Category: Uncategorized

As with most of these posts, this was sparked by a conversation that I had in passing. This conversation began as the typical conversation whenever you speak with someone who has children in the high school age range. “We’re looking at these colleges, but he doesn’t really know what he wants to do.”

These kind of statements are always baffling to me. An educated man is saying this. He’s not stupid, but smart people do dumb things. How did he arrive at the conclusion that sending a kid to college, with no idea what he wants to do, is a reasonable idea? Operative social conventions. Society need to rethink a few things. The “college is required for success” meme needs to go.

College is great if:
1) you can get out without debt
2) you know with some certainty what you want to do (stemming from enough experience to actually make that call).
3) you are mature and driven enough to treat college with the appropriate respect. (it’s not difficult to maintain a high GPA and do well).

Without these, some more life experience may be pertinent to justify the resources, time & money, that college requires.

Trying enough different things is the way. Go out to the land in which you are a stranger. It doesn’t take that much time to know that you’re not interested in working fast food, for instance. Junior colleges, trade schools, & apprenticeships are good places to gain knowledge of that which interests you and that which doesn’t. Interests reach out and possess you, they chose you as much as you chose them. Combine that in some fashion which will allow you to be driven in a field with reasonable pay and a fair job market, then you’re off to a good start.

During my time at university, I watched many struggle and search for direction. The common experience was to pick one thing, let’s say engineering. Once they get a ways through the program of said pick, they realize that they don’t want to do engineering because it’s not enjoyable to them. Then it’s back to square one, “I don’t know what I want to do, but I know that I don’t want to do THIS.” – No Bueno. At this point, there is so much invested in the program (time, money, resources) that they feel like they have to finish. The feeling is akin to something that might be described as “no way out.”

Another common architype is the one who doesn’t know what they want to do and doesn’t approach university with the appropriate respect and maturity. It’s easy to do what’s fun and exciting, so naturally there’s a decent amount of partying, poor grades, poor decisions, and many times incomplete degrees. If only that time and money might have been better spent. It’s a sad story when people realize that they years when they feel and run best (biologically) were spent on fruitless endeavors lacking direction.

The proper environment of the aimless would be one that allows trials in many fields. Trails that peak interests and trials that do not. Through these trials, many develop direction. Go out, get a job & work. Do the absolute best job that you can do about that job. Take a few different classes at the local community college. Take trade class or two. Search online, YouTube etc.. Find people that work in positions that the path you’re considering would land you a job in and see what they have to say. The experience of people that work in fields often do no match the ideas that surround the degree or college program required for that position. Try and learn enough and you will find something.

I would always ask people claiming to desire to be an engineer: “What does an engineer do?” “What position to you desire exactly?” “What do you need to get that specific job?” (as we know, most of the better jobs require a little more that just a degree. Most are entirely unable to answer these beyond some guess.

Modern colleges are a combination of puppy mills and centers for indoctrination, depending on where you fall. They’ll crank out as many degrees as they can sell with no real concern for quality of education. It does not appear to me that many people in college should actual be there, as they do not approach what should be respectable with the appropriate respect. Frustrated teachers do what they can, and the whole system doesn’t work very well. The debt bubble continues to grow exponentially as the cost of attendance does the same. What a lovely monster we, society, have created. It’s really quite spectacular when you compare what college really is currently to what college is in it’s more idyllic beginnings. Send your aimless kids to the be destroyed by our spectacular monster.

Yesterday, I attended an annual training session for kids ministry at a local church. As always, I try to enter these sorts of things with an open mind as it’s always fascinating to observe the interpretation of what it means to participate in ministry. The ages ministered to range from infant to elementary. The focus was on the usual things that you’d expect from a Christian organization which is good and well. The structure and style was animated by the spirit of the mother.

