Dismantling Feminism: A Brief Introduction

by Thag Jones on September 22, 2010

In order to dismantle feminism, one must see it first as a part of the larger movement of progressivism, particularly with progressives like Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood and known Nazi collaborator. This philosophy has turned and continues to turn the values on which western civilization was built on their heads, which was always their intention. It might even seem like a classic example of “it seemed like a good idea at the time,” but there are no good ideas gone bad, only bad ideas and good ideas. Progressivism and all its offshoots are bad ideas and the results speak for themselves.

It could be argued that the downward spiral of western cultural values gained huge momentum in the much-lauded 1960s. The prosperity of the post-war era brought a hitherto unknown level of general material comfort and stability, ushering in social programs and greater freedom to use leisure time unknown to previous generations aside form the very wealthy of the population. The result, it would seem, was a spoiled generation that, in its relative opulence, could only think to demand more – more freedom, more leisure, more fun. Fast forward to today and we have a generation of entitled brats who expect lavish rewards for every banal accomplishment. As an example that seems harmless enough on the surface, take graduation ceremonies for kindergarten or even daycare. Who benefits from this? Surely not the children, who are only being trained to expect promotion for little actual work. The parents beam with pride, each watching the whole event on small screens as they preserve the auspicious occasion on digital video cameras and cell phones, as though the child had accomplished something out of the ordinary.

Undeserved rewards, which have come to be known as “rights,” have grown out of this progressive movement, of which feminism is a significant and formidable part. I cannot imagine the traditional head of household father getting excited the way today’s parents do about an accomplishment as trivial as little Bobby’s first crap in a plastic potty, but that is what a good many parents do now, because little Bobby has a right to feel good about himself – also known as self-esteem, that squishy, psychobabble nonsense that tells us we should always regard ourselves highly no matter what losers we might be. In the meantime, self-respect has gone down the toilet along with the strong moral sense that made this civilization great. Like cash payments for good grades, many young people today expect rewards for doing something that should be its own reward and that should be done anyway.

Along with the rise of the concept of “self-esteem” has come explicit permission to do whatever one wants because, if one has “self-esteem,” one regards one’s self favourably no matter what an abomination one becomes. Everything becomes a route to “empowerment” in this culture of unearned rewards and no responsibility. When a person is taught that he (and I use “he” as a neutral pronoun, much to the chagrin of feminists) doesn’t have to do anything to earn respect from others or himself, why bother being a decent person? Why bother struggling through “mistakes” when you can just have an abortion? So what comes next is the disintegration of the family unit – because people aren’t feeling “fulfilled” enough within the confines of marriage and need to “find themselves” – and the total devaluation of human life.

Of course the irony is that now that so many women have been duped by feminism, women are on the whole less happy now than ever, thanks to all these wonderful changes that have taken place. Government schools have been dumbed down to a shameful degree, single parent (usually the mom) “families” are so normal now that girls grow up thinking it’s a viable life choice to stay single and reproduce, the “right to choose” (choose what? The colour of the drapes?) is an unquestionable stance within feminism, and all the traditionally female realms (sewing, cooking, etc.) are sneered at by the enlightened sisterhood. Because of that, we are more dependent than ever on the state and corporations to provide for us what a family used to be able to provide for itself.

All this feminist-progressivist brainwashing has rendered us slaves, units of production without value, and where reproduction is concerned – formerly a key motivation for family life – we are all disposable. A woman can get sperm from a sperm bank or a one night stand, or easily dispose of her husband (or unborn offspring) should they be inconvenient to her, thereby making man and child disposable and woman not much more than a free whore and a maker of replacement units that she can ship off to daycare at six weeks old to be paid for by the state.

Perhaps the undeserved praise we lavish on our children is a subconscious effort to make up for the way we’ve killed our collective spirit. We make children disposable, then treat the ones we “keep” like special snowflakes so that they never quite grow a spine. Wash rinse repeat. Looking into the future, it is bleak indeed if this trajectory isn’t changed. It will take a great effort to change it and it won’t happen over night – heck, it may never happen for all I know, but that doesn’t mean we should sit back and watch it all crumble. In a world where some mothers think nothing of pole “dancing” lessons for kids, we are headed for nothing but lewdness and vulgarity. The movie, Idiocracy, doesn’t look all that far fetched, which is a sad statement indeed.

{ 182 comments… read them below or add one }

Epoche* September 22, 2010 at 03:15

The idea of dismantling feminism implies that there is something worth salvaging about western women or this civilization. When I look at the future of this country I see little future for men, and this is not the place that I would want to raise a family in. Is this the kind of country you would want to live in 20 years? Let foreign nations stop buying our debt and we will get to know what real destruction is like.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 16 Thumb down 4
Hughman September 22, 2010 at 04:01

Your link is dead btw.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1
IurnMan83 September 22, 2010 at 04:02

Good article. Don’t know what else to say.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1
misterb September 22, 2010 at 04:27

Now that’s a damn decent article. How female commentators should write.

To make feminism a literal thing of a past. Now that’s something.

Kind like the old saying, if you want something, earn it. But then again, in our society, our people act like brats, emotional stunted people.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 1
Travis September 22, 2010 at 04:27

Hey guys! Looks like Newsweek has just followed up the Hannah Rosin article with one of their own. It agrees that men are heading for extinction, but they have a solution. We need to “reimagine masculinity”. In other words, the author thinks we need to redefine feminine traits as the “new masculinity”.

Here’s the tagline for the article:
To survive in a hostile world, guys need to embrace girly jobs and dirty diapers. Why it’s time to reimagine masculinity at work and at home.

Here’s the link:
http://www.newsweek.com/2010/09/20/why-we-need-to-reimagine-masculinity.html

There are also a couple of links to other Newsweek articles on the same topic. Including “Why the New Macho is Good for Women”, and “The Trend Toward Manly Ads”, which includes this opening line:

Men in television advertising are often portrayed as barely sentient morons, emasculated husbands, or literate cavemen. So in other words, according to many of my friends of the fairer sex, accurately.

