Charles Bukowski is a whiny little bitch,

[balkprParticipant 26]

I was looking through the posters, and I have to call this one out. Charles Bukowski is a whiny little bitch. He’s living a miserable, s~~~ty life. Why? Is it because he has a miserable, s~~~ty job? No it’s because he’s a miserable s~~~ty man.

Chuck, grow the f~~~ up and take responsibility for your life. The minute you turned 18 you were doing exactly what you wanted to be doing, you were exactly where you wanted to be, and you have been every minute since then.

How could Charles B enjoy the existence he describes? The first step is realizing that every morning, he has the freedom to smash his alarm clock with a sledge hammer, keep his little toes under the warm covers and wallow in his own filth, sleep until noon, then walk around like a sweaty, stinking, unkempt slop. Every morning Charles B decides that the consequences of that decision are too great, so he goes to work. If Charles B doesn’t like his current life situation, he can change it. If Charles B doesn’t know what a better situation would be, he could do some work on figuring out what that might be and work towards creating it. Apparently, Charles B isn’t doing that. What else could Charles B do to enjoy his existence?

Chuck, I’m sorry your daddy never taught you this so I will, stop being so worried about what’s going on with everyone else. It’s not your job to worry about them. You focus on you. Unless what those other people are doing affects you then it’s none of your g*d damn business.

Charles B’s priorities are so out of whack. So what exactly is so wrong with Charles B’s job? Let’s see…he has to get up early, to an alarm clock and drive through traffic. Yes, that’s unpleasant. I agree. P~~~ing, s~~~ting, eating, taking care of his personal hygiene and putting some clothes on are things most grown ass men are going to want to do on a daily basis even without a job. I’m still not sure what seems to be so dissatisfying…
Does the job suck so bad he wants to slit his wrists and hang himself every day after work?
Does he get paid minimum wage to dig ditches under a tropical sun during the hottest month of the year?
Charles B doesn’t mention any of that all Charles B seems to be concerned about is that he thinks he’s making a lot of money for someone else.

Well guess what Chuck, how much money someone else makes is none of your g*ddamn business.

Who exactly is this “someone else”? His boss? His boss’s boss? Charles B doesn’t know.
What exactly is “a lot of money”? How does he know how much “someone else” is making? Is his employer publically trade, and if so how much would he get if he divided last year’s net earnings by every employee in the company? Would that make him happy? Hell no, and he wouldn’t take the time to do the math on that anyway. If his company isn’t publically traded, how does he know that they’re not losing money right now and keeping him on because they have work that needs to get done in order to keep on?

We don’t know if Charles B likes what he does when he gets to work. Let’s assume that the expectations and environment don’t suck. His $50,000 per year salary doesn’t suck, and Mr. ‘Someone Else’ makes $1,000,000. If that’s the case, then what the bloody f~~~ difference does it matter to him what someone else is making? If he can find a better job, go find one. Would he rather take the digging ditches in the sun job, make $17,000 per year because at that job Mr. Someone Else only makes $30,000? Would that make Charles B happier and more satisfied with his life? If so he’s a mother f~~~er that needs a bitch slap.

As for the gratitude, Chuck, you’re exactly where you want to be. You get to continue to be there because someone hasn’t canned your miserable s~~~ty ass. The first step to not being a miserable s~~~ty man is to stop hating and, at least in the privacy of your own mind, uttering an inaudible “thanks”.

Ball Keeper

[Faust For ScienceParticipant 22558]

A good rant can only be appreciated if the readers know the details of the subject material which is being discussed.

[balkprParticipant 26]

Faust For Science wrote:

A good rant can only be appreciated if the readers know the details of the subject material which is being discussed.

I don’t understand what you mean, please explain.

Ball Keeper

[KeymasterKeymaster]

That’s like saying YOU are a whiny little bitch.

He made the point +40 years before you already.

His entire point is HIM not understanding why OTHER men do this. It’s not even about about him. It’s about working men in general. He doesn’t once use the term “I” , “me” or speak about himself, so where in the universe of f~~~ did you interpret this to be about HIM?

balkpr wrote:

Who exactly is this “someone else”? His boss? His boss’s boss? Charles B doesn’t know.