Growing up in small Alabama towns, I was fortunate enough to have attended some very decent schools. The principal, vice principal, and the like were consistently strong, just, and kind men who embodied the spirit of the father. I’m sure that’s not the case for many people; however, that was my experience. My mother, who raised two children, brought me to Cub Scouts when I was that age and into the Boy Scouts as I grew. Again, the majority of leadership consisted of good, strong, just, and kind men who embodied the spirt of the father. Again, I know the Boy Scouts has their share of problems, but my experience was that of growth, discipline, development, learning, competence, morality, and all elements that create the type of men that society needs.

As I watched and learned throughout the training, the absence of spirit of the father weighed heavy on my heart. You don’t have to search far to find the endless statistics that illustrate the importance of a father in the home, yet we minister to children in a manner where the father is absent in the house of God.

I’ve asked around to see what others close to me think and this seems to be the more common sentiment. Something like “we’ll leave that to the women.” Now, we should all be well aware of the masculinity crisis that is plaguing societies on a global scale. Most people aren’t aware, but they should be. I get it, good masculine leaders are fewer and fewer with each generation as all that is man is bred out of boys. But it’s not JUST that. Nobody even notices that a critical element of development in children is missing: the father. Society is so acclimated to a lack of male leadership that no one bats an eye.

Until the spirit of the father is restored in men, civilization will continue to decline. We should study this carefully, as the future of humanity depends on it. Do not do nothing.

In short, an excellent read.
Eye opening quote:

“In the temple of science are many mansions, and various indeed are they that dwell therein and the motives that have led them there. Many take to science out of a joyful sense of superior intellectual power; science is their own special sport to which they look for vivid experience and the satisfaction of ambition; many others are to be found in the temple who have offered the products of their brains on this altar for purely utilitarian purposes. Were an angel of the Lord to come and drive all the people belonging to these two categories out of the temple, few would remain, but there would still be some men, of both present and past times, left inside.

If the types we have just expelled were the only types there were, the temple would never have come to be, any more than a forest can grow which consists of nothing but creepers. Now let us have a look at those who have found favor with the angel. Most of them are somewhat odd, uncommunicative, solitary fellows, really less like each other, than the hosts of the rejected. What has brought them to the temple?  No single answer will cover, escape from everyday life with its painful crudity and hopeless dreariness, from the fetters of one’s own ever shifting desires. A finely tempered nature longs to escape from personal life into the world of objective perception and thought; this irresistible longing to escape from his noisy, cramped surroundings into the silence of high mountains, where the eye ranges freely through the still, pure air and fondly traces out the restful contours apparently built for eternity.

Man tries to make for himself, in the fashion that suits him best, a simplified and intelligible picture of the world; he then tries to some extent to substitute this cosmos of his for the world of experience, and thus to overcome it. Each makes this cosmos and its construction the pivot of his emotional life, in order to find in this way the peace and serenity which he cannot find in tbe narrow whirlpool of personal experience.

The supreme task is to arrive at those laws from which the cosmos can be built up by pure deduction. There is no logical path to these laws; only intuition, resting on sympathetic understanding of experience, can reach them.”

-Albert Einstein

Albert knew something. That something may be called by some “natural law” or “phenomenology.” Something that authors such as Nassim Taleb frequently write about. That thing is the know that you don’t know something.

“The scientific method only tells you where you’ve been, not where to go”
-Robert Persig

You have to care to know where to go, and I mean really care. Care in the way which Persig calls “quality.” Care in the way the Christians refer to as the image of god.

Recently there’s been quite a bit of debate about preventative options for popular sicknesses. Most propaganda to push such options is touted as “caring.” It’s hard to believe that these people care so much about life when the same number of people die each year from Tuberculosis on a global scale. They’ve been dying for years and tuberculosis is relatively cheap as easy to overcome. Nobody knows or cares since they’re not told to.

You have to care, and I mean really care.

Preface: this account is in no way to be a malicious critique of any projects that I’ve been involved with or the results which they produce. These are only thoughts that I have had along my journey.

