Men's Size

So an interesting event happened today at work. I encountered a violent customer. To put things in perspective I work at a car wash that's sandwhiched between two ghettos (Richmond and Oakland). If there's one thing ghetto people care about, it's their cars. They could care less if their children end up in prison or on crack, but if their piece of shit car (family heir loom) isn't respected, they'll turn into wild animals.

Anyways I'll explain what happened. At our car wash, cars need to form two lines. These two lines then merge into one line. There's a sign posted at the merging point that says in big capital letters "MERGE INTO ONE LANE. PLEASE ALTERNATE.". As things would happen, one customer cut in front of another. This happens all day long, mostly because people don't know how to drive. Most people don't get upset but this particular customer who was cut in front of got furious.

The customer who cut was a small asian girl. The guy who got cut was a 6'5  250lb + black dude. Immediately after she cut he got out of his car and started swearing at her. Among the things he said were: "DO YOU KNOW THAT'S FUCKING RUDE", "FUCK YOU GET THE FUCK OUT OF THE CAR I'LL BEAT YOUR FUCKING ASS", "FUCK YOUR PEICE OF SHIT CAR". While saying these things, he was walking up to her car and kicking it. Meanwhile I'm about 10 feet away, just observing the incident.

To be honest I wanted help the woman but I was intimidated. After all if this guy is willing to beat a woman's ass in broad daylight who's half his size, then I don't think he'll have any qualms about pounding the first guy who tries white knighting into the ground. And why should I white knight for her anyways? From what little I saw of her she was typical slut who probably thinks her vagina can break rules whenever at it's own whim. If she'd just followed the damn signs I wouldn't need to risk being murdered for her. For the record, I'm only 5'8 125 lb.

I basically just let the situation diffuse itself. He kicked her car then walked back to his own car and cooled off. In the meantime all my co-workers were looking at me like I should of done something. One co-worker said to me "you gotta step up and take charge". It's easy for him to say that when his fat ass watching from a distance. Another co-worker yelled something at the man from the window. Needless to say the responsibility fell to my plate since I was the closest.

So here's a question: What should I of done in this circumstance? Stand up get my ass kicked? It's not like the woman wasn't protected, she was inside her car with the door locked and the windows rolled up.

This got me thinking about other things. There's always been men of all different body types including small scrawny guys like myself and big towering giants like this guy. If everyone played by the golden rule "pick on someone your own size", I wouldn't be so disadvantaged. But as things are, I'm on the weaker end of this spectrum and street fights don't have weight classes.

So my bigger question is how have small scrawny guys survived all these years? The first thing that occurred to me was in a civilized society men team together to kill bullies. Today no other male co-worker came to my aid. Nor did any male stranger. Perhaps this is the bystanderd effect, but it's also a sign that men don't team together in this society. Instead of having collective principles that we enforce, we outsource these collectives to police. However things like police are inept and unreliable.

So what did I draw from this? Since men don't team together in this society it's everyone for themselves. This also extends to the dating scene. A man who'd normally be valued in a team won't be valued individually. The reason women desire tough guys is because our society is run by predators. Predators thrive when men don't team together. So rather than a woman valuing a guy for civilized traits, she'll lower her standards to dating a predator who's abusive in exchange for protection from other abusers.

I've asked myself often what I'd do in a circumstance where a man much larger than myself wanted to hurt me. Most men are too sensitive to admit they're physically weak because it hurts their male ego. Or should I say it hurt's their pride in a society that values physical strength above all else. And such a society is the result of displacing good genetic traits like intelligence, honest, ect, for useless ones like raw brawn. It doesn't hurt my ego, because I know a society based on pure brawn will produce nothing in the long run. Muscle bound freaks are parasites.

The first option a physically weak man has for protecting himself is leveling the playing field with technology, specifically firearms. Firearms are the one equalizing piece of technology that allows helplessly weak people to defend themselves against brutes. Doesn't matter whether you're an old lady or skinny weakling, guns beat size.

And it occurred to me, men can only form meaningful teams when they can enforce their rules. Firepower is what enforces rules. That's why police have guns and that's why we call them. In our society men are disarmed. So it's no wonder that physically weak men carry so little value in this society. On top of not having teams, all equalizing technology is banned. Predators are living high on the hog.

I suppose another option is getting a dog. I've thought about buying a Caucasian Shepherd. I've heard these dogs will gladly fight wolves.

 

You shouldn't have stood up for her.  There is no reason ever to stand up for a woman in a feminist culture.  If some guy asks you to stand up for her, the 2 reasonable responses are "I believe in equality of the sexes, so she can stand up for herself as well as any man" or just "stand up for her yourself".

As a man working at a job where there are thugs, you should carry mace.  This simple technology equalizes the size issue without being illegal or even very dangerous.

