Belinda Luscomb, writing for feminist mouthpiece Time Magazine, exposes the fact that young women make more than young men in virtually all big cities in the United States.
The triumphalism so clearly on display in the article shows the feminist claim that all they want is “equality” for the bald-faced lie that it is. No, they want supremacy, and they have demonstrated time and again that they will use the state to achieve it. In fact, it is through government interference that young women have gained the upper hand over men. Not only do public schools favor female learning styles, guaranteeing that there will be more women in college than men, affirmative action and mandated “equality” grants and government contracting rules ensure that women are well-represented in highly-paid jobs that were previously majority male. In the meanwhile, predominantly male jobs that women do not care for are eliminated or have seen wages depressed by an influx of illegal labor, aided and abetted by government negligence. Additionally, private sector pay has declined or stagnated while public sector pay has gone on to all-time highs as women come to dominate the taxpayer-funded jobs.
Essentially, the US has a two-tier system of socialism for female employees and unregulated capitalism for men, putting male employees at a huge disadvantage. The question this raises is where will the money to keep this system operating come from as men are squeezed into poverty and can no longer afford the onerous tax burden that places women in a position of supremacy?
{ 82 comments… read them below or add one }
Does that means that they will finally STFU about the page gap, glass ceiling and all that bunch of crap?
Most public employees (and make no mistake, most women with high-paying jobs are there) only care about squeezing the tax base for all it’s worth. Everything else is secondary.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
71 
1
Of course they won’t STFU – they’ll just find something else to bitch about.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
53 
3
I am sure that feminists will be able to spin this information into a “…hits women hardest” story of woe and misery (and then blame men).
Or, this story will be completely ignored because it doesn’t fit the victim-based narrative of feminist ideology.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
73 
0
I would say that there is a very positive side to it: either women become the breadwinners or they remain single.
In either case, it sets men free from the duties of being the breadwinner. In the best situation, men will NO LONGER have to work long and killing hours because they need less to live on than women do.
What will come out of that is that men will have an easier life, while women toil to bring the bread on the table.
I know a number of young men who think exactly in that line of thoughts: an easier, less frustrating life.
That’s the + side of the coin.
Not all bad, innit?
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
45 
8
“Or, this story will be completely ignored because it doesn’t fit the victim-based narrative of feminist ideology.”
Gotta wonder about this. I bet money that this will be spun in a way that suggests that women need to save men by consolidating more power. That the more politcal and sociological pull womyn have, the safer and more fair it will be for everyone, regardless the ubiquitous evidence pointing to the opposite.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
47 
1
It shows that the female species don’t care about men. They only care about themselves. Every male is on his own, whether he’s a child, a teen or a man.
the feminists system of onerous taxation is not feasible. it will cripple the US economy.
if you see a man suffering, sitting and bleeding quietly. people would assume he deserved it. After all to the women, he’s just the brute or some bum that don’t deserve nothing.
anyways I would bet that other comments would confirm the screwiness of the state of the affairs
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
54 
1
It comes from debt on top of more debt. We’re broke now!
We’re really teetering on the brink here, and few seem to care.
Obama is ignoring it, hoping it’ll all just go away. His agenda is social equality through redistribution of wealth. It’s out of step with the current economic situation. All that time and energy on ObamaCare, while 20% of our workforce is unemployed, the majority of which is men.
What will they do? Just go off and die somewhere?
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
40 
0
Why can’t they see that they are destroying the whole culture? Life will only end up worse for everyone this way.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
31 
1
Actually, the laws of hypergamy will create a condition where women are the breadwinners AND remain single.
If I could figure out a way to invest in pet futures, I’d be rich in about 20 years!
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
35 
0
The whole “women are paid less than men waahh!” idea just got thrown in the garbage can.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
39 
0
Well it gives us men some ammunition to fire back on the old 70 cents to the dollar claim.
In order to counter this the feminist will now have to throw out circumstances and they managed to eliminate circumstances as a defense for pay disparity a while back. In fact this may lend some weight to the current wal-mart fight in allowing them to break the million woman strong law suit down to individuals. I don’t really know what the total number of women is that have joined this suit but if circumstances can be brought to bear it could be a real victory for men’s rights or at least a defeat for the feminist juggernaut.
Like or Dislike:
14 
0
Seems that Vox has picked up your “liberation to chattel” column, Welmer.
Congrats!
The word is getting out there. Now prepare for the ‘Vox-i-lanche!’
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
22 
0
It shows that the female species don’t care about men. They only care about themselves.
The problem is that most women don’t know what they want or what’s good for them. I am beginning to think life is getting worse for women as well as men, not better. I don’t see, for instance, easy access to abortion as beneficial to women, but it is women who fight so hard for this “right” and make the idea of “choice” sacrosanct so that if you so much as question it, you’re anti-woman (even if you ARE a woman).
I know I’m going off-topic a bit (as I tend to do), but that sentence stuck out for me. If feminists cared about women, they would care about men. They’re a bunch of bitter, angry individuals who just want to fight about something and feel righteous about it. It’s all about winning a battle at any cost; cutting off their noses to spite their faces.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
34 
2
“The question this raises is where will the money to keep this system operating come from”
The gub’mint will just keep printing dollars. Eventually, other governments will dump their soon-to-be-worthless dollars for other sound currencies, and things will probably get interesting in a hurry. Oh, have you been watching the currency markets lately? I think single-day volumes have been ~ US$4 Trillion. That’s a lot of currency washing back and forth. Someone is getting nervous.