Please, please, PLEASE head over there and leave some comments… We can’t let crap like this go unchallenged.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 42 Thumb down 1
Migu September 22, 2010 at 04:35

Wrt to not just sitting around. Save as much as you can after theft (taxes). When the state goes bankrupt you will be able to fight, and your savings will buy you influence. Don’t reveal them to anyone that decries hoarding though. They’ll just turn you in to make sure you get your equal share of nothing.

In the meantime keep judging people and discriminate against those who are lacking. Also, remember to do the same to yourself short of full on abnegation.

Nice article.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 2
Migu September 22, 2010 at 04:37

Am I on automod again?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 6
namae nanka September 22, 2010 at 04:45

You can’t work without an opposing force, similarly you can’t have greatness without adversity. Crumble it must, for stagnation is the worst fate for mankind.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 0
crella September 22, 2010 at 04:45

We need to “reimagine masculinity”.

To which I’m tempted to reply, ‘Oh ya? Reimagine my arse!’

Why is it that men have to change, when it’s women who are dissatisfied and need an attitude adjustment?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 49 Thumb down 3
Migu September 22, 2010 at 04:49

Do any comments last longer than a few hours. I’ve been trying to get links in these articles over to various manosphere sites. Max time a comment stayed up was about 8 hrs. Huffpo actually keeps em up longer than any other site I’ve been to. If you get em to stay up, what’s the trick?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Thag Jones September 22, 2010 at 04:50

Not sure what’s up with those links….

Gunn September 22, 2010 at 04:59

Generally good article, a couple of observations:

I don’t think that the article makes a strong case for equating feminism with progressivism. I agree that the two are linked, but there needs to be a stronger argument as to why they are linked (particularly if trying to convince someone who hasn’t yet bought into the premise).

However, once you make the case that feminism has made families more dependent on the state, I think the article reads very well from that point on, and backs up its assertions sufficiently.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 1
Thag Jones September 22, 2010 at 05:05

Oh, I saw that “Re-imagine Masculinity” article yesterday and I couldn’t read any more past “we should be like Sweden.” OH HELL NO!

The links in the article are as followes:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article6395879.ece
http://neweconomist.blogs.com/new_economist/2007/09/women-more-equa.html

And the words mangled therein are “less happy.” I’d fix it up if I could edit! The HTML seems to have got messed up in transit somehow – must be something between mail clients.

Thag Jones September 22, 2010 at 05:10

Oh crap, shouldn’t type before coffee – I can’t believe I put an ‘e’ in follows! LOL

Thanks Gunn, I realized that before I submitted but I figured I’d end up never getting anything in if I started on making all those connections. I’ll have a go at that for the next one perhaps.

Rebel September 22, 2010 at 06:01

It’s an uphill battle.

There’s an easier solution than to fight the feminists to the bitter end: breed outside of your race.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 18 Thumb down 5
Nergal September 22, 2010 at 06:36

“To survive in a hostile world, guys need to embrace girly jobs and dirty diapers. ”

To which I reply, “F*ck you,bitch.You wanted it all? You can HAVE it all.”.

I’m not gonna turn into a faggot and “embrace girly jobs”. If you make it impossible for men to work we will hunt,farm, and fish for subsistence,squatting on government land. When your sick ass attempt to turn men into pansies FAILS hardcore,I will emerge fat and happy to piss on your f*cking corpse. Men aren’t going to “embrace girly jobs”,even if you leave us no other choice. The thought of it makes me sick to my stomach. I actually have to keep myself from throwing up thinking about it, and I wouldn’t be surprised if most men feel the same way.

I’ll dodge bullets, I’ll spend all day covered in grease and dirt, I’ll sell my organs to science while I’m still using them, but I’ll be damned if I’m gonna prance around in a “girly job” for the amusement of some sick sexually-confused feminist whores. I’ll die first.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 51 Thumb down 9
W.F. Price September 22, 2010 at 07:00

And the words mangled therein are “less happy.” I’d fix it up if I could edit! The HTML seems to have got messed up in transit somehow – must be something between mail clients.

No, it was just the html vs. visual editor — I pasted in the wrong one. Sorry about that, should have previewed it, but by the time I got around to scheduling it last night I was already half-asleep.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1
Travis September 22, 2010 at 07:07

@Thag
Sorry. I got all bent out of shape over the Newsweek article and forgot to mention that your article was excellent. But then, I knew it would be. Not sure if you saw my “semi-proposal” on the other thread, but what I said there bears repeating. You’re an amazing woman. Thanks for giving me hope that there are a few decent one’s still out there. I look foreward to seeing more of your stuff posted here.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 2
demirogue September 22, 2010 at 07:13

You can’t dismantle it. The mere fact that birth control and on demand abortion rendered the provider role for which most men were brought up for obsolete gives women total power now. Toss in the jobs and who honestly thinks they’re going to give it up? The natural roles of women has been diminished now because of it and in turn made the natural roles of millions of men un-needed and unwanted.

You have guys out here in the population that are labeled losers and shunned because they are socially inept yet are the one’s who are productive members of society. And they are starting to hate women as a whole because of it. And through the coldness of it all, women actually enjoy it. They feed off of it like it’s some mystical power source and so for it to go down, that needs to be taken away naturally and it will.

Feminism will die off simply because the un-natural selection and the un-natural ways that women are reproducing (or not) will not progress society but have the complete opposite effect. When women find they are working 50 hours and their pay is meted out not by their employer but the government, the special gender treatment is gone and the men left are either thuggish or emasculated, only then will women see the error of their ways. Look at the disaster the matriarchy’s of today have become and multiply it on a grander scale. The men who paid for those are going away and the women who’ll finance them won’t have the ability to reproduce in numbers to prevent that from becoming the norm throughout. Feminism will simply die off because like the men who are giving up today, women will eventually tire of the sate slave role they got themselves into when all they do is finance what the real fallout of feminism brought upon them. And that’s the continued decline of their own cities and neighborhoods.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 39 Thumb down 0
Thag Jones September 22, 2010 at 07:14

Travis, that’s very kind of you, thanks.

That’s OK about the Newsweek article – it was pretty damn stupid!