It’s YOU who “doesn’t know”. He’s talking about any employer. A boss. A chief. A CEO with subordinates and employees. How is that not clear.

Stop being a …… what did you call it?
Oh yes, a whiny little bitch.

balkpr wrote:

I don’t understand what you mean, please explain.

He means in a classy way to tell you that your rant about the personal dealings of the author is silly unless you know the personal details of the subject you are criticizing.

If you keep doing what you've always done... you're gonna keep getting what you always got.

[sidecarParticipant 35837]

When, exactly, did they stop teaching basic reading comprehension in the schools? Because someone clearly didn’t get the message.

[KeymasterKeymaster]

sidecar wrote:

When, exactly, did they stop teaching basic reading comprehension in the schools? Because someone clearly didn’t get the message.

It’s anybody’s guess how it’s possible to imagine and interpret multiple paragraphs and x-teen questions from a single quote phrased as a QUESTION , and then “require clarification” on a comment in response to it.

balkpr wrote:

I don’t understand what you mean, please explain.

I don’t understand how the OP doesn’t understand. Please explain.

If you keep doing what you've always done... you're gonna keep getting what you always got.

[SlayherParticipant 2074]

Anyone else sensing a ‘Winner alarm’ alert?

[KillmandrillParticipant 497]

What hasn´t been mentioned before, I see this as a rhetorical question, so a question not to be answered in a satisfying way or at all, more something to mind about…

balkpr wrote:

No it’s because he’s a miserable s~~~ty man.

So miserable that people still remember him long after his death, so s~~~ty that people still read his books and write books about him! He left a footprint in history!

Ah, women. They make the highs higher and the lows more frequent. Friedrich Nietzsche

[AnthonyParticipant 2281]

I remember seeing this poster a while back. I always thought the context of the question was about marriage and husbands expecting to be “grateful” to end up doing that kind of s~~~.

Even if it were taken completely out of context, why in the hell would you want to do that kind of s~~~ in the first place if you could afford not to? No one in their right mind would actually do a s~~~ty 9-5 hour job if they could afford to do something more enjoyable with their lives.

Once you have a Fleshlight real vaginas become worthless.

[xlrsnbrgParticipant 1786]

I don’t like that quote either. You don’t work so that someone else makes money; you work so that you make money, it’s called a salary. If you decide to spend it on women it’s your problem.

He also assumes that people hate their jobs, which is not true, a lot of people enjoy what they do. Jobs that are hard or sometimes boring are not necessarily s~~~ty.

I also have a friend who’s been unemployed for over a year. He would be very “grateful for the opportunity” to work again.

A man shouldn't make his life's objective to be on the side of the majority, but to avoid finding himself in the ranks of the insane. (Marcus Aurelius)

[Anonymous 3]

balkpr wrote:

Chuck, grow the f~~~ up and take responsibility for your life. The minute you turned 18 you were doing exactly what you wanted to be doing, you were exactly where you wanted to be, and you have been every minute since then.

In my opinion, this is an arsehole thing to say.

Sure, in principle, we have control over our lives once we reach 18. However, in reality we are subject to society. Most of us can’t simply do what we want. Things aren’t that simple. There are parameters within which we have to live and work. Most of us didn’t know and weren’t told, how the world really works. We had to find out, figure it out for ourselves. You don’t just reach a certain age and then ‘know’ everything. You don’t just reach a certain age and then suddenly start doing whatever you want, where you want and how you want.

For instance, most men who make the mistake of getting married or devoting their lives to women in some way do so because society has indoctrinated them that way and they also have hormonal urges. Men have agency and can make their own decisions and rise above this, but that requires education, knowledge and awareness, which can only be gained through the right influences or by having an unusually inquisitive mind and finding out, or by just being the type of person who is independent-minded.

I also don’t think Bukowski was complaining about the facts of life, as such. The way I interpret what he says in that quote is he is lamenting not the way things are, but rather the fact that most men don’t develop beyond it.

[Faust For ScienceParticipant 22558]

balkpr wrote:

I don’t understand what you mean, please explain.

I posted my previous comment before you re-edited you post with the picture. Still, a good rant requires given details behind the rant.