Rebel- you are right on the mark. A major ace up the sleeves of men is our ability to have a great life on relatively little income. As Fred Reed recently put it, a lot of guys can be pretty happy with casual sex, scuba gear, and a Harley Sportster. “The girls go by, dressed up for each other.”- Van Morrison
Another thing that will be fun to watch is the fur that will fly when public agencies start having to really compete for the scraps of public money to keep their bloated fiefdoms alive. This will be heighten by the fact that a lot of the cost-cutters will be steely-eyed women, not simpering white knights who might be swayed by a tearful plea. What might be more interesting is the sea-change in women’s attitudes about government largesse that will occur when it’s predominately their wages that are being siphoned off for programs that support . . . other women and other women’s children.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
30 
1
Is anybody surprised?
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
26 
0
Way back in the 80′s, when my son was still a little boy, they were told to write on the topic of women working and being President and things like that. Liberal, feminist propaganda.
I remember he wrote at that tender age, yes, the women should do all those things so the men could go fishing all day. Even at that age, the big picture was obvious to him.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
39 
0
Taxes paid by men are like generalized ex-wife support payments. Women do not need to marry and divorce anymore for obtainig free money, it is the task of government today.
The money for the women will come in future as in the past from the work of men, willing or not. Here is where they get the money.
Women do not and can not care for the future. If the Western world is ending, because of them, they are unaware of it, because of their nature.
If they are not stopped in a way or another, they (with the government hand) will simply force men on more and more taxes, will restrict more and more men’s rights. Probably they plan to build forced labor camps (FEMA camps?) for the male population, like the prisons are today.
I urge everyone to understand we can not make females reason, it is silly asking “but they do not understand doing so they damage theirselves, the economy and blah blah…”. I have read those questions too much times, here and in other similar sites.
There are women who can understand this, but unfortunately they are statistically irrelelvant.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
41 
1
If and when the downturn becomes worse. Women are naturally cold hearted. they would cut the funds off and divert them to other projects.
It would be interesting to hear when women finally make objections when paying for other women and women’s children, rather for their own selves. the irony would be, you want equality well you got. in being shafted by the big government. And the irony would be bittersweet
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
25 
0
All this does is price women out of the dating market. Women tend to like men that are more successful than they are. Just the way it is.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
43 
15
This statistic is quite obviously the result of the Mancession, since quite a lot of women, possibly a majority, work in government jobs that are not in danger of being downsized. Well, not yet anyway.
Of course feminists will continue to whine about their “70 cents”, because logic and facts are irrelevant. The fact that 20-something women are now getting paid more than men in their peer group will mean nothing to them. Look, back in the 90′s the AAUW trumpeted their bogus study “proving” that fewer women in college was evidence of the evil conspiracy of Patriarchy to keep them down. Anyone seen AAUW running the same study, with the same method, now? Nah. Because it was never about equality in the first place.
What’s going to hit the wall in a while is government at the state and local level. Uncle Sam can print money, and even hand it out to states to prop up SEIU and teacher union jobs, but not forever. At some point, towns, cities and states will have to start cutting jobs. Sure, they’ll start with the firemen and the cops. But eventually, the executive assistants and the mid level managers and even HR will feel the axe. Then…THEN…we’ll hear an ululation, a scream, about the economy. Because single women will be affected, and single women are the biggest constituency for the ruling party.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
34 
0
All this does is price women out of the dating market. Women tend to like men that are more successful than they are. Just the way it is.
It won’t do that, Laura, for the 20-somethings. They’ll just line up for the de facto harems of the few Alpha men. Then when they get to be around 30, they’ll discover that in order to “settle” for a Beta, they’ll also have to plan to support him. Or be a single mother with a bastard child. Neither option will be very appealing to the Princesses, that’s for sure.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
58 
0
“Why can’t they see that they are destroying the whole culture?”
Because it’s about them only. “The whole culture” is not their concern. Should the culture collapse, it will be because men let it happen and women will rise up to reconstruct it as an openly matriarchal egalitatarian multi-cultural state of endless love and understanding . They see whatever they do to advance their cause as strategically benovolent to everyone, but especially women.
“The whole “women are paid less than men waahh!” idea just got thrown in the garbage can.”
This article is VERY important and needs to be referred to and referenced whenever possible.
This is not a matter of if or when it happens.
It’s happening RIGHT NOW!
Governments are barely hanging on.
Everybody who can’t print their own money is facing a “looming budget crisis”. This ain’t chicken little crap here folks. It’s real.
And no Barry, small businesses don’t need low interest loans from the government “to help stimulate the economy”. They need CUSTOMERS!
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
33 
0
Eventually they can recreate the wonderful situation that black woman enjoy in all corners of our society: free-roaming feral men, unencombered by any sense of a need to meet social norms, mercilessly preying on woman for sex, housing, money and bragging rights. That’s the topsy-turvey world socialism and feminism will deliver to us.
Already many young men have no interest in having kids, preferring to bed woman for sport, or “the game” as they call it. Men have choices woman don’t, including preying on them as petty criminals.
Social orders that are not based on the reality can only be imposed from above for so long.
Have another cosmo while you can, girls. A hard rain’s gonna fall…
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
48 
2
@Laura: Still feel sorry for those old feminists? Even if they’re admitting their mistakes. The damage is already done.
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Gx1080 September 1, 2010 at 09:18
”Does that means that they will finally STFU about the page gap, glass ceiling and all that bunch of crap?”
….
You know they won’t.
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Zammo September 1, 2010 at 09:34
”Or, this story will be completely ignored because it doesn’t fit the victim-based narrative of feminist ideology.”
…….
This information will be happily omitted that conflicts with their argument. Just like everything else they present.
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::;;::::::::::::
Rebel September 1, 2010 at 09:36
What will come out of that is that men will have an easier life, while women toil to bring the bread on the table.
…………….
@Rebel: It’s not going to be anything like that, remember the nature of women.