Nergal September 22, 2010 at 07:39

Great article,by the way,Thag. I whole-heartedly agree with it. The only rights a person has are the ones he can win by his own force, everything else can be and will be taken away at some point.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 1
Travis September 22, 2010 at 07:51

Hmmm. Just noticed I got an extra “e” in forward. Has anyone ever mentioned that it would be great if there was a way to edit your own posts? I’m not complaining. Just a suggestion…

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
Lirazel September 22, 2010 at 08:04

Wow, an invocation of Godwin’s Law in the first sentence…

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 4 Thumb down 16
Thag Jones September 22, 2010 at 08:13

Lirazel, how exactly is stating a fact about a person who had ties with the Nazis invoking Godwin’s Law? So if I said, “Hitler, leader of the Nazi Party….” that would be an invocation of Godwin’s Law in your mind. Listing “credentials” as it were, is all that is. I get so tired of people thoughtlessly crying “Godwin’s Law” at any mention of the word “Nazi”; some comparisons (not that that’s what this is) are valid. If we can’t compare current goings on to history, we are doomed to repeat the same mistakes and sometimes I get the feeling some people would like to pretend certain things never happened.

Anonymous Reader September 22, 2010 at 08:22

Thag Jones:
Perhaps the undeserved praise we lavish on our children is a subconscious effort to make up for the way we’ve killed our collective spirit. We make children disposable, then treat the ones we “keep” like special snowflakes so that they never quite grow a spine.

That is a very interesting suggestion. I think it also ties in to the expansion of day care as well, which really took off in the early 1980′s, while the self esteem movement started in California around the middle of that decade, 25 years ago. So teaching children to sit around the daycare center singing “I am special, I am special, look at me, look at me” could well be a lame attempt at compensation for being in the daycare center in the first place, combined with guilt at the fact that there are children missing from daycare because they are dead at the hands of abortionists.

One hopeful sign I see is that younger men and women are more and more opposed to abortion to some degree. I think that the advances in medical imaging technology are responsible for this to some degree; the feminist line from the 1970′s about abortion only affecting a “blob of cells” is definitely smashed when an image with a clear, obvious head is visible. There also may well be some “survivor guilt” involved. I’m too old to know what it would be like to be a child or a teenager and find out that Mommy killed one or more of my siblings, but I suspect it would have emotional effects. Add that to divorce, another feminist sacrament, and the double whammy could be significant. I’m just thinking out loud here, but I have a hard time truly imagining how I would have regarded my mother at, oh, 15 if I knew that she’d killed one or more of my siblings and driven my father off as well. It would be difficult to be too emotionally close to her, very likely, just for a start.

Lirazel, Godwin’s law doesn’t apply in this case, because it is easy to show the fact that Margaret Sanger had a voluntary association with the National Socialist All German Party. Her enthusiasm for eugenics caught the Nazi’s eye early on. It is one of the dirty little secrets of the left/libera/progressive world, along with the fact that the Soviets were allies of the Nazi’s for nearly two years, and other things.

My own view is moving to the point where I regard feminism as a variant or spinoff from Marxism. The same “oppressor/oppressed” duality used to split society, the same kind of “with us or against us” Manichean worldview, and the same desire for a government with unlimited power to remake society at a whim can be seen in both. Russian feminists supported the Bolsheviks without question; marriage was essentially abolished very early after the revolution, for example. I believe the connection is clear, and Thag Jones is quite right to point out that in no way can feminism be considered as just some kind of stand-alone object. Smashing the nuclear family was one of Marx and Engel’s clear objects, because they did not want any kind of social structure outside of the state.

A good introduction to the topic, provides food for thought.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 25 Thumb down 1
Keyster September 22, 2010 at 08:29

Progressives believe its time for civilization to “progress” past the traditional value system upheld and propogated by the white male power structure. We need to “re-think” society to be more fair and just for ALL its people. Christianity is also hated by progressives, as its been used by the white male power structure to control people. (As long as there’s an oppressor, there will be the oppressed.) We must be freed from the shackles of the white male power structure and embrace a new utopia of equality and sameness, multi-culturalism, peace, happiness and unending joy for ALL.

The Progressive Agenda is meant to deconstruct the white male power structure, hence the connection to feminism. Things like “traditional values” are an anachronism from years gone by. Our founding fathers were racist, sexist, bible thumping control freaks. We need to “Move On” from their philosophy. Down with the MAN! Peace and Love and Tolerance and Acceptance and Inclusiveness…

The White Male Oligarchy MUST be toppled!
It’s only then, everyone will be happy.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 5
Thag Jones September 22, 2010 at 08:37

Tolerance and Acceptance and Inclusiveness…

Unless you’re a (white) man. Some animals are more equal than others.

Migu September 22, 2010 at 08:37

“Survival Child” is what is doing it. At least for me. I survived. I am the oldest, but not the first. It is a sobering thought.

I know the last was also killed, so I’m missing one. His name was Nathan.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2
zed September 22, 2010 at 08:42

the Newsweek article – it was pretty damn stupid!

Same old same old feces that we have been hearing for years. I could easily toss out more than a dozen articles and books from the past couple of years with the message that the only thing wrong with men is everything. There is a well-developed genre of “whine lit” with doyens like Maureen Dowd, Sandra Tsing-Loh, Kay Hymowitz, and a host of others too numerous to mention.

Their actual appearance is only the tip of the iceberg. The consistency of them, and the sheer volume, has the purpose of pouring gasoline on the flames of the gender war in order to keep it going. The natural attraction and affinity which the sexes have for each other would cause the hostilities to die out naturally without the wounds being kept fresh and continually scraped raw. When I read things like that and there is no counter-voice from women who disagree with the message, I get the impression that most women agree with what is being said, which in turn shapes my impression of women.

The completely tiresome and predictable “NAWALT” does not touch this issue. From the male perspective that is equivalent to saying that no all cylinders of a gun are loaded in a game of Russian Roulette – true, but neither relevant nor significant. My concern is completely focused on cylinder which has the ability to blow my brains out if I deal with it foolishly.

Women need to wake up to what a hatchet job the media is doing on them under the guise of bashing men.