The question that I’ve been wrestling with in recent months is something to the effect of “what is the best use of my time in regards to outreach and ministry in general?” This question was pushed to the front of my mind after listening to one of my favorite podcasts, Cradio (Catholic Radio). The subject was “how wonderful the good news is and our desire to share it with others” or, to be put another way, the idea that we are all called to ministry.” So this got me thinking about the times in my life that I am preforming properly and how truly wonderful those times are. I genuinely desire for all to experience that at some point in their lifetime.

“You don’t just feel good and run well unless you’re moving forward and upward” – Sam Walton (from the breakroom when I was employed at the wallyworld)

In effort to share this sentiment with those that might not have known it, I began researching different avenues that might bring that light. One group that found me through the local Jesus party was called “Car Guys Making A Difference.” This seemed right up my alley, since I’m a car guy.

The idea behind the group was something like “relational outreach via meeting needs in the community.” It seemed like a really good idea, and seemed very well thought out and backed by a non-profit group which had already been working in the community for years. It was intended not to be a hand out, but instead to be a helping hand working along side members of the community. It didn’t work as well as I imagined and I can’t seem to put my finger on why. The following ideas are theory as to potential reasons that these types of outreach are only marginally effective.

The community in which the non-profit operated is a government housing project. I imagine the culture (though possibly an incorrect idea) to be similar to that which is expressed artistically through hip-hop music, and I love hip-hop music. It is the genre, or at least has been, in which music that is inherently alpha is produced. Ideas and common themes of the hip-hop that I enjoy are “get money,” “what’s mine is mine and I’m going to take it,” ruthless and aggressive things of that nature. It really brings out all the things inside me that make me run with power in every step while I’m exercising. It’s quite refreshing after a day in the cube.

One question that I continually ask myself throughout our outreach efforts is “are we reaching men?” (The answer is usually no). Men are the leaders of the family. Men are the backbone of society. In order to have successful outreach, you have to reach men. In order to have a strong society, you have to have strong men. I’ve observed the majority of those from the community interacting with the outreach groups to be women. Why is that?

It may have something to do with the ideas uncovered by experiments that have studied resource distribution between groups of different gender. A group, composed of men, told to devise a system to distribute resources will almost always construct some form of merit based system. Women, on the other hand, are much more communal distributing resources in a socialist manner, an even distribution.

I believe that it’s rooted in the nature of men to despise handouts or anything that might even resemble the appearance of a handout. Social and government conditioning can certainly override this, but on an innate level I believe this to be true. Put simply, men want to be taught how to be strong. They do not want to be told that it’s ok to be weak. Even if they take the handout, it tears their hindbrain to pieces.

An outreach group offering an effective means to walk alongside members of the community, does not bring men in. Men do not reach back. Meanwhile, those that promise that which culture values will line people around the block. I see people spending their last dollar on all kinds of “investments,” “entrepreneur gurus,” and the like. I see people net less than minimum wage per hour to sell products legal and not. I can only imagine that they are chasing the promise of something greater. How do you compete with that?

You have to sell something with power and know what you’re selling. Believe in your product. People like Tony Robbins line people up to come to conferences and retreats. He knows what he’s selling, people want it, and he delivers. Christianity has a lot to learn from these types.

I’ve never viewed Christianity as a weak belief system. Being created in the image of god is one of the most powerful ideas that I’ve ever heard of. The idea that if you wrestle with god, the divine ideal, that you can constantly grow and become the best version of yourself. The idea that if you are truly doing the best thing for yourself that it’s simultaneously the best thing for everyone else since the best version of you is the version that gives most to the world. (Contemporary Christians word this idea “your cup must be full before you can pour out to others.” I don’t think that verbiage carries the same power.) The idea that sacrifice and the future are intimately related and the god of the universe gave the greatest conceivable sacrifice so that we may have the greatest possible future. These ideas have power. These ideas are a product that I believe in and want to share with people.