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Gentlemen, the hypocrisy continues and they’re that confident they’re smiling as they’re doing it.
Like or Dislike:
11 
0
In the article it is said that the gender war is over… NOT!
It just went underground, which makes it even more dangerous.
In this time of crisis, I would recommend to young men that they should change their lifestyle and live on smaller means: the more they do that, the better they will be prepared for the coming armaggedon in economy.
Save as much money as you can and, whenever possible, try to avoid paying income tax. There exist many ways of doing that.
Stack up and hoard for future needs. And don’t marry, for even if women now have the upperhand as far as revenue is concerned, rest assured that women will still insist on cricifying the men they are divorcing.
Also, in the said article, it is proposed that marriage and family are more important to men than women… If this is true, then the fems hold yet another weapon against men. So, men must disengage completely from family and take the necessary measures to avoid fatherhood. I am thinking about vasectomy or any other technique that will prevent the birth of children.
The other day, I read in the Pravda that marriage is almost dead now in Russia. Don’t kid yourselves: this is coming here, too.
And I believe that this will free men forever.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
31 
1
If you have read “The SCUM Manifesto” and “The Red Stockings” manifestos, this was planned ahead years ago. Conisider the many types of feminism. NOW feminists are too late to keep from reaping what they have sown. Watch to see what they N.O.W. have to say.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
16 
0
Rebel, you need to teach us single men how to avoid the income tax extortion scam. Not all of us have done the research, or even know where to start to do the research.
Like or Dislike:
11 
3
Interesting to speculate on the end point of this process. I don’t know if forever free is where we’ll find ourselves.
I was thinking only this morning how things have changed since I began my working life. The systemizer in me sees a 4-box matrix with axes Straight Men / Women and Minorities and Private Sector / Public Sector. Twenty five years ago the occupants of the Straight Men / Private Sector box were still in the driver’s seat. Now if you’re in that box you’re on the bottom of the heap looking up at the privileged class occupying the Women and Minorities / Public Sector box. This is not good for the USA for reasons that will be obvious to straight men.
Forever free maybe. We’ll see.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
17 
0
I have a question for the men here. I am young, Generation Y male with a decent amount of financial assets for my age, yet am very scared that some female will try to confiscate it through sadistic measures. Other than the obvious tricks of driving a used car, wearing inexpensive clothes, and going to a cheap gym, how do I avoid attracting attention from females?
It seems the key to success in life is to avoid standing out. But does anyone have other tricks to avoid female attention or female suspicion? Thanks in advance and sorry that this is probably in the wrong thread, it’s just a concern I have since many of you are stating that females only pursue men for money (or essentially, they do so).
Hot debate. What do you think?
16 
8
– The stated goal of the radical element of the 1980s was to break down the patriachry. I was present to hear this stated numerous times in after-hours university socialist public conference meetings. (I was on a huge learning curve back then, absorbing everything possible and those meetings were provided at no cost. No, I am not a scocialist). The old adage, “Be carefull what you wish for. It may come to pass” could come about.
Even the idea of house-wives or stay-at-home mothers being given a salary was one of the radical ideas of the 1980s. Back then government funding for “women’s” (that is, feminist) groups was at a low level. Interest from elected reps. and bureaucrats was even lower. This idea of salaried moms has recently caught bureaucratic attention.
So, it is not out of the equation to advance legitimate men’s concerns to the legislative realm. The growing numbers of the mrm can not be ignored in a representative system. This would, however, throw a monkey wrench into the liberal corporate free trade globalist camp, one of the driving forces behind feminism.
Regarding the wage/gender gap topic of this post: feminists repeatedly took umbrage to the wage/gender gap, considering the gap was mostly fictional, but now take delight in women being paid more money? Bit of a disconnect, simultaneous hate/love. Indicative of true intent and nature.
When adjusting for marital status, hours and education single women over 30 earned .99 of what similar statused men did.
- 1982 Block/Walker
“Discrimination, Affirmative Action and Equal Opportunity”, The Fraser Institute.
How many more examples such as these are required to convince the decidedly unconvincable? Short answer – wrong question.
Like or Dislike:
12 
0
Unless you have a heavily fortified compound or private island somewhere, you won’t be ‘free’ for much longer than the rest when the tab is called in.
For those of us young white males that actually give a shit whether society can sustain itself things look unremittingly bleak. Being Cassandra sucks ass.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
22 
1
Salary is just a superficial representation of employment worth. Some people make less, but may be more inspired, less stressed, or less caught up in office politics.
Like or Dislike:
14 
3
Cheer? Yeah right. I saw this over at Shakesville earlier today. (I won’t offend you all by linking to it but the post is called “I Write Letters”.)
I would have actually called it, “Young Women Are Now Paid More Than Young Men In Some Places, Feminists Flip the Fuck Out and Cry Foul in Another Way To Reclaim Their Victimhood”.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
23 
0
Women are, and have always been, power sluts. They will fuck, suck, dance, strip, lie, cheat, steal, or whatever it takes … to gain more power. They can’t help themselves. Its in their DNA.
Once men learn this, and feminists are doing their best to expose their power slut attributes, men will revolt against all women and enslave them.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
29 
3
I worked for several Fortune 500 high tech companies most of my life.
I now work part-time as a consultant for various county government agencies. I make half the money I used to make, but only work half the time. My stress level is nil. I make just enough in payments to the IRS to keep them from putting me in jail or enact garnishment proceedings.
I’ve stopped feeding the beast.
I’m the quintessential beta male awoken from his slumber.
I wear it like a badge of honor.
There’s many more just like me.
The government isn’t sustaining itself without us contributing.
We were once the majority tax base. Now we’re hiding in a metaphorical Galt’s Gulch. Leave us alone!
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
31 
0
Tip #1
Do you get a refund from the government every year?