Men in television advertising are often portrayed as barely sentient morons, emasculated husbands, or literate cavemen. So in other words, according to many of my friends of the fairer sex, accurately.

If that is what women think of me(n), it is a kindness to myself as well as them to not impose my unpleasant presence in their worlds. They are fish, we are bicycles. If they find us so annoying and bothersome to put up – unless we are paying them money, killing spiders for them, or fixing something that needs fixing – maybe avoiding having their slime on our seats and rust in our gears works to everyone’s advantage.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 42 Thumb down 0
Rebel September 22, 2010 at 08:47

In my opinion, dismantling feminism is going to take a couple of centuries or tough fighting.

Can anyone afford to wait that long for normalcy to return?

I certainly wouldn’t if I was a young man.

The West is dying, let’s face it. Is this society worth saving? I do not think so. Too far gone.
That’s why I see no reason to continue to fight feminism: the poison goes too deep: the patient is terminally ill. And don’t mourn the death of this society that hates you with a passion.

Therefore, the best and most pragmatic position to take is to “abandon ship” and like your ancestors did, find a new place where you can live your dreams.

The American dream has become a nightmare: there is no future for men here.
Therefore, why no look elsewhere?

What’s there to loose?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 31 Thumb down 3
zed September 22, 2010 at 08:54

Thag Jones is quite right to point out that in no way can feminism be considered as just some kind of stand-alone object. Smashing the nuclear family was one of Marx and Engel’s clear objects, because they did not want any kind of social structure outside of the state.

A good introduction to the topic, provides food for thought.

A very good introduction.

I’ve been saying all along that what we are dealing with is a lot larger and a lot older than “feminism.” I cannot imagine anyone being able to read “Atlas Shrugged” and not see just about everything Ayn Rand described – down to an explicit “Equalization of Opportunity” bill.

At the social level we have almost exact analogy of some company being able to market what is essentially rat poison as an artificial sweetener. FEMININE-ism works because women were hoodwinked into regarding men as the collective enemy and becoming useful idiots to the implementation of the Marxist agenda of the “Long March Through the Culture.”

Simone de Beauvoir’s famous quote cannot be repeated often enough to try to pound into women’s heads what they are actually purchasing (family poison) when they buy it, regardless of how “sweet” it may taste in the short term.

“No woman should be authorized to stay at home to raise her children. Society should be totally different. Women should not have that choice, precisely because if there is such a choice, too many women will make that one.”

Source: Do-Gooders — How Liberals Hurt Those They Claim to Help, by Mona Charen, 2004, page 124.

FEMININE-ism has never been about giving women “choices”, but rather about taking them away.

Excellent brief introduction, Thag. Now if you can just get the media to stop painting women as such poisonous creatures you have a good start on the battle to come.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 27 Thumb down 0
the universe September 22, 2010 at 09:08

Perhaps this is one of those “goes without saying” kind of moments but the political movement known as “Progressive” sure looks a lot like end result regressive.
It appears that the movement proponents’ choice word to describe their banner may appeal to those believing themselves to be hip and enlightened. To me, progress means more like working toward perfection or a better state of being rather than just moving laterally or onward from whatever was previous.
We’re supposedly to learn and advance away from disgraced examples from the past, not emulate them. And from the looks of what “Progressives” support we appear to be doing little of the sort. However, as with most things political, subjectivity is nearly everything.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 0
Gunn September 22, 2010 at 09:18

Rolling back feminism will be accomplished in one of two ways:

i. feminism will succeed in emasculating western society to the point where other nations such as China, India, Russia, the various Arab states, or South America will become the new global hegemons (which of these it will be will depend on various factors including how much they can resist the influence of encroaching feminism in their own cultures). When this happens, the west will be wiped out as a force in the world and either subjugated or catapulted backward in terms of technology and lifestyle. In a worst case scenario, the final stages will include last ditch wars to shore up the end of empire, but with the lack of will to fight (both in terms of men willing to do so and society able to pay for it and/or tolerate the human losses). The absolute worst case here would be an outcome involving nuclear exchanges, in which case mankind as a whole could be bombed back to the stone age.

ii. western powers realise that their welfare / feminist states are bankrupting them and act to scale government back wholesale. If this can be done (and the political blocks to do so are numerous in our universal democracies) then its possible that the west can emerge with a significant degree of its power intact. There will be no de jure reversion to the old monogamous patriarchy as existed before, but once we stop:

- welfare for single mothers (i.e. general resource transfers from men to unnamed women);

- child support outside of wedlock via scale back of child support agencies (i.e. specific transfers from men to named women) and introduction of measures such as MPT;

- affirmative action and favored workplaces for mothers (i.e. transfers from single [childless], productive, men or women and married productive men to less productive married or single mothers);

- huge public sector employment (transfers from the largely male dominated private sector to the largely female dominated ‘make-work’ public sector)

- lifelong or long-term alimony (transfers from men to specific women, but increasingly from women to men too)

- education that aims for credentialism rather than competence as a prop for affirmative action (i.e. if an employer is unable to identify who the ‘best’ workers are, they are unable to argue against the government insisting that they employ workers using diversity criteria rather than merit)

- state mandated and publicly funded healthcare (transfers from men to women and from the young to the old in general)

and a few other sundry areas, we will end up with the de facto reversion to a society that looks a lot like the old patriarchy. Under such a society, the family would become much more important as a safety net for individuals, and women would not be subsidised by big government at the expense of men (meaning they would need men in their lives to survive day to day).

I’d prefer outcome ii. obviously, but the way things are going the feminists simply don’t recognise the danger of i. which makes it more likely to happen. I think that most feminists sincerely believe what they have been indoctrinated with viz. gender being a social construct, and don’t understand that society will not continue to function or be able to defend itself if 80% of men are marginalised.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 0
Keyster September 22, 2010 at 09:40

“No woman should be authorized to stay at home to raise her children. Society should be totally different. Women should not have that choice, precisely because if there is such a choice, too many women will make that one.” -Simone de Beauvoir

I find it telling that as feminists have held her up as a kind of beacon of feminist philosophy, yet this (perhaps her most quoted quote) is EXTREMELY hard to find on the internet; Wikipedia and everywhere else.