This train of thought is a slippery slope in the direction of televangelists. The beatitudes tell us that “Blessed are the poor in spirit.” This idea of selling a product and believing (And when I say believing in it, I mean knowing this system to be a certain reflection of how the universe operates. I mean having tested it and it held water in the worst conditions conceivable. I mean pure objective truth.) in it cannot be attached to monetary gain. It must be coupled with a vow of poverty, which is an unattractive idea at first. How do you present this wonderful realization of having something so much greater that money? “Take up your cross and follow me.” Walk in the footsteps of Jesus and emulate the divine ideal. That is greater than money.

These ideas are touched on in television programs such as Star-Trek or the more recent minimalist “van life” movement in the younger generation. I think they’re onto something with finding the appeal in that piece of the puzzle. Even those famous youtuber millionaires such as Alex Becker are constantly advocating for the benefits and freedom of existing without possessions. This is something that I am, and will most likely always, wrestle with in my own life as being a car guy is not conducive to living without possessions.

Somewhere in the muddy water that has been outlined by the ideas presented thus far, exists a way to to truly people. There is a truth that men have an innate desire to seek. Hopefully there is a way which I can find to share the brief glimpse of life while walking along that straight and narrow path. When you’re on that path, you know it and it is magnificent. It’s kinda like a riding a bike by yourself when compared to riding bikes with friends.

“Get a bunch of bikes and ride them around with your friends. It’s the shit” – Tyler The Creator

I came across an Instagram post today, posted by someone that I consider to be a friend. The post is something that is unsettling to a degree that I can only compare to heartbreak.

The first half of the post is neither here nor there, but the second half is very disturbing. The implication here seems to be that a collective group of human beings have no value. Not only that, but the writer takes pleasure in viewing a group of human beings as having no value. The dehumanization that must occur in order for anyone to take pleasure the idea that a collective group has no value paves the way for genocidal events similar to those that we have witnessed in recent history. It is not good.

The better social narrative is the idea that all life has value. This idea lead the way to the most basic law: killing another human being is wrong, because their life has value. If you detach value from a human being, as done by the common narrative “useless men,” you’re only a stone’s throw away from atrocities that I’d rather not write about.

Tearing others down to build yourself up. This is wrong. This type of thinking stems from a place of scarcity. The scarcity idea being “for me to eat, another must not.” The truth, in abundance, is that there is room for everyone to eat at the table. You do not have to tear others down to build yourself up.

You have value. You know the reasons that you have value, and that is a beautiful thing. Others also have value, and humanity is beautifully imperfect. We should all build each other by calling out the value in each human being, calling each other to greatness.

I warn against saying anything “just because its nice.” The calling should be genuine. Call out the value, while never letting anything leave your mouth that you don’t wholeheartedly believe. It’s really quite difficult to genuinely call out the greatness and value in others while existing our dark and criticizing world.

If you find yourself in a position where you cannot recognize value in another human being, what then? Is this from a place of hatred an contempt? Surely it cannot be from a place of love and wisdom?

Edit: The latter part of this post also reinforces the idea that the value of men is in their utility. If they have no utility, they have no value. Reminds me of the Chris Rock comedy bit “unconditional love.” Society trains men to derive value from “what they do” and “what they provide.” That’s not necessarily a bad thing, until you’ve convinced someone that they have no utility and can provide nothing. Where else must their self-worth be derived other than from where society tells them that they should derive it from? The psychological damage that comes from an individual believing that they have no value is not something to be overlooked. The fate of those that allow themselves to be torn down to this degree never has a good ending.

Nassim Nicholas Taleb, the author of The Black Swan, seems to be an absolute intellectual powerhouse. His pair of books, The Black Swan and Antifragile, changed my thinking in ways that I could never have imagined (as most changes in thought probably are). The additional filter provides an appreciable amount of clarity when combined with the existing lens through which I view the world. I’ve studied this book very closely, as I was especially intrigued by the absolute destruction of contemporary statistical methods in relation to any meaningful real-world application.