That’s YOUR MONEY!
Make sure YOU owe them, just to the point of not underpaying.
People who jump for joy because they get money back from the government
are idiots. The government keeps your money all year and uses it.
Understand the tax code. It’s on the internet. There are books too.
Like or Dislike:
15 
1
Yep, the present reality for Russian women is the future reality for American women. The parallels of a fallen nuclear superpower are going to be parodic in the extreme.
-High crime
-Avg. life expectancy of 59 years for men
-Rampant alcoholism among men (probly paralleled more by drug abuse in the States, but also alcoholism)
-Wage slavery for women instead (as per above article)
-A collapsed and inefficient industrial economy based around government-cozy oligarchies tied to organized crime (the bailouts will be just the beginning, this will also be paralleled by )
-A collapsed birthrate and collapsing population (as in New England already)
-Islam and non-ethnic Russian nationalist seccessionism nipping at the heels of the southern borders (parallels in the U.S. are obvious)
The only difference is that Russia gets a slight reprieve for two reasons:
1. old Soviet socialist infrastructure and cheap housing makes it possible for people to live cheaply. In America, if you can’t afford a car, wtf are you supposed to do?
2. Russia is reaping windfall profits from oil/gas sales. No such parallels in the U.S., as without any effective American muscle, the only true remaining export America has (intellectual property) will be completely devalued and stolen around the world with impunity.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
29 
0
Yep, it will be. It’s just like the feminist reaction to proof that gender differences are innate and not a social construct. Every couple months a new study by geneticists, FMRI studies from neurologists and other fields disproves that feminist first principles. And the reaction is always the same:
1. Denial (this isn’t true!!!!)
2. Snark
3. Anger/outright hostility towards the researchers (teh studies autors were menz!! of course theyd make stuff up to help the Patriarchy)
4. Inane allegations of conspiracy (the university took a donation from Rupert Murdoch… the majority of tenured professors at teh univerity are male.. etc.)
5. Finding some small and insignificant “problem” with the methodology of the study.
6. Declare the study/report “debunked”
7. Call it a day, and ignore it from then on.
8. If anyone ever mentions it again, declare firmly that it was “debunked”, and throw out a “lzolzz wat about teh menz?”
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
26 
0
“Rebel, you need to teach us single men how to avoid the income tax extortion scam. Not all of us have done the research, or even know where to start to do the research.”
Firstly, I shall not recommend “cheating” right here. (that’s up to you and your imagination).
Here’s what I did. I did some research and comparisons and found an accountant who knows all intricacies of income tax laws. He was also a university professor.
He asked me how much income tax I wanted to pay.
I replied that I wanted something that will not draw gvt attention. (I’m what you call a ghost)
Although his fees were quite large ($700) for making an income tax report, I ended up paying only 5% of total revenue in income tax, instead of the usual 40 to 50%.
He told me that the law does not expect me to show profit during years 1, 2 and 3 of a new business.
Note that this is not cheating…
Cheating would be to close the business after the 3d year and reopen under another name. Nobody can tell, but that would be cheating. See what I mean?
After ten years of being my own boss, I ended up paying an average of 3.5% of income tax a year.
I used every little minute detail the law authorized: I creamed it so well that there was hardly anything left that I had to pay.
So, in all, it cost me $10 000 total of accountant services and that saved me more than $175K in useless income tax over a period of ten years.
All legally.
Exploit the “holes”…….
To me, this is an investment. A worthwhile investment, in my opinion.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
21 
2
– The stated goal of the radical element of the 1980s was to break down the patriachry. – the universe
Indeed – I should have remembered that. No wonder we’re screwed.
Like or Dislike:
4 
0
– The stated goal of the radical element of the 1980s was to break down the patriachry. – the universe
Indeed – I should have remembered that. No wonder we’re screwed.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Ha Ha! I strongly suspect you already knew the answer to this as you wrote it.
Since when in history have women ever been satisfied with their lot? It’s just not in their make-up. Eternal torment is their reward, though one can’t help but think they must have developed a robust tolerance of it. Obviously, they’ll just pick something else to moan about.
I noticed in the wake of the ‘woman drops cat in bin’ video scandal recently a hint of one of the many new directions the yentas will take. It seemed rather improbable that such an exposure of a woman being cruel to animals would go unanswered for long. Sure enough, within a day my local newspaper had a newspaper article about 5 boys who had reportedly kicked a puppy around a park. No video of course, only a woman holding the puppy declaring that the incident was sickening, and then very predictably going on to tell us that ‘cruelty to animals has been shown to be linked to violence and sexual offences’ (the puppy was sporting no injuries by the way, and looked to be in the rudest of health – we only had her word to go on).
I can’t recall anyone saying if the middle-aged Englishwoman of the cat-binning bent was likely to be a sex offender, but I’m open to correction.
And again today, another assertion in another publication that boys showing cruelty to animals are blah-blah-blah. The thing is, I suspect this ‘fact’ is about as true as the ’1 in 4 women are raped’ and ‘women get paid less than men’ facts, and likely to have come from the same source – ie feminist groups making anything up to discredit men where suspicion of them is likely to be accepted without question.
In my experience all kids are rough with animals, and nearly all animals know to avoid them. Children are still basically savages awaiting civilizing – cruelty to animals is normal. It’s only as children mature that they develop a sense of empathy and care for those weaker than them. But I’m wandering well off topic. In a word, the wage battle may have been won, but all it signals is the beginning of another battle elsewhere.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
18 
0
“Why can’t they see that they are destroying the whole culture? Life will only end up worse for everyone this way.”
As many have mentioned on this site, women are fundamentally high-functioning children.
I wish that this were not so, because I really want something more in my life. But I have finally had to accept reality as it is, due in no small part to a female friend of mine.