Unless you’re a (white) man. Some animals are more equal than others.

If you’re a white male you ARE the problem. You must be coerced, sublimated and disenfranchised for contentment of all other beings, to reign as one glorious worldwide unified force of humanity. Villianize him, shame him into submitting. He’s guilty of causing everyone pain and hardship.
White men are SO last millenium!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 1
Zammo September 22, 2010 at 09:41

Dismantle feminism?

Here’s a thought – evolve the marriage strike into the baby strike:

1. Male birth control pill
2. Change sperm bank laws so that donors are no longer anonymous
3. Continue to educate men regarding the shackles of family and the benefits of Game.

The vast majority of women all catch baby rabies at some point in their lives. If the supply of sperm is choked off (sorry, couldn’t resist the pun), there will be some amazing social changes.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 3
Keyster September 22, 2010 at 10:06

I’m now commited to MAN-UP per the Newsweek article.
I no longer feel “threatened” by female empowerment.
My new masculinity is to become more like a woman, as women have become more like men. After years of oppressive sexism its only right that I meet her halfway so we can live in this androgoneos utopia where everyone is the same, (except women, who are special). I will not try to dominate her because the modern “macho man” doesn’t do things like that. I’ll obey her and cater to her every whim however, because her happiness is my responsibility as a man.

I’m going to strive for a more traditional lower paying female occupation such as nursing or teaching, because frankly I’m ashamed of my masculinity. I don’t want to offend women or make them uncomfortable. I want to demonstrate to women that I’m all about equal rights and fair pay. Surely they’ll be attracted to me for being so pro-women and such a strident equalist. They’ll love me for being so sensitive to THEIR needs!

According to Newsweek I’m the perfect modern male specimen all women yearn for, if only we’d just start doing it. C’mon guys, join me in manning-up!
“Sweetie, have you seen my apron?”

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 24 Thumb down 0
CashingOut September 22, 2010 at 10:12

ThagJones:

Tolerance and Acceptance and Inclusiveness…

Unless you’re a (white) man. Some animals are more equal than others.

I don’t know what I find more amazing: that White harpies screech about the “oppression” that their White male protectors and benefactors supposedly inflict upon them, that they think that they are “kindred” spirits with the members of any other race which actually has been oppressed by Whites…or that these members actually BELIEVE this.

As has been mentioned in this article, feminism, as with socialism, communism, and so many other progressive isms, claims to exist in order to remove the “oppressors,” thus freeing the oppressed. Presumably, if there are no more oppressors, then the oppressed will live freely, visiting no harm on anyone.

So where then do women like Bethany Storro fit into this picture, who comittend fraud against men and women, and would have gotten a Black woman (you know, one of those minorities we need to be saving from White men) falsely arrested had the fraud continued? Women would probably argue that her fraud was initially, somehow, someway, instigated or initiated by a man. Never mind that in this fraud, no man was named, and the primary target of the lie was a woman, the liar was a woman, it was women all around. If we were to remove all men from the picture, would this somehow make Bethany Storro less of a liar, or somehow make her unable to lie for profit?

For that matter, where do women like Shirley Sherrod fit in? Everyone remembers the flap when Sherrod’s soundbyte became famous, when compared to the original speech that she made. I could make a case that the soundbyte and the original speech didn’t prove that she had change, and in fact proved that she was more innately racist than any given White man who a) didn’t know any better, or b) thought they were doing something innately right. But I won’t. Instead I’ll use this link:

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/Examiner-Opinion-Zone/Former-Shirley-Sherrod-nci-employee-accuses-her-of-exploiting-black-farm-laborers-99880014.html

If you don’t want to read the link, I’ll give you the jist of it: Our famous “non-racist” friend Shirley Sherrod, along with another big name in Civil Rights, Charles Sherrod, (You might remember him as the head of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Comittee, and a major player in the Selma Voting Rights Movement) created a farm community similar to a model used in Israel. They then underpaid, overworked, and abused these workers, sprayed them with toxins, and mistreated and fired them at whim.

And oh yeah, most of these workers, were Black.

Holy crap, oppression, abuse, maltreatment, humiliation, orchestrated by people who weren’t rich White males? And pushed heavily by a BLACK woman as well? Wait a minute, if there are no oppressors, the oppressed should be free and happy and equal and everything. Why is oppression going on here?

The problem is, the world doesn’t work like that. The problem with the whole “oppression/oppressor” model is this:

1) People are people, wherever you go. There is no culture where the traits that make an “oppressor” don’t exist. Greed, lust for power, intelligence, and charisma in the right combinations can make anyone an “oppressor.” Oppression, like leadership, is a relative thing. The guy “oppressing” a tribe in a mud hut in the Amazon couldn’t flip burgers here in the US.

2) “Oppression” is an attribute of society, kind of like how “top” and “bottom” are attributes of a 3 dimensional object. You can’t remove the “top” attribute of an object. You can remove the part of the object that was on the top, but you can’t remove the “top” of the object such that the object has no top. By definition, 3d objects have tops. Cutting the top off of an object to remove the existence of a top will always fail, and only result in making less of an object. In the same manner, the methods that feminists and other ists use to remove “oppressors” always fail, because someone always steps into the power vaccum, and all that is done is that they make society less for it.

Realizing this, I view the women who shriek to me about our White male oppressors, as though we have something in common, with disgust. The fact is if there were no White men in the world, there are plenty of people of any race who can more than step in and take over the role of tyrant, and I would doubt that these Idi Amin or Kim Jong types would be so tolerant of the women screeching this as White men are. Claiming that equality can only be achieved by neutering all White men is a fallacy that no member of any race should listen to, as it assumes

1) That tyrany and malfeasance is inherent in all White males,
2) That it isn’t in any member of any other male or race, and
3) The people who bring about this change (women, people of other races) will form a society with a just, fair rule because of 1 and 2.

