot of men. Unfortunately this weakness is getting passed on to our boys. I am embarrassed at the high school at boys that I coach baseball for. Out of the 20 boys I would say that maybe a dozen aren't weak. Of those 12 I would say maybe five would actually defend themselves if someone accosted their future wife. Personally I am disgusted by our leaders as they are promoting weakness and femininity in our young men. Would you find an Army Colonel posting pictures on his swing set? Nelson is supposed to be a leader of men. Have some dignity. Don't go around acting like some little prissy weakling.

[tmac]

In a previous thread, FrankOne recommended the book “The Way of the Superior Man,” by David Deida. I highly recommend it.

Among other things, he discusses the value of having a group of close, supportive male friends to discuss things and bounce things off of, and help each other. In my experience he is right, and I don’t get anything like that out of my EQ.

[FrankOne]

a possible solution to languishing EQ's around the world.. Freedom Cells:

The number of eight participants is drawn from the research of Bob Podolsky and
his book, Flourish!: An Alternative to Government and Other Hierarchies.
Podolsky is the protege of researcher John David Garcia, who spent 20 years
researching how to maximize the creativity of a group of people working together
on a joint project. After performing hundreds of experiments, he came up with an
optimized model based on groups of eight, which he called an octet or octologue.
The idea is that a shortage of individuals would leave the group limited in capability,
but with too many people, the group becomes bogged down by disorganization and a
lack of focus. Podolsky recommends forming octologues made up of four men and
four women guided by specific ethical tenets.

Although Freedom Cells are also promoted as groups of eight individuals
collaborating together, they differ from octologues in that they are heavily focused
on decentralization. While Podolsky outlines a detailed vision of how an octologue
should operate, I hope to provide examples of applications for FCs, without telling
other FCs how to operate. The needs of each community will naturally differ.
Beyond a general agreement to respect each other’s right to be free of coercion, I
believe FCs should not be monopolized by the vision of a single cell. I caution the
reader to remember that these ideas are a guide and not the final word on the literally
limitless possibilities

In the beginning, individuals can work together to accomplish goals such as every
group member having three months’ worth of storable food, encrypted
communication, and a bug-out (or Exit and Build) plan, and ensuring that
participants have access to firearms (or some form of self-defense) and know how to
use them safely and proficiently. All the while, cell members make themselves
readily available to render mutual aid to their cell in whatever form that might be
necessary. After you have established seven to nine people within an FC, individual
members should be encouraged to then go out on their own and start another FC,
especially if the original members are not living in proximity to one another. Having
cell members who live reasonably close to each other will allow for a quick response
time in emergency situations.

~ Title : How to Opt-Out of the Technocratic State 2nd Ed, by Derrick Broze, pg 51.

Imagine if you were part of an 8 member group of people from church that you could call on for mutual aid, going fishing, building a shed, babysitting kids, sharing produce from your garden, etc?

I had several close friends.

We were that tight.

Then one by one marriage.

To girls who mostly mutually knew each other.

Who subsequently couldn't get along.

You can guess the rest.

We are still friends.

But we don't do anything together.

Sir H

I had two good close friends, then...they got married. We all rode dirt bikes since we were little, grew up on them. My one friends wife told him that he couldn't ride anymore. uh...ok. The other friends wife wouldn't let him do ANYTHING without her. I'm not exaggerating. Nothing. Since I wasn't married it was plain awkward to do anything with them. ...she had an attitude. You get the picture.

Most of my friends got married before I did. I was also the youngest of 6 kids as I watched all of them get married. I learned by observation to be very choosy about a mate as i watched the majority of those that got married go through hell in their marriages. Also, even though my wife was/is a gem of a human being, I still asked her if it was ok with her to wait 4 yrs to have kids.....just in case. She agreed. There was a secondary reason for waiting and that was to spend alot of time together.....just us two ....camping, hiking, fishing, riding 4 wheelers. It worked out perfectly and after 4 yrs, we both REALLY wanted to have kids. 6 kids later, life hasn't always been easy, but we have worked as a team and if I could go back and start over, I would make all the same choices.

[mudflap]

a possible solution to languishing EQ's around the world.. Freedom Cells:



~ Title : How to Opt-Out of the Technocratic State 2nd Ed, by Derrick Broze, pg 51.

Imagine if you were part of an 8 member group of people from church that you could call on for mutual aid, going fishing, building a shed, babysitting kids, sharing produce from your garden, etc?

I had several close friends.

We were that tight.

Then one by one marriage.

To girls who mostly mutually knew each other.

Who subsequently couldn't get along.

You can guess the rest.

We are still friends.

But we don't do anything together.

Sir H

I had two good close friends, then...they got married. We all rode dirt bikes since we were little, grew up on them. My one friends wife told him that he couldn't ride anymore. uh...ok. The other friends wife wouldn't let him do ANYTHING without her. I'm not exaggerating. Nothing. Since I wasn't married it was plain awkward to do anything with them. ...she had an attitude. You get the picture.

Most of my friends got married before I did. I was also the youngest of 6 kids as I watched all of them get married. I learned by observation to be very choosy about a mate as i watched the majority of those that got married go through hell in their marriages. Also, even though my wife was/is a gem of a human being, I still asked her if it was ok with her to wait 4 yrs to have kids.....just in case. She agreed. There was a secondary reason for waiting and that was to spend alot of time together.....just us two ....camping, hiking, fishing, riding 4 wheelers. It worked out perfectly and after 4 yrs, we both REALLY wanted to have kids. 6 kids later, life hasn't always been easy, but we have worked as a team and if I could go back and start over, I would make all the same choices.

see - that right there ^ is something that ought to be preached.

In high school, I had no idea "who I was". Then I went on a mission. But I wasn't into wearing suits (so I still didn't know who I was). When I came home, I started dating right away because "gotta make up for those 2 years that I'm now behind!!!" so I didn't have time to find out who I was then, and I jumped right into dating - didn't want to hit that first mission reunion without a girlfriend!

go go go, all the time. I did some solo camping but felt like I was in a race (because that's how Utah makes you feel), so camping was a "waste of time".

If I could go back, I think I would spend a year living with my siblings after the mission before I ever started dating. Just hang out at their house, maybe get a job on a farm picking berries or something - just to keep occupied.

Anyway, I made a lot of mistakes getting caught up in that rat-race.

[RosyPosy]

We are taught to be: Unquestioning Followers. Compliant. Sheep. Slaves.

That is what LDS men are taught and raised up to be.

Which the bullies among us take full advantage.

There is or at least was a real problem with bullying in the church.

I told my kids to take three steps:

Tell them to stop.

Tell an adult.

Beat their @#$ until someone stops you.

My kids aren't really fighters.

And they weren't jocks or farm boys.

But no one bullied them after step three.

Easier prey elsewhere.

Plus they became the cool kids.

And no one bullied the younger ones at all.

Too bad.

Some adults are bullies too.

Skip step two.

Sir H

I'm glad you said this. Too many good christian men were taught to be endlessly passive, and avoid conflict. Christ did not do this with the Scribes and Pharisees.