I met her in the 7th grade, when she was the blue-eyed girl with golden bangs who came up with imaginative ways to tickle my ears and the back of my neck, when the teacher wasn’t watching.
She is brilliant, with an IQ a bit over 150, and she became a medical doctor. But, in many critically important ways, she is, and apparently will always remain, a child.
I think that the main reason why men have such difficulty in accepting this truth about women is that it goes against our innate sense of justice. It just doesn’t seem fair to treat women as children.
But, would you give dangerous tools to a little girl and then send her out to play? Would that be “fair”?
The quote at the top of this comment is what you get when you give such tools to a bigger girl and then allow her to follow her nature, without giving her firm boundaries.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
28 
0
“Why can’t they see that they are destroying the whole culture?”
I think many of them do see, but they aren’t disturbed by it the way we are. No, they *celebrate* the destruction of the culture — because, like all leftists, their entire outlook is based on a hatred of that culture.
That’s right: at bottom, *they* are the real haters.
They think they’re replacing the old culture with something better, but the world they’re building is an illusion that cannot be sustained.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
16 
0
ABC News actually covered this here.
That’s a lot more eyeballs than Time.
Yeah, its because for every two men graduating from college there are three women who graduate. No problem, as a matter of fact “its fantastic news!”. Buh, where will all these honey’s be when they’re 45? Grrrl Power!
Like or Dislike:
12 
0
Good. Now they can start paying more of the bills.
This trend is interesting. They still do most of the unpaid family work and are also going to gradually pay most of the tax. Whilst being chained to dull jobs and late retirements. While loosing the house.
Triumphant, indeed.
They’re just gonna end up carrying the can, while guys like me collect rent off them whilst playing at the beach.
Fools.
For heavens sake men, don’t alert them to whats going on here.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
16 
1
Despite Young Women earning more the feminazis won’t shut up about the wage gap as it’s their biggest selling point and “proof of oppression”. They will cheer Wage supremacy while simultaneously claiming that “patriarchy” is preventing them from earning More. Feminism is like a cancer gnawing a away at the heart of our society, and it’s time that we begin to ACT, like Peta protesters, or something, and throw red paint on them to represent the gender suicide gap, or the blood of Fathers that have been fiscally raped in the corrupt family court sytem. It’s time for action!
Like or Dislike:
13 
1
So when does the whole house of cards collapse?
Like or Dislike:
6 
0
Funny thing is that there are hundreds of thousands of US soldiers overseas protecting this very structure. All great rebellions come from within the army, maybe the top cadre is just stacked with too many elite sycophants.
Like or Dislike:
7 
0
“the US has a two-tier system of socialism for female employees and unregulated capitalism for men”
Wow. I came to this conclusion a few months ago just while laying in bed. Good to see somebody shares my thoughts.
Like or Dislike:
11 
0
The BEST way to eliminate the wage gap is for all men to stop working.
Stop shopping. Stop buying. Stop working. Let the whole rotten American outhouse crash in on itself.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
21 
0
“Not only do public schools favor female learning styles, guaranteeing that there will be more women in college than men, affirmative action and mandated ‘equality’ grants and government contracting rules ensure that women are well-represented in highly-paid jobs that were previously majority male.”
And these policies have all but guaranteed that the United States will continue to fall further behind in the global science and technology race. The “women from Venus” who love to collaborate and empathize are just ducky if you’re manufacturing hummingbird feeders or designing a new line of clothing for the Empowerment Barbie Doll. Not so much if you need a more resource-efficient way to build a skyscraper, or to design a spacecraft to take men to Mars.
Remember the old saw, “An elephant is a horse designed by a committee”? Well, over the last couple decades the horse has been designed by affirmative action women and we’ve ended up with an elephant with no legs.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
24 
1
thank god for poker, which women suck at
Like or Dislike:
4 
1
lol, I like how they leave out WHY women are getting more college education.
Also, a comment from a feminist after a rant about white males crying discrimination: “Women are happier divorced.”
Yeah, I’ll bet.
Like or Dislike:
4 
0
“Don’t be too proud of this feminized workforce you’ve constructed. The ability to balance a spreadsheet is unsustainable without the wealth-generating power of a manufacturing sector.”
“Don’t try to frighten us with your sorceror’s ways, Lord LaughOrCry. Your sad devotion to that ancient patriarchy has not helped you conjure up six month’s maternal leave for all working women, or given you clairvoyance enough to find CEO positions for women in… AKKKKK-KKKKKHHHH”
Like or Dislike:
5 
1
Well if the taxes don’t dry up their is always evolution. The future only belongs to those who show up for it. How many children do these entitlement cunts typically have?
How many children do nonfeminist women have?
What about Muslim women?
The future may not be Christian but it sure as hell ain’t gonna be wimminz.
Like or Dislike:
13 
0
WGMOV–
Second your comment, as did William Tucker recently in The American Spectator, who stated that the kind of economy in which women will thrive is based on writing environmental impact statements and pushing people around in wheel chairs.
Camille Paglia once said that if women ran the world, we’d all still be living in grass huts.
Like or Dislike:
14 
0
It’s weird. It’s mostly MEN who die for the system, what enslaves them.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike:
18 
0
It’s weird. It’s mostly MEN who die for the system, what enslaves them.
Welmer,is not is possible to fix a cookie, what remembers my username and e-mail adress here in the magazine?
Like or Dislike:
2 
0
College degrees in what?
The Psycho-Social-Cultural Implications and Communications Analysis of How to Tie ya Shoe Laces Together for a Game of Quoits on the Titanic.
101.
First subject… The Importance of Leo DiCaprio to Ship Building and Stone Polishing.
Second subject… The Rein of King Leo, of the World.