The premise of the pair of books, as far as I can tell, is something along the lines of: The averages don’t really matter when the unexpected outliers have basically all of the massive impact. There are positive and negative massive impacts, and there is a way to position yourself to disproportionally expose yourself to the positive swans while limiting exposure to the negative swans. And that way is structure things to be and betting on things that are “antifragile” (things that gain from disorder).

Most, if not all, concepts in these books are very rationally presented. The anecdotes are amusing, the writing is a bit long, but you will know them by their fruits. Judging by his repeated massive success in areas very few are successful in, Taleb seems to be onto something. As I was speaking with a co-worker the other day, it occurred to me that Taleb’s ideas not only don’t seem to be at conflict with, but are also not all that different on a fundamental level from the structure of reality as described in the Bible.

The idea that “You can structure your life in such a way that, as long as you’re aiming for the highest possible good for yourself and others, everything you need will provided for you.” doesn’t seem far off from the idea that “you can limit your exposure to negative Black Swans while also expanding your exposure to positive Black Swans.” Combine that idea with the idea that you can be “antifragile,” not only being robust to, but growing under stressors to your system. This seems to tie into something that is very dear to my heart, the idea of “loving the struggle,” which I mean in the truest sense.

The following is my preliminary attempt to connect these dots using words:

There’s a very powerful idea in the Book of Genesis: the idea that we are made in God’s image. In the beginning, God speaks order from chaos… or as Dr. Peterson says “formless voids can be viewed as limitless potential, and through speaking the word or truth that limitless potential is transformed into order” (paraphrasing). If you hold the view that chaos is limitless potential, how you handle chaos will determine to what degree you are antifragile. The innate ability of man to thrive in adverse conditions seems to be the greatest form of antifragility that I can find. Connecting that ability to some piece of the divine inside of us aids the robust structure that allows us to thrive when exposed to stressors. This seems to be closely tied to theories of our hemispherical brain structure being related to order and chaos, and the idea that we are at our best when we stay true to that narrow path between the two.

The next bit of dots, that I connect in my mind, involves the sermon on the mount and guiding your exposure to Black Swans. The sermon describes some structure of reality, or in simpler terms “behave in this manner and this will be the result.” From a phenomenological perspective, that structure acts as a surprisingly accurate predictive framework in life. (This is probably why it’s commonly referred to as the greatest sermon ever given.) We all seem to find this true on some level, but few have good explanations for why. It seems to me that Taleb’s books and thorough descriptions of the driving mechanisms behind his concepts, to some degree, explain why the sermon is such an accurate predictive framework. I hope to develop these ideas further in the future.

As with most bits of literature, there seems to be a part where the Author and I part ways. The conclusions drawn near the close of the Black Swan is still a parting, but the book is not so far off from what I imagine to be the wisest path.

“You can stand above society and the pecking order by choice. By creating your own idea of success.” – From some where near the end of The Black Swan

Now, we can surely create our own idea of success. I, however, am not a fan of spinning my wheels if I don’t have to. I prefer the advice “stand on the shoulders of giants.” Many ancient texts, the bible seeming the greatest of these, define success in way better than I could have imagined. The sermon does a grand job of that. If your idea of success aligns with the god of the universe’s idea of success, then you’re probably on the best past possible, even beyond imagination. That’s something to consider no matter who you are.

“Quitting a high-paying position, if it is your decision, will seem a better payoff than the utility of the money involved (this may seem crazy, but I’ve tried it and it works). This is the first step toward the stoic’s throwing a four-letter word at fate. You have far more control over your life if you decide on your criterion by yourself.” – From some where near the end of The Black Swan

Well maybe Taleb, that very well may be. Do decide (advice to myself) on your criterion, but do not discount the wisdom of the ancients.

As a man living in modern society, we are constantly bombarded with the notion that we should emote more frequently. This is the idea that men should be vulnerable, especially with women. “Get in touch with your feminine side.” I will explore vulnerability in the context of inter-gender dynamics and marriage.

Emoting (as man to your feminine counterpart) like seems like a particularly unproductive and often harmful thing to do. This type of behavior often causes people, even more so women, to lose respect for you.