Now just ask the people who worked for the Sherrod’s how fair and just their world with no oppressors was.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 1
Herbal Essence September 22, 2010 at 10:23

I like the article because it points out the destructive belief that praise and resources belong to you without any effort. That’s a main plank of Feminism and Collectivism in general.

I’ve given up on the women changing until the pain of changing is less than the pain of staying the same. And make no mistake…booze, pills, junk food, trash culture, and the self-help industry are designed to numb women’s pain (and men’s to a lesser extent.) Female empowerment, found at the pharmacy and at the bottom of a bottle of chardonnay. What a joke. Notice how you can buy cheap wine, junk food, and self-help books at any pharmacy now. Got all your pain numbing catalysts right there!

“Dismantling Feminism” may be one part of the solution but I think “Empowering Men” is the name of the game.

Feminism is only possible because millions of men are still willing to be the beast of burden or don the jackboots. Though most of them do so without knowing exactly what’s going on.

A woman’s pedestal is made of men bending over. We need only to stand up and her ass is on the ground. (Of course, it doesn’t help men are in many ways forced to bend over…)

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 0
Snark September 22, 2010 at 10:49

Great article, Thag …

ROFL @ the moron who thinks it is “invoking Godwin’s law” to call an actual Nazi a Nazi.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 24 Thumb down 1
zed September 22, 2010 at 10:53

C’mon guys, join me in manning-up!

I considered that possibility years ago, and decided to man OUT instead. I can be as masculine as I like just as long as I make sure to not give any woman the opportunity to use that as something to attack me with or for.

I started out as a conscientious objector to the gender war, but then I got conscripted, so I deserted.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 25 Thumb down 0
zed September 22, 2010 at 11:03

Women would probably argue that her fraud was initially, somehow, someway, instigated or initiated by a man. Never mind that in this fraud, no man was named, and the primary target of the lie was a woman, the liar was a woman, it was women all around. If we were to remove all men from the picture, would this somehow make Bethany Storro less of a liar, or somehow make her unable to lie for profit?

@CashingOut – good observations and analysis.

The most dangerous lie in the entire system of lies currently being hidden by the smokescreen of the name FEMININE-ism is “sisterhood.” Any woman who foolishly believes that women will continue to target only helpless children and men hamstrung by the biased legal system from defending themselves, and leave other women unscathed, is in for a very rude awakening. As your examples point out (in the model of Orwell’s “Animal Farm”) give people a chance to oppress someone else and a large percentage of people will take it.

With the rise of female violence and the infamous pussy-pass, children and men will only continue to be the primary targets of women for so long before their focus broadens to include other women. I can easily envision a day not far off when women have more reason to fear other women than they have to fear men.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 0
Keyster September 22, 2010 at 11:05

The inherent flaw in the Progressive Agenda is the theory that we’ve evolved past our innate human nature. Our tribal nature, hypergamy, survival instinct, pro-creation imperatives, etc. It’s time for “humankind” to transcend traditional constructs and form a global coalition of one like group, that will be easier to manipulate and control.

This is what the elites believe needs to happen. As long as there are “haves and have-nots” we haven’t “progressed” society. If we can help the have-nots rise up, at the expense of the haves, we’ll live in a world of endless peace and mutual understanding among all people. They don’t take into account that humans ulimately live by natural law; eat or be eaten, self-reliance and the constant struggle for power and domination.

They think the USA founding father’s principles were probably better suited for that time, not ours. The time has come to reinvent us into a new social order, where NO ONE is left behind regardless of ability or effort.

Now if only the insane neo-cons preventing this would all either die or become suddenly enlightened, they could make this happen. Neo-cons want to remain in the dark ages of white male supremacy and Christianity.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 2
Travis September 22, 2010 at 11:10

@Keyster
Please tell me you posted that comment over on the Newsweek site…

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Red0660 September 22, 2010 at 11:14

Unrelated breaking news!

Check out the front cover of Newsweek!
“Man Up” “The traditional male is an endangered species”

http://www.newsweek.com/2010/09/20/why-we-need-to-reimagine-masculinity.htmlc

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Red0660 September 22, 2010 at 11:16

Actual link…..

Unrelated breaking news!

Check out the front cover of Newsweek!
“Man Up” “The traditional male is an endangered species”

http://www.newsweek.com/2010/09/20/why-we-need-to-reimagine-masculinity.html

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Skadi September 22, 2010 at 11:29

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 28
Red0660 September 22, 2010 at 11:36

The premise of the Newsweek article is this.

First let me warn you that it uses classic propaganda techniques. I wish I knew the name for it (strawman?) but if you object or offer a logical argument in any way you prove you are what they say you are in the article. Clambering for any semblance of masculinitu, clinging to your hatchet and hunters outfit etc.

The message of the article is that men’s jobs are gone. That men need to accept our growing trade deficit, a non sovereign economy and globalization. In order to get men to role over they inform us that the government will pay men to stay home.

I’d love to see this propaganda torn to pieces here at The Spearhead. The MRA community needs to respond to this “front page news” We all know that this is about subduing men and demoralization so that we do not protest the globalist and big business agenda.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 1
Skadi September 22, 2010 at 11:50

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 21
Red0660 September 22, 2010 at 11:50

Well Skadi if you read the Newsweek article they are doing their best to get men to submit to globalization and big business agenda.

I hope to god men don’t buy the humiliation tactics such as clinging to don drapper and our hatchets or hunting cloths or hating women. It is they that are using gender to divide and conquer. There are monied interests being the propaganda. They want to shut down argument by setting men up.

I hope that men get angry and form ranks. I hope our country will grow dissident. I hope that revolt and revolution come soon. We need to read between the lines. They are telling men to accept globalization, the growing trade deficit so the wealth can continue to be accumulated up top. The distribution has now surpassed 1929 levels that preceded the Great Depression. It is precidented. They want to continue the assault.

I hope men and our people can see what they are doing. Men should buy food, provisions, medical supplies, vitamins, ammunition and weapons and prepare to fight this out

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 0
Skadi September 22, 2010 at 11:51

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 30
Thag Jones September 22, 2010 at 11:54

Red0660, Those are ad hominem attacks – attacks on the person, not the opinion. Also, if you look at the comments earlier, that article is being discussed.

but men have not learned to be like women (and many of them probably won’t).