Oooooh. Berry intewigence and most oosfool two.
Like or Dislike:
7 
0
Meanwhile, fembots and manginas are still raging away at the TechCrunch comments section about how women are systematically discriminated against in the tech industry (completely ignoring Michael Arrington’s points).
One silver lining here is that women will now be in a position of having to pay alimony in rare instances. While this will still be rare, this is the only way alimony can actually end – when we see women shrieking about having to pay it.
Like or Dislike:
14 
0
TFH September 2, 2010 at 01:48
” While this will still be rare, this is the only way alimony can actually end – when we see women shrieking about having to pay it.”
Exactly. Once women have the balance of power and wealth in their favour you can be certain they’ll make laws to keep their grubby fucking hands on it.
We’ll always have the superior male traits to fall back on though. Or will we? The feminisation continues. Will it one day be women and their squeaky voiced dutiful eunuchs that rule the world?
Like or Dislike:
9 
0
sestamibi September 1, 2010 at 22:27
”Camille Paglia once said that if women ran the world, we’d all still be living in grass huts.”
………..
Hear hear. If it were left to women we’d likely never have discovered how to light fire, knap flint, the wheel would likely have been used as a hairpiece, etc etc etc. Moaning, whining and nagging would be religious imperatives for females. Along with the fat female idolised. No god would be worshipped, our goddesses would be in our own homes. Narcissism isn’t new to females.
Like or Dislike:
9 
0
In Sweden feminists have the motto “Half of the power and the full salary”. I once asked at a feminist forum if that means that feminists want individual women or groups of women to give away power, in situations where they have more than half of the power in a given field, and give up parts of their salary, if they get more than the full salary, but no one cared to answer that question.
The devil is in the details (and practice), as always.
Like or Dislike:
12 
0
Fantastic, now that women have taken what they wanted by force we will soon get to here what losers men are. Just leave us the fuck alone now.
For God sake, for the first time in evolutionary history we don’t have to carry women on our backs and now we are not going to get them to shut up and leave us to our sports bars, kitty bars, video games, porn and beer. The best we can do is ignore them and leave them to their single mother families.
God, and you know that none of this means women will let us get away with not paying for and suporting them. They will attempt to drain us of every last cent. They already have a natural sense of entitlement. Their egos, their power and narcissism are simply ever more unbearable now than ever before.
I hope to God we men withdraw from them and force them to be Independent from their dependency and demands upon men to provide to them. I hope now we can be separate, independent, divorced and liberated equally from eachother. Please just let us be equally independent from eachother.
Women won’t set us free will they. They won’t give us choices will they.
Like or Dislike:
4 
0
http://www.chamberpost.com/2010/08/equality-suffrage-and-a-fetish-for-money.html
“I have a question….if we are to pay women to stay home and be mothers how much do women want business or government to pay?
Obviously women need to be financially supported by somebody i.e. men, business or government. This certainly should not be the responsibility of men anymore because of all the anti male economic, education and business policies. Also, providing for a woman in marriage will make you have to be her provider after divorce.
Will women ever marry men who are less “successful” and make less money than they do?
Will they ever support men while we stay home? I’d love to be supported by a woman in marriage and have no liabilities in divorce like women do. Plus I would get to take the children with me and make her support me, even in no-fault divorce.
It seems like women always want more choices, special protections and provisions than men have that are all enabled by male responsibility or giving up our seats to the ladies like with women first Affirmative Action in school admission and for jobs.
Question…..Is there anyway to make it so women are really independent? When will they stArt paying on dates? I don’t want to support a woman. What if she gets pregnant. I know several couples who had an unplanned pregnancy and the woman said that it was him that got her pregnant and that it was not a mutual act of mutual responsibility and that it was only her decision to keep the baby or not.
So men have to work hard and earn more because we have to be able to support women’s choices. Men don’t have any choices. You know like work or stay home, have a baby or not have a baby from unplanned pregnancy, to be married or divorced and be financially supported in both, to go out on a date and not pay. You also have to pay women if you want to have sex, while they don’t have to pay.
All things that involve men’s relationship with women has to be paid for in money. Women won’t give men any choices. All her choices are paid for by men.
I’m 22 and just starting to try and think about these things. Why do women unfairly compete against men in education and in the work world?
Why do they compete against us at all and complain when men really need that money in order to pay women with and pay for their choices? Why won’t women let men have choices, why don’t they support us like we have to do for them? Maybe if they gave men choices we wouldn’t have to compete, work and produce so much.
It’s really men who are paying the price for all this.”
Like or Dislike:
4 
0
Wall Street Journal: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703882304575465672667170524.html
“Market researchers asked groups of 10 to 12 women gathered at local coffee shops or a friend’s house as well as in traditional focus groups in New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Atlanta, and Denver”
“They also thought men had gotten wimpier and associated the opposite sex with the bumbling losers played by Jonah Hill and Seth Rogen in recent romantic comedies. “It was obvious that these women feel like they have to take charge and be the hero,” says Jane Buckingham, president of Trendera, the market research and trend forecasting firm that conducted the study.”
KEEP AN EYE OUT FOR WOMEN’S BEHAVIOR THAT SHOWS THEIR RESENTMENT AT WHAT THEY(& the government) HAVE DONE.
KEEP AN EYE OUT FOR MORE AND MORE PASSIVE AGGRESSIVE BEHAVIOR, DIRECT CONTEMPT, MISANDRY AND VIOLENCE AGAINST MEN as women express their discontent with what they themselves have done to men. THIS IS WHAT I BELIEVE THEY ARE SO ANGRY ABOUT, THEY ARE ANGRY AT WHAT THEY HAVE DONE TO THEMSELVES AND TO MEN AND BLAME US FOR IT!!! Perhaps this is why the market research indicates that they want to see violence, particularly against men in their TV programing. Keep an eye out for women shaming men for all this.