This story ties into CoAlpha more than anything else.  And I agree with all of your conclusions.

fschmidt wrote

You shouldn't have stood up for her.  There is no reason ever to stand up for a woman in a feminist culture.  If some guy asks you to stand up for her, the 2 reasonable responses are "I believe in equality of the sexes, so she can stand up for herself as well as any man" or just "stand up for her yourself".

As a man working at a job where there are thugs, you should carry mace.  This simple technology equalizes the size issue without being illegal or even very dangerous.

This story ties into CoAlpha more than anything else.  And I agree with all of your conclusions.

I'll look into mace.

I remembered this video when I was writing this thread.

The woman's clearly a whore, so I don't think anyone should whiteknight for her. He also didn't start dry humping her without her consent. Though it does seem like she got a little more than she asked for.

However if the circumstance was a little different, let's say she didn't invite the dry humping and was a modest woman - I think this behavior would be grounds to kill the man. But since he's a steroid freak, the only way to put him down would be with the help of multiple men or weapons.

I agree with everything you wrote, especially with the need for weapons.

I've asked myself often what I'd do in a circumstance where a man much larger than myself wanted to hurt me. Most men are too sensitive to admit they're physically weak because it hurts their male ego. Or should I say it hurt's their pride in a society that values physical strength above all else. And such a society is the result of displacing good genetic traits like intelligence, honest, ect, for useless ones like raw brawn. It doesn't hurt my ego, because I know a society based on pure brawn will produce nothing in the long run. Muscle bound freaks are parasites.

All large men benefit at the expense of small men, not just large brutes (though large brutes benefit the most). Its a spillover effect.
There are times of conflict of interest where men are just men, no brutes vs good men distinction (nor continuum for that matter).

Like scarce resources like a pretty girl with two suitors.

I remember about a year and a half ago, an incident with that pretty girl who was interested in me. I left class early during break with a classmate, and she came out the other door with her in 3 months boyfriend to be. This was the second last time she tried to make contact with me. She looked over to me and (silently) vigorously moved her head up and down. Basically, "come talk to me, damnit".

I looked away. Her suitor was right there, and he was much larger than me. She clearly desired me over him (or at least did at that moment in time, Im not going to think about flakiness scenarios etc). But I had an almost second nature fear from being intimidated in the past*.


Another thought. Human beings, like many other animals have stylized behaviors they have to go through before changing state. For example, before a male gets violent, he will raise his voice and get physically tense. Successfully interrupt these and the violence will not occur.

The same applies to courtship. The male and female seem to be 'just friends' for some time before taking further steps. If you're a large male (or larger than the female as a minimum standard), the rest of the immediate group "allows" this deception. However if you're small, you will (probably) have to endure insults like "aren't you too short?" or "look, <your name> is going to get laid <haha>". These, I think, are clear forms of interruption which prevent a basic social and human need to come to fruitation. They are a form of societal disrespect which interrupt the process.

People who do that are not classical "brutes". However, they have it in their head from past experience that smaller men are incapable of retaliating, so disrespect is fun and devoid of consequences.

Stun guns, mace, guns etc solve these issues quite well.
1)That past experience wouldn't exist, or they would have to at least (subconsciously) deal with fact that there could be retaliation (for eg, a 'mad dog strategy' used in the past where a physically weak man overreacted and attacked a disrespecter).
Also,
2) approaching a woman would only entail the fear of rejection by the woman, not other males violence.


*NOTE:Ofc Im not saying I would have necessarily approached if she didnt have a male companion. I may be partially pure loveshy as well. Just saying it was a factor.

Why didn't you kick the bitch out of line for cutting?

Alone Naturally wrote

Why didn't you kick the bitch out of line for cutting?

She was in a car. I'm not strong enough to kick a 250lb 6'5 militant black dude, let alone a 2500lb Honda Civic. She, like most customers, would rather just run me over.

Besides, I'm not paid extra to settle arguments between customers. I don't feel like getting murdered just for the sake of keeping a minimum wage job.

Do they let people conceal carry guns? I don't know what the laws are like where you live, but to me it would be worth it to get a 9mm pistol for $400-$500 just to be on the safe side, and carry it concealed. There's other options too. Have you heard of the pug? It's a .22 revolver that's tiny.

http://www.north-american-arms.com/category/1508-22_Pug_Revolvers.aspx

Naturally filling a rampaging 350lb guy with .22 rounds won't stop him but will definitely slow him down. But that's for on the job. If I were elsewhere in oakland I'd keep a .357 or .44 on my person 24/7.

Yeah,
But, chances are, the cops will put you in jail for defending yourself.

Way I see it...better than being dead.

Tru Dat.

But say hello to 6'5 militant black dude's 6'8 400 lbs cousin called Bubba.

Ive always been a libertarian. Even before I knew what the word meant.

I read a few books on it a few years back, Charles Murray's What It Means to Be a Libertarian comes to mind.