Without details for readers, the readers only see someone complaining something without knowing what that something is.

[IAmManParticipant 228]

Anonymous wrote:

Men have agency and can make their own decisions and rise above this, but that requires education, knowledge and awareness, which can only be gained through the right influences or by having an unusually inquisitive mind and finding out, or by just being the type of person who is independent-minded.

Or in my case, being so thick skulled and whipped that I only learn after way to many bad decisions blow up in my face that I can no longer deny reality. Oh well. To better times and better decisions!

[RoyDalParticipant]

I agree with Keymaster on this question.

Society asks MGTOWs: Why are you not making more tax-slaves?

[balkprParticipant 26]

Keymaster wrote:

That’s like saying YOU are a whiny little bitch.

He made the point +40 years before you already.

His entire point is HIM not understanding why OTHER men do this. It’s not even about about him. It’s about working men in general. He doesn’t once use the term “I” , “me” or speak about himself, so where in the universe of f~~~ did you interpret this to be about HIM?

balkpr wrote:

Who exactly is this “someone else”? His boss? His boss’s boss? Charles B doesn’t know.

It’s YOU who “doesn’t know”. He’s talking about any employer. A boss. A chief. A CEO with subordinates and employees. How is that not clear.

Stop being a …… what did you call it?
Oh yes, a whiny little bitch.

balkpr wrote:

I don’t understand what you mean, please explain.

He means in a classy way to tell you that your rant about the personal dealings of the author is silly unless you know the personal details of the subject you are criticizing.

Keymaster,

You make a good point. I was sloppy in reading the quote. He never said anything about himself. Regardless, the premise of my his question remains the same, as does my critique of it.

The premise of the question, as I understand is, “How can we enjoy getting up, getting dressed, driving to work, and working if our work allows our boss, leader, chief or CEO to make ‘a lot’ more than we do?”

The answer is to let go of bitterness and envy and detach our individual happiness and satisfaction in life from what’s going on with someone else.

If I get up, get dressed and drive to work at a job I’m OK with for a salary of $50,000. Being p~~~ed off and upset because my CEO makes $1,000,000 is a s~~~ty way to live.

Ditching that job, only to get up and get dressed to drive to a different job doing the same work and making $30,000 simply because the CEO only makes $35,000, is stupid and isn’t going to make me happier.

So in answer to CB’s question, how could a man enjoy what he describes my answer is: he can in enjoy it by owning his s~~~ and accepting the fact that he’s there because at that moment in his life he wants to be, and by realizing that his happiness isn’t dependent on how much someone else is making.

Better questions to ask would be:

How is a man supposed to enjoy getting up getting dressed …
… to do a job that sucks the life out of him?
… to have a female dominated HR culture breath down his neck?
… to work for bosses that degrade him or treat him badly?

those would be good questions. To me, what CB asked on this poster reveal character flaws.

Ball Keeper

[balkprParticipant 26]

Anonymous wrote:

balkpr wrote:

Chuck, grow the f~~~ up and take responsibility for your life. The minute you turned 18 you were doing exactly what you wanted to be doing, you were exactly where you wanted to be, and you have been every minute since then.

In my opinion, this is an arsehole thing to say.

Jack,

In my opinion this was NOT an asshole thing to say. It is however one of the most bitter, reddest pills we’ll ever have to swallow.

Ball Keeper

[balkprParticipant 26]

Slayher wrote:

Anyone else sensing a ‘Winner alarm’ alert?

What’s a winner alarm?

Ball Keeper

[KeymasterKeymaster]

balkpr wrote:

The premise of the question, as I understand is, “How can we enjoy getting up, getting dressed, driving to work, and working if our work allows our boss, leader, chief or CEO to make ‘a lot’ more than we do?”

It’s pretty clear he’s asking the question most working men never will when they are sitting at a red light. Going to do something – without questioning WHY – or if he even enjoys it all.

If you want to rip it apart and look for flaws, start with the word “ENJOY”.