When we look at the characters in the Bible and the life of Jesus himself, there are no known examples of anyone (that I can find) acting out the display of vulnerability in the way that society describes. From a Christian perspective, these ideas don’t seem the have the ability to reconcile. The bible paints a very different picture.

“And he said unto me, My grace is sufficient for thee: for my strength is made perfect in weakness. Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in my infirmities, that the power of Christ may rest upon me. 10 Therefore I take pleasure in infirmities, in reproaches, in necessities, in persecutions, in distresses for Christ’s sake: for when I am weak, then am I strong.” – 2 Corinthians 12:9-10

2nd Corinthians does an excellent job of illustrating the difference between vulnerability and weakness. That may be a good way of thinking about showing vulnerability… “Content with weaknesses, insults, hardships, persecutions, and calamities.” (depending on the translation)

These things that are viewed as vulnerabilities are in a sense weakness when the person describing their experience comes from a place of victimhood, scarcity, fear, or self-preservation. An almost identical condition can be described through a lens of truth in the human condition, spoken with confidence, and coming from a place of strength. Can you guess which lens the bible gives preferential treatment? It might be akin to saying “these are the things that would be a weakness without the god of the universe.”

The “boasting of weakness”, described in Corinthians seems to be the right way to go about it.

“If you abide in my word, you are truly my disciples, ³² and you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.” – John 8:31-32

As disciples of Christ, the truth indeed does set us free. Anything that may be perceived as weakness or as vulnerability through a worldly lens, is not such through the lens of discipleship. Speaking truth and describing events and experiences that we know to be part of the human experience is far from a display of vulnerability or weakness. This is what we are called to do in contrast to the more common social narratives, especially in our relationships.

“Therefore, having put away falsehood, let each one of you speak the truth with his neighbor, for we are members one of another. ” – Ephesians 4:25

“Therefore put on the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you may be able to stand your ground, and after you have done everything, to stand. Stand firm then, with the belt of truth buckled around your waist, with the breastplate of righteousness in place, and with your feet fitted with the readiness that comes from the gospel of peace.” – Ephesians 6:13-14

Generally speaking, I’ve never been much of a writer. The only thing that I’ve written, in which I was proud of, was a Jeremy Clarkson style narrative in place of a technical report for a class at Auburn (I received the lowest grade in the report section, but still received an A in the class). With that in mind, myself having a blog is a bit of a strange thing. My mind tends to run on a bit like Lucky Charms (mostly cardboard with a few marshmallows).

Two things, I heard recently, provided the inspiration need to turn my thoughts into words.

Thing 1:
“Reading maketh a full man; conference a ready man; and writing an exact man; and, therefore, if a man write little, he had need have a great memory; if he confer little, he had need have a present wit; and if he read little, he had need have much cunning, to seem to know that he doth not.” – Francis Bacon

Well, I’ve read (listened to books) to my hearts content. Before audiobooks, I could count the number of books that I’ve read on one hand. It is time to expand to writing, if only to be precise. My memory is also less than desirable, what a relatable quote.

Thing 2:
“No skill needed to understand it. Mastery to write it.”

I don’t consider myself a master of most of the things which I write about, but mastery is one of the four tactical virtues. So if writing will assist in mastery, write I shall.

Two heavy hitters in conversation is often a wonderful thing to be a fly on the wall for. Today, I was blessed to watch Mikhaila Peterson’s podcast facilitate this wonderful conversation. I’ve seen Wim popping up all over the internet. Despite being extremely interested in the subject matter, I haven’t been able to decide whether or not I really like the guy until now. (I do like the guy).

Wim is usually (from what I’ve seen) a bit all over the place, which seems to stem from his passion to share his findings with the world. Dr. Peterson was able to recognize this and ask the perfect questions to gently nudge the conversation along in a very digestible and intriguing way. This is my commentary on the conversation. Before continuing, I encourage you to watch the episode.

In writing this, I’m working off of the assumption that you are already familiar with Wim and Dr. Peterson.