She says that like it’s a bad thing.

Thag Jones September 22, 2010 at 11:55

Oh no, please don’t address Skadi directly; she is a terminal bore.

Skadi September 22, 2010 at 11:56

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 24
Skadi September 22, 2010 at 12:04

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 23
Red0660 September 22, 2010 at 12:12

Glad to see you guys already found it.

At work now but had to get you guys the Newsweek front page article. Can’t wait to read this post and all the comments. I hope we can get this Newsweek article out into the MRA community and tear it to pieces. I hope we can it reconstructed here at The-Spearhead and on the MRA blog community. Men need to respond to this.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0
Lovekraft September 22, 2010 at 12:12

But once Feminism is reduced to the scrap heap of history’s failed social experiments, then what?

Every time this has happened in the past, the new bunch turns out to be just as bad, if not worse than, their predecessors.

My hope is any restructure can keep the things that work while shaving off the barnacles.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0
Nergal September 22, 2010 at 12:14

“Many women are unhappier now because of the double burden. Women have learned to be like men but men have not learned to be like women….”

You can’t learn to be gay, you either are or you aren’t. Most of us guys aren’t. And women are unhappier because they got what they want (Somewhat like a sports game or video game, when you can easily win, the game is no longer challenging and thus not fun. Whereas before it was exciting, now playing makes you unhappy,because the outcome is not in question.) ,not because of some “double-burden” which has,in fact, been proven not to exist. Men already do their fair share of housework.

“… (and many of them probably won’t).”

CAN’T.

Our masculinity is not something you can strip out of us and leave a fully-functioning man behind. Being masculine arises from our being alive,we both generate masculinity and consume it,without it we cease to exist. Remove the masculine from a man and you are left with something pitiful, pathetic and deformed, you are NOT left with a woman or some kind of man-woman.

You feminists don’t understand that, and you don’t want to. You view us as defective women, not as fully-formed men.

If you want to fuck with people’s psychology start with yourselves, we don’t have a problem with our masculinity,YOU do. Fuck yourselves up with testosterone injections and male-aping behavior until you are twisted androgynous inhuman creatures. We do not have the same issues regarding sexuality you do,we are fine with our masculinity.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 24 Thumb down 0
Red0660 September 22, 2010 at 12:15

Glad to see you guys already found it.
At work now but had to get you guys the Newsweek front page article. Can’t wait to read this post and all the comments. I hope we can get this Newsweek article out into the MRA community and tear it to pieces. I hope we can it reconstructed here at The-Spearhead and on the MRA blog community. Men need to respond to this.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0
Skadi September 22, 2010 at 12:17

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 23
Nergal September 22, 2010 at 12:23

No wonder they mention Sweden. Swedish dads are simply fantastic.

Swedish dads aren’t allowed to stand when they pee. They aren’t “fantastic”,they have been beaten into a cowed and compliant state by the feminist government.

You are a very sick person.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 22 Thumb down 1
Skadi September 22, 2010 at 12:25

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 25
Skadi September 22, 2010 at 12:27

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 25
Skadi September 22, 2010 at 12:28

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 25
Paradoxotaur September 22, 2010 at 12:29

There are people who still read Newsweek?

I’m gobbstopped!

I find it hilarious that the author of the article refers to fictional characters of a TV show I have never watched and probably won’t ever watch.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 0
Nergal September 22, 2010 at 12:31

The point is not to remove masculinity. The point is to let men live their lives the way they want to.

You JUST fucking said you think men should act more like women. Which is it? If given a choice (even if there is no choice), men are going to choose to act like men. A pirhanna isn’t going to choose veganism if you try feeding it carrots instead of meat, it will starve to death because it eats MEAT,you fucking idiot.

A man isn’t going to choose to be a woman if you introduce a bunch of womanly crap into his life and don’t allow him to be a man, he will just die inside.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 1
CashingOut September 22, 2010 at 12:33

“…but men have not learned to be like women (and many of them probably won’t).

She says that like it’s a bad thing.”

The reply says it like it’s a thing the author (Skadi) would actually embrace. For those of you men new to the game (probably no one here, but just in case), let me enlighten you on something. No one wants an effemine/potentially unmanly man less than a woman. This is even if this man is made of iron inside, fully competent, a provided and everything, but simply does not exhibit “alpha” qualities openly.

You see, women do like gay men…so long as they never ever planned on fucking them, or having any other kind of relationship with them beyond gossiper/gossipee, or gay man as her subordinate bitch. When it comes time to get her asshole knocked out, and/or find someone to bring home the bacon, she wants a man who exhibits, well, manly qualities. Why do you think most women marry up?

Women whine about men being more effeminate the way most people say they will do something when pigs fly: it’s something they know will never ever happen, and if it did happen, they’d say they wouldn’t do it because the actual event is repulsive in and of itself.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0
Nergal September 22, 2010 at 12:35

So how is it gonna be.. the woman must be the breadwinner, the parent and the unpaid housemaid… and the man is only supposed to be the breadwinner. Right.

NO. You don’t have to do any of that shit, and we don’t have to do a goddamn thing you want us to do either.

“Unpaid housemaid” my ass, you take 2/3′s to one half of a man’s salary inside and outside of marriage. Don’t fucking lie about that shit, we know better here.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 0
Nergal September 22, 2010 at 12:41

Women have been like men for decades though.

Oh yes, of course you have. That’s why the person who picks up my garbage is always a woman and why I can always ask the females in my life for advice on rebuilding my car’s engine. You’re children playing at being men,you don’t even know what a man IS (or a woman,for that matter) it is painfully apparent in your comments.

You’re not men, you’re not women, you’re not even human.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 26 Thumb down 2
Anonymous Reader September 22, 2010 at 12:57

Migu:
“Survival Child” is what is doing it. At least for me. I survived. I am the oldest, but not the first. It is a sobering thought.

I know the last was also killed, so I’m missing one. His name was Nathan.