As defined in the book, and probably elsewhere, the core concept of Libertarianism is to deprive people of the use of force, and allow them to form free arrangements and contracts with each other.

Charles Murray wrote

The first legitimate use of the police power is to restrain people from injuring one another. Government accomplishes this end through criminal law and tort law.

Criminal law, rightly construed, forbids the basic offenses that involve initiation of the use of force. Civilized societies have condemned these for millennia: assault, murder, rape, and theft in their many variants. Criminal law also rightly forbids fraud. The difference between criminal law in a libertarian society and in the one we now inhabit is that, while a libertarian society would retain only a tiny fraction of the laws we now have, it would take the few remaining laws extremely seriously. For a libertarian society to function, it is essential that people be deprived of the use of force. In practical terms this means that the use of force is met by such certain and discouraging punishment that few people try to initiate the use of force, and almost all who try live to regret it. Enforcement of criminal law requires police, courts, and prisons.

How does this relate to Men's Size?
Simple - Men's Size is a weapon - a kind of force, and a non-confiscatable one. Given that the police cannot be everywhere at once, nor are inclined, nor trustable, nor swift enough, to partake in everyday matters - this poses a real problem for a libertarian society.

The next best thing to depriving people of force is of course to equalize force. Which is exactly what stun guns, mace and guns do.

Going back to my girlfriend problems - I realize that what it looks like is an issue, its not the overriding one.
A more important (though not total) issue is the feeling of safety I give up by getting an attractive girl (or 'stealing' one away from a larger suitor, or during being watched by people everywhere). I survive by being under the radar in a land of bullies (physical and social).

Given the moderate amount of interest I have received from women, this issue is greater than women's free sexual choice for me.

In a libertarian society, would a man who seduces your wife be punished?

I find the question irrelevant,

But to answer it, Im thinking no system is perfect - so yes - if in that society the wife's sexuality is considered the husbands property (yes, I read your recent postings on niceguy). Because then clearly he has broached your property.

The relevance is that force isn't the only problem, the only thing society needs to regulate.  Libertarians are too keen to enforce all contracts, which can cause other problems.

There are societies where physical violence is a major problem, but in America and Canada, I think sleaze is a bigger problem.

Anyway, something like mace should solve your problems.  I personally can't relate since I never had this kind of expression of interest from women, and because when I was single, I had no fear at all since I didn't value my life.

I think a libertarian society need not be one where people can get away with violating contracts by going behind others' backs. I mean, that's what guns are for, right? But you'd have to be careful or such a society could become very violent very quickly.

To me, size has always been a problem in that I appear weak and puny compared to most men. I'm not that big, and it's definitely a confidence issue. Whenever I see an attractive girl with a boyfriend, he's always larger than her, size-wise. Even if he's shorter than her. I see this as a big obstacle for me, as I want an attractive woman.

Ardia wrote

How does this relate to Men's Size?
Simple - Men's Size is a weapon - a kind of force, and a non-confiscatable one. Given that the police cannot be everywhere at once, nor are inclined, nor trustable, nor swift enough, to partake in everyday matters - this poses a real problem for a libertarian society.

The next best thing to depriving people of force is of course to equalize force. Which is exactly what stun guns, mace and guns do.

Exactly.

I was thinking about this the other day. Since police cannot be relied on and men are naturally unequal, this means men need to come up with their own solutions. One solution I've considered is that men like ourselves should only go out in public in sizable groups. Groups have an intimidation factor, which scares criminals.

Another idea is all of us should train in fire arms and mace use. Body building and karate is useless when confronting men whom are naturally bigger and better fighters then you.

Lastly, strict safety guidelines should apply to our women. Women, especially young women, should never go out in public without male guardianship. Male guardianship should start with fathers and move it's way down the chain to brothers. Extended male family members can offer surplus guardianship where needed. Once a woman marries, guardianship should become the primary responsibility of the husband's family. This includes a son of mature age eventually guarding his mother in absence of his father.

I plan to make a thread entitled "What gives men power?". In this thread I'll discuss what gives men power over other men.

I'm a big advocate of firearms ownership and concealed carry training. I can't emphasize it enough. Guys like us need to be armed for self-defense purposes. There is no leeway here.

I also think it's good for making a guy more "alpha." I mean, it just feels manly, and it's a good confidence boost.

Scorpius wrote

I'm a big advocate of firearms ownership and concealed carry training. I can't emphasize it enough. Guys like us need to be armed for self-defense purposes. There is no leeway here.

I also think it's good for making a guy more "alpha." I mean, it just feels manly, and it's a good confidence boost.

The only problem is laws supporting use of firearm's may be weak. How effective is using a firearm on criminals, if you're put in jail by a kangaroo court of liberals for defending yourself? We need a new equalizing invention that has the power of firearms, yet isn't lethal. Until this comes along men like us will be forced to kill criminals and go to jail for defending ourselves.