First, I’d like to say how wonderful it is to see Dr. Peterson creating and collaborating once again. I have enormous respect for the work he has done and what he has been through. Watching this conversation, we see Dr. Peterson in his transparent and authentic fashion go through the breathing exercises and contemplate how the discoveries of Wim might help his condition. Following Dr. Peterson’s lead, I’ll go ahead and disclose that this made my eyes water as it warmed my heart.

Hearing Wim speak about the discoveries that link the mind to the physiology is very reminiscent of the classic by Dr. Maxell Maltz, Psycho-Cybernetics. In that light, I’m not sure how much of what Wim has discovered is actually new. However, it is truly wonderful that his feats have attracted the science to objectively prove that these things really do work. As the scripture says, there is nothing new under the sun. Wim is woke enough, despite seeming unfamiliar with Dr. Maltz’s work, when he says “but the ancestors already knew this”. Dr. Peterson seemed to agree.

After that introduction, I’d like to identify the part where Wim and I seem to part ways. (I’m writing this before I’ve read his book, my mind may change once I do). I’ll make the best effort to lay out how I connect the dots in my mind after watching the conversation. I’ll pull elements from The Warrior Ethos, Pyscho-Cybernetics, Catholic theology.

Wim and Dr. Peterson are definitely onto something deep as they always are. They are discussing the physical and psychological implications of living naturally, by god’s design, as warriors. The hero dynamic that Dr. Peterson brings up is spot on, and it all seems to align with scripture.

Scripturally, we are created in God’s image. I’ve always had a part of me that didn’t sit right when I hear the contemporary Christian verbiage “you can’t.” Specifically, though I can’t recall where I heard it exactly, the idea that “you can’t do it on your own.” You need god’s help.

When society presents a narrative and conditioning of victimhood and limiting beliefs, the phrase “you can’t” connects to that primitive part of the brain that stores self limiting beliefs then anything that follows is negated. I prefer the same heart presented with a slight modification, an empowering medication. “I can do all things through god who strengthens me.” So, I’ll say it again. We are created in God’s image.

I seem to find that, in being created in god’s image, we are created with potential beyond our imagination. This is a potential in which we are equipped to handle any stressor that could every be present to us. We (I am speaking here as a man [war, warrior] and understand the potential gender differences so bear with me) are made to keep supporting the weight of the world until the moment that we die. With that being said, it’s very interesting when Dr. Peterson asks Wim “How long can you do that” (referencing his ability to maintain his body temperature in freezing temperature). Wim responds, “as long as necessary.” I read into that a bit and think “until it kills me.” This is probably a creative liberty on my part, but I think I’m seeing a bit more science (we have had a good bit for some time now) that supports the idea that I can do all things through god who strengthens me.

[Many Warrior cultures, that conquered the world, came from climates that were harsh. They go and conquer. Then they return to the harsh conditions. Seldom do conquers come from, or stay, in the comfortable conditions.] Paraphrasing from the Warrior Ethos.

What if God’s natural design for living was living out in the amazing and vast conditions that he created throughout the world? Wim himself, said we weren’t meant to wear clothes (who told you that you were naked?). The man (Wim) climbs mountains and swims in freezing water while basically wearing nothing. This makes him stronger and feel better. This physical response is typical of all domains. It’s truly as if we were designed this way. In all aspects, when we live in the way that we were meant to live everything is better. Food, marriage, relations, and the collective human experience are all outlined in scripture. We’ll see if the scientific opinion will align in favor of salvation and convert the nonbelievers.

Now when I say, “I seem to find”, I mean that I have personally experienced these things in my own life. When I was running, I did a substantially similar breathing exercise to what Wim outlined in his video. I never felt better than that! I had no idea of the underlying processes that were occurring while combining these. The same is true when I follow scripture in ALL other areas as well (I have no idea of the underlying processes taking place). Eating what god made, as god made it, and LIVING works beyond measure. There’s this extra bit in LIVING that no amount of science or scholarship will ever be able to explain. Like Wim said, “experience first, then you understand.” I’d even go so far as to say that until you have lived how we were designed, you have only partly lived. For me, each time I get closer to god’s design, it’s a whole new level of life. So in reality, until I have lived the way god designed (I’m nowhere near yet), I have only partially lived.