You’re not even SUPPOSED to “enjoy” your job. That’s why it’s called a “JOB” (JUST OVER BROKE)

I was once asked in an interview what I LIKE to do. (in terms of work / tasks). I answered that it’s irrelevant. I asked the f~~~ing interviewer… would you ask a fireman what kind of fires he LIKES to put out? He’s not SUPPOSED to like it. He’s just supposed to DO it. That’s why it’s called a job. He’s paid to do it, and does it out of a sense of duty.

I am paid to “put out fires” of a different sort.
I do not “enjoy” waking up at 2AM to do this.
Even when I can invoice more for it.

The point is not to “enjoy” your job in the first place. You are paid to do it. Full stop. If you don’t like it, or it doesn’t pay enough, or you are unfulfilled and think that’s a reason NOT to do it….. QUIT.

If cleaning toilets for a living paid $X million a year,
I f~~~ing PROMISE you, I would “enjoy” it.

But nobody gets to say “let go of your bitterness” if I needed to clean toilets for $30K. I can be as bitter about that as I f~~~ing want. I am not required to be happy to clean s~~~ for $30K. So why do you think that a man who does it SHOULD be happy about it and enjoy it?

balkpr wrote:

The answer is to let go of bitterness and envy and detach our individual happiness and satisfaction in life from what’s going on with someone else.

balkpr wrote:

If I get up, get dressed and drive to work at a job I’m OK with for a salary of $50,000. Being p~~~ed off and upset because my CEO makes $1,000,000 is a s~~~ty way to live.

I don’t know how you can read that in what he’s asking. Or even imply such a thing.

Would you recommend the Phillipino workers who polish the screens on iPads for pennies a day let go of their “bitterness” when creating a $1200 something for Steve Jobs?

Who are you kidding here?

You’re not REQUIRED to “like” it.
You’re only required to DO IT.

That’s what a “job” is.

A job is only something you need to make enough money to do the things you want to do when you’re not working (for someone else). You don’t consider yourself unfortunate and are perfectly content doing that. But would your CEO be as content to work for YOU???? F~~~ no. He would think the same thing as Bukowski!!! And he would ask the same question.

He’s not going to be content to work for anyone else.
He would rather YOU work for HIM.

Are you going to say to him “let go of your bitterness, man”???

People are not required to like their jobs. They are only paid to do them.

• You need to be reminded of that.
• Employers need to be reminded of that.
• And every working man needs to be reminded of that.

So the Bukowski question asking “how can a man enjoy it” isn’t about “enjoying” it at all. It’s about asking himself the question. Most people don’t even ask themselves the question.

It’s not the answer that drives us.
It’s the QUESTION.

The Bukowski quote isn’t about HIM. He’s actually talking about people like YOU. People who are “happy” working for someone else for $50K. You think the question is about HIM. It’s not. It’s about you!

“How in the hell could a man enjoy being awakened by an alarm clock, leap out of bed, dress, force-feed, s~~~, p~~~, brush teeth and hair, and fight traffic to get to a place where essentially you made lots of money for somebody else and were asked to be grateful for the opportunity to do so?”

What you do every day, is his version of hell. If anything, he would look at YOU and say “how the f~~~ can you enjoy that? stop being someone else’s bitch”. You think you’re criticizing him… but he’s already way ahead of you and he’s criticizing you!

You’re just not “whining” about it.
But it would bug the s~~~ out of him.

What you “enjoy”…. he would HATE.

If you keep doing what you've always done... you're gonna keep getting what you always got.

[sidecarParticipant 35837]

@balkpr: Look, it’s easy to understand. Charles Bukowski isn’t talking to you. He’s talking to that judas goat asshat Wilcox from Prager Looniversity.

[Deadly RaverParticipant]

Damn man. You jumped off the wrong side of the cliff on this one. As has been mentioned above, he was speaking on a praeger U videoclip that got beat to hell by many a MGTOW, including one mr. Charles Bukowski. Basically, praeger U’s brad Wilcox was trying to say that the virtual slavery that marriage has become is a good thing. Charles B ripped his argument to shreds in one statement. It got so bad that brad even ended up backtracking later on down the road.

Simplest way to put it is this: Charles has already done the part you’re trying to do now. Simple misunderstanding, everybody can move along. Nothing more to see here.

Learn from the past, Control the present, and you will know the Future.

[Author]

Posts