We NEVER should have allowed secular representation by gender within government. Equal representation under law regardless of gender, race or religion is what our Constitution intended. This has all turned out a big mess. Women are right, this is all our fault, we should have never let them enact so many “women only and women first” laws, ESPECIALLY in education and job hirings!
I hope men don’t buy into all the shaming and contempt and simply continue to withdraw and shrink away from civic duty and civilization. We should let the Matriarchy fall hard and not give in to all the bitching, wailing and whining. Let us descend into the abyss and the Republic destroyed as happened to the Romans when women became to “independent” and “liberated” for their own good.
Upon the dissolution of the Roman family, falling birth rates, female sexuality moving from private and monogamous to public and promiscuous the Roman general, statesman, and censor Quintus Caecilius Metellus Macedonicus states in 131 B.C….
“If we could survive without a wife, citizens of Rome, all of us would do without that nuisance.” So proclaimed the Roman general, statesman, and censor.
Still, he went on to plead, falling birthrates required that Roman men fulfill their duty to reproduce, no matter how irritating Roman women might have become.
“Since nature has so decreed that we cannot manage comfortably with them, nor live in any way without them, we must plan for our lasting preservation rather than for our temporary pleasure.”
Rome became financially broke in it’s final days as well. There are many parallels to our current situation with the death of the Roman Republic. The above statement regarding the women of Rome was in 131 BC, Caesar was proclaimed perpetual dictator in 44 BC. This has all happened before.
Like or Dislike:
5 
0
Red0660 September 3, 2010 at 01:57
You’re right, there are many similarities with old Rome and today’s western society. Perhaps those that set up the American government should have thought of that when they used it as a model for their own government. Sorry America,, not trying to dis’ you.
I wonder if Rome had their own version of feminism to contend with too. I don’t need to point out who Rome’s ultra liberals were.
The meek shall inherit the earth my arse. No, they shall make it impossible to live in. Sorry as I’ve indicated before, I’m atheist.
Like or Dislike:
1 
1
@Harrytoo Quite right. In their vindictive, braindead egalitarianism, batshit utopianism, opposition to traditional order and sheer hypocrisy third-fourth century Christians look eerily familiar. Read ‘The Deaths of the Persecutors’. Nietzsche was spot on about slave morality.
http://www.pinn.net/~sunshine/book-sum/xtian1.html#celsus
Said Celsus, of whose critique of Christianity only extracts survive, Christians having burnt all the original texts:
1) “Celsus . . . complained that Christians sought out uneducated and gullible people because they were unable to give reason or arguments for their beliefs.” page 77
2) “Celsus knew that Christian scriptures provided justification for eschewing appeals to reason and argumentation. “Some [Christians] ,” says Celsus, “do no even want to give or to receive a reason for what they believe, and use such expressions as “do not ask questions; just believe,’ and “Your faith will save you.’ Others quote the apostle Paul. ‘The wisdom in the world is evil and foolishness a good thing.’ ” (1 Cor 1: 25-26; c. Cels. 1.9)”
3) “Just because many in the churches were uneducated and illiterate, Christians had the reputation of being gullible and credulous. . . Christians were an easy target for the racketeers of the Roman Empire.” page 98
12) “Celsus sensed that Christians had severed the traditional bond between religion and a “nation” or people. The ancients took for granted that religion was indissolubly linked to a particular city or people. Indeed, there was no term for religion in the sense we now use it to refer to the beliefs and practices of a specific group of people or of a voluntary association divorced from ethnic or national identity.” page 124
Also do a search for ‘Circumcellions’.
Julian the Apostate rocks my boxers, though Christian posterity did a number on him too.
Like or Dislike:
4 
1
I don’t really want to get off topic on these pages but I’ll say this last thing from my atheist perspective. The religious speak of faith, when what it actually is, is hope.
Like or Dislike:
1 
1
Harry the bricklaying, lorry driving philosopher. *Laugh*
Like or Dislike:
1 
2
Empires come and go, what’s wrong with that? History just repeats itself.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0
thehermit September 3, 2010 at 08:07
The end of the Roman Empire wasn’t a quiet affair.
Like or Dislike:
2 
1
Yes i know. It means war, what scares me.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
Typical feminist – where is the equality there?
What is a feminist? – resentful, belligerent and quarrelsome. They are also usually ignorant and misinformed with weak self control. Feminists use to be called ‘men haters’ and ‘troublemakers’. They have always been around throughout human history and their main intent is to create ill will, bad feeling, and malice between men and women.
The cause is the maternal instinct which regards men as either a mating object when in lust, or a potential danger to the family unit to be driven away when not, by making life as difficult as possible. The male equivalent – male aggression – is the pack hunting instinct. Throughout history this has resulted in armies and wars.
Mature and well balanced people recognise the problems and control their instincts and emotions using basic social skills and practical common sense, something the feminist is very lacking in.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0
Dave September 4, 2010 at 08:58
”Mature and well balanced people recognise the problems and control their instincts and emotions using basic social skills and practical common sense, something the feminist is very lacking in.”
………..
Yet governments continue to give in to their nagging. No matter what they get, they’ll dream up another ‘need’.
Like or Dislike:
1 
1
Harrytoo – since you brought religion into the debate…
Regarding your claims that Christians burnt all of Celsus’ writings – prove it – don’t just make rash accusations of which there is no proof – as a matter of fact the Christian writer Origen is the main reason we know of Celsus’ writings in the first place. Quite ironic, I should say…
About Christians being somehow gullible – at that time, in the ancient world, nearly everyone of any faith and background was uneducated and illiterate – where is the proof that Christians were somehow more so than the mainstream populace?