Let me first start by saying that I am aware that this review may rustle some jimmies, as it should. Let’s hope that it rustles jimmies in a productive way.

Enola Holmes, the Netflix original, was a terrible film. I chose to give it a chance since the cast looked pretty decent and the story seemed like a reasonable spin-off of the contemporary Sherlock Holmes. However, what I discovered while viewing this film is a PRIME example of the militant feminist (man hating) narrative that is a detriment to society. (I can feel the jimmies rustling). Stay with me a moment and see if you can follow my logic, or lack there of.

For this review, I’d like to focus a few key elements, though the list of examples that I could pull from the movie is truly endless.
Element 1: The romanticization of a singe mother raising a daughter, without a father specifically. Glorification of the idea that the only thing you need a man for is reproduction.
Element 2: The reoccurring phrase used to describe Enola’s male counterpart, “useless boy.” The reoccurring theme that men have no use in society.
Element 3: There was a bit of dialog where Enola told her male counterpart “you’re a man when I tell you you are a man.”

The rest of the film was neither here nor there and a perfect portrait of feminist dreams, fanservice. I only take issue with the 3 elements that I deem militant. (appropriate since Enola’s mother in the film is hinted at being a terrorist.)

This film sends a very dangerous message to the youth and impressionable people, male and female. It tells boys that they are useless and that they should seek the approval of women for all things. It tells young girls that men have no place or use in society, they are only a hinderance.

History and statistics paint a very different picture in regards to the family. The family is the backbone of society. This sort of militant narrative entirely devalues the family. It paves the way for a generation to believe in such a way that a successful family has very low chances of existing and surviving. Where are the TV shows, movies, music, or media of any kind that paints having two parents in a positive light? Where is the media that romanticizes having the strong family that statistics say give the youth the best chance of success?
Not convinced two parent’s don’t matter? Other do a much better job that I ever could disproving that.

https://fordhaminstitute.org/national/commentary/power-two-parent-home-not-myth

Men and women, working together, complimenting each other’s live and playing off the strengths of each gender works so well that it’s almost as if it were by design. Why would anyone want to destroy something that works so well? Power? Control? Conspiracies aside, if the government put crack in the hood to destroy the black families, it surely backs militant feminism to destroy the others. Bravo government, nothing else in the history of the world has been as successful in destroying the backbone of society (families & tribes).

Lastly, I’d like to break down this bit of dialog: “you’re a man when I tell you you are a man.”

Many societies throughout history have had some sort of rite of passage or definitive point where boys become men. This is absent in contemporary western culture. The absence has opened the door for “what it means to be a man” to be entirely subjective. As a result, the lost boys will jump through hoops to be awarded their man card from those that claim to hold the key. Many will use manipulative verbiage to persuade others to conform to their belief system. Counter to the militant feminist narrative, women do not hold the keys to manhood.

What is means to be a man, as subjective as it is painted, it much more clear if you can distill out some of the B.S. We can all agree that, men are respected by other men. This actually has nothing to do with women and groups will literally go to the end of the earth to suppress this idea.

For a rough outline to “man,” let’s reference the four tactical virtues featured in The Way of Men by Jack Donavan. They are strength, courage, mastery, and honor. Honor is the one we can focus on here since it’s most subjective as it require an “honor group.” You get to select this honor group along your journey. Historically, honor groups for men have been groups consisting of other men. Either way, there would be something fishy about a man’s honor group with no men. The latter does not come with recommendation, with the exception of the militant demanding that you bow to their wishes.

Let’s build a strong society with backbone for our children and future. When we see things that do damage to the family, speak out against it. The best way to combat a story is to tell a better story. Like the family, the counter narrative beings at home.