About divorcing religious identity from a nationality…how is that necessarily a bad thing? Do people’s beliefs have to be determined by where they were born – should Truth be dependent on the political entity in which you live? I understand and respect tradition, but still the point stands – why is this belief somehow inferior to the ancient one?
What unsubstantiated and ridiculous attacks on Christianity have to do with the main thread of this discussion, I don’t know. The decline of the Roman Empire mourned by Red0660 was not the fruit of Christianity – I mean female promiscuity sounds sooooooo Christian, does it not…
Us men don’t like females making rape accusations without evidence, don’t do the same to the beliefs of millions of people.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0
Now to be fair JT2010 Harrytoo never mentioned Celsus, that was me posting anonymously.
Again in all fairness, I can’t PROVE Celsus’ work hasn’t come untarnished down to this day due to its suppression by Christians, but every substantial critique of Christianity from before the High Middle Ages survives only in extract.
Conservative Roman authors were concerned that Christianity established a separate society in defiance of many of the basic tenets of their civilisation: the familial and tribal bond, religious plurality, philosophical diversity; its appeal to the poor, ignorant and marginalised. Hence why it bears comparison to socialism, feminism and slave morality in general.
In that Christianity took on a life of its own and gave expression to some of the greatest minds of Western civilisation I respect it. But the central message is irredeemable nonsense.
Like or Dislike:
1 
1
Interesting read. I wonder if our country will finally realize it is discriminating against men big time. As a women myslef, I’ve come full circle in this fact after bringing a sweet little boy into the world. looking down at my sleeping son clinging to his stuffed bear, kissing his boo-boos….I realize how I was so wrong for believing for years that somehow, women were discriminated against in the US. (I fought for “equal pay” for so mnay years, not knowing until I woke up that I was making more than most of my male counterparts) When I was 18, a draft notice came to me, my sexist attitude, brought on by all thos dicrimatory U.S. History books that make us believe somehow going to war is a Man thing” more so than femail thing (very gender biased and outdated….not based on current Science) I though “Not me! I am just a feeble female!. Now, I see why men might seem a bit “insensitive” to women as we women cried for yeas….they have paid the price linger than any women. OUr leaders are finally talking about requiring all american girls age 18-26 to register for Selective Service (finally) subjected to all same laws currently inflicted wrongly on men (If you don’t register, no financial aid for college, licence may be revoked, w50k fine, possibly prison) although I don’t believe this inhumane law should be invokded on ANY HUMAN BEING male or female, as long as the USA engages in its useless wars that have NEVER NOT ONCE done anything positive for our country let alone others, we need to at least discriminate with equal rights. My son will never register for that God forsaken thing, I don’t even bleive in war and killing people, (ALL MEN WRITE IN CONSCEINTIOUS OBJECTOR or simply DON’T register. 3 million men are unregistered, the gove has no right over any persons body, male or female. I have no respect for parents that would protect their daughters anymore than their sons from the horror of war. So suddenly, all this talk about women making more than men is just another discrimination against our men.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0
More lies about the wage gap.
“Men still out-earn women, but the gap is narrowing. In 2007, full-year women workers had median earnings of about $33,000, which was 71 percent of men’s median earnings of about $46,000. Back in 1970, women’s earnings were 52 percent of men’s. ”
Ref: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/18/AR2010011803895.html
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
This isn’t really the best forum for this (plus since I was away on business this article is fairly old now and not likely to be read by anyone…) so I will be quick…or at least as quick as I can be. I apologize for taking up space on a forum dedicated to another subject, (and in no way want to hijack the discussion thread about the AA-driven wage supremacy of today’s empowered independent (except on that little thing called the State and that thing called a man’s wallet) wymyn) but as religion (well mainly Christianity) was brought into the debate and criticized by others; I think it is fair to defend it.
a. The Church (human implementations of religion as opposed to the actual faith itself) has not always acted up to the ideals that they espouse, but can you give me some good examples where you can prove that Christians harshly suppressed their critics? In the cases that I have found where any form of church sponsored suppression did in fact take place, it was greatly exaggerated by Christianity’s critics and in most cases was driven by people who only nominally espoused the faith and used it as a political means to destroy those they didn’t like. (Good examples of this occurred in the Spanish Inquisition, for example.) The other cases I have found (some of which also occurred during the Spanish Inquisition) were cases in which the Church suppressed a heresy that it felt threatened the eternal and even temporal good of the society that it watched over. Given the Church’s role at the time as the entire foundation of Western Europe’s religious, political, and economic identity and survival, that was quite a bit more understandable than is normally portrayed or understood by those with little historical knowledge of the time period. To quote historian Bernard Hamilton “ the Catholic church played a major role “as the sole vehicle of a more civilized tradition in a barbarous world” and “became involved in social and political activities which formed no part of its essential mission, but which it alone was qualified to discharge.”
b. I find it odd that while on one hand many of the greatest minds of Western civilization held very firmly to Christian belief, yet at the same time it is alleged by you (without explanation) to be total ‘irredeemable’ nonsense. If so many of history’s best and brightest held to it, maybe there is something to it. How many of these people could have done what they did, been who they were, if their core beliefs about the nature of reality and truth were allegedly totally off base?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
U.S. History books that make us believe somehow going to war is a Man thing” more so than femail thing (very gender biased and outdated….not based on current Science)
————————
Even today war is generally a mans thing. Since men are naturally more aggressive and competitive they would be better at it. Gender biased? No, just facts. Outdated? Nope, still a fact. Not based on current science? Yes it is, what kind of ‘science’ are you looking to? Real current science(especially) says the same, men are naturally more protective and competitive, therefore war is mainly a man thing. Not a bad thing.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
{ 2 trackbacks }