My God, Migu, that’s a heavy load to walk with. I can try to imagine what it is like, but I’m sure I can’t really know. Carry on, brother. I’m with you.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0
Amax September 22, 2010 at 13:00

Women whine about men being more effeminate the way most people say they will do something when pigs fly: it’s something they know will never ever happen, and if it did happen, they’d say they wouldn’t do it because the actual event is repulsive in and of itself.

Women whine about everything that makes them feel bad at the moment. When men had the money and they where stay at home mom’s they whined about not having choice or being independant. When men stand up to them and tell them what’s what, they whine about him not being sensitive and wish more men where more like women. When men are effeminate, women whine about them ‘not being man enough’.

No matter what the situation is, women WILL whine about the lack of the opposite as soon as the current situation no longer favors her.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 0
Skadi September 22, 2010 at 13:00

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 24
Skadi September 22, 2010 at 13:02

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 18
Anonymous September 22, 2010 at 13:05

@Thag Jones.”Red0660, Those are ad hominem attacks”

I am familiar with ad-hominem but I am looking for the name of the debate or propaganda technique that was employed i.e if the person debates or gives argument then they demonstrate that they are in fact the ad-hominems used against them.

Perhaps it is simply a non sequitur ad hominem.
We all know they pulled this stuff out of their ass. They say men are latching on to axes, hunting clothes, don drapper outfits and blaming women in an attempt to hold out from submitting to the fact that men’s jobs and a diversified self sustaining sovereign economy is gone. That men should accept this and thus the resulting demise of production and our trade deficit. Globalization is inevitable and any man that resists proves he is the sad pathetic sack of shit mentioned above.

They then say that they are going to pay men to day home and thus attempt to pacify our resistance. This say that men are “overepresented” in business and government anyway and thus should not complain or resist the globalist agenda and lack of male jobs.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1
Red0660 September 22, 2010 at 13:07

@Thag Jones.”Red0660, Those are ad hominem attacks”

I am familiar with ad-hominem but I am looking for the name of the debate or propaganda technique that was employed i.e if the person debates or gives argument then they demonstrate that they are in fact the ad-hominems used against them.

Perhaps it is simply a non sequitur ad hominem.
We all know they pulled this stuff out of their ass. They say men are latching on to axes, hunting clothes, don drapper outfits and blaming women in an attempt to hold out from submitting to the fact that men’s jobs and a diversified self sustaining sovereign economy is gone. That men should accept this and thus the resulting demise of production and our trade deficit. Globalization is inevitable and any man that resists proves he is the sad pathetic sack of shit mentioned above.

They then say that they are going to pay men to day home and thus attempt to pacify our resistance. This say that men are “overepresented” in business and government anyway and thus should not complain or resist the globalist agenda and lack of male jobs.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1
Skadi September 22, 2010 at 13:15

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 22
W.F. Price September 22, 2010 at 13:26

Maybe there will be a backlash to globalization and more localization will happen. Why not build more “male” jobs? As long as real economy is created, it doesn’t matter if the jobs are male or female. Technical, high qualified jobs will always be needed, just learn a trade.

Skadi, hidden behind this supposed rise of the woman is a mountain of legislation that specifically favors women. To get men back to work all we would have to do is repeal these laws and dismantle the institutions that enforce them.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 30 Thumb down 1
Retrenched September 22, 2010 at 13:34

Men in television advertising are often portrayed as barely sentient morons, emasculated husbands, or literate cavemen. So in other words, according to many of my friends of the fairer sex, accurately.

What a disgusting pussy this guy is.

No man should be friends with any woman who thinks of men as subhuman.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 22 Thumb down 2
Keyster September 22, 2010 at 13:36

And yet, women en masse seem to be oddly unattracted to men who work in traditionally female jobs and make less money than them while doing so. Based on my own experience and life long observations they just don’t seem to be lining up to marry house-husbands. When women become sexually turned on by a man who works as a teacher or nurse making half as much as she does; a man of lower career status than her; men might consider “manning-up”. But that’s not the way it works is it? Guys like that are for all the other women, not you.

Isn’t it ironic though that the new definition of masculinity is to be like a woman. And if you don’t accept this, you must not be a MAN! After all women have gone to all this trouble to become more like men, so shouldn’t men become more like women? Feminism would be such a raging success, if only men would agree to be more like women.
It’s our fault, AGAIN.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 0
Skadi September 22, 2010 at 13:46

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 21
Skadi September 22, 2010 at 13:47

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 22
crella September 22, 2010 at 13:50

the woman must be the breadwinner, the parent and the unpaid housemaid… and the man is only supposed to be the breadwinner.

Well, most men are unpaid gardeners and handymen around the house. Women always conveniently forget that fact, crab on and on because their husbands throw socks on the floor or don’t wash the toilets, but how many wives go out and mow the lawn, cut down tree limbs, or can fix the car? paint the house? “Housework” isn’t just what you define it to be.

What’s with the ‘the man is only supposed to be the breadwinner’ comment? After all the time you’ve spent here, you still don’t understand how men feel about fatherhood?

One more aspect of the ‘unpaid housemaid’ comment is that it clearly shows you’ve bought the feminist line hook, line and sinker, when you start to refer to any kind of caring behavior (cooking, cleaning, picking up) as some kind of domestic slavery. Don’t you already have to do these things for yourself? Why is is burden to do them for one other person?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 2
Red0660 September 22, 2010 at 13:58

Skadi says: “As long as real economy is created, it doesn’t matter if the jobs are male or female.”

Skadi, a real economy consists of multiple sectors the basics of which are manufacturing and production which includes engineering etc. It does matter if there are no male jobs.

Globalization has caused this: http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_IU3iQnIt6Nc/S15Qw2KpCNI/AAAAAAAAAVw/hSn3zUfuUcI/s1600-h/l_dc397dc22fc94e89bd790df2505bb8d9.jpg

The reason is because it is profitable to multinational corporations. The people behind the Newsweek article and globalization do not want to create jobs for men. The idea is to liquidate the wealth of the country by globalization and trade policy. One of the ways this is done is by producing cheep goods and selling them back to us at marked up rates. The idea is to make corporations rich while destroying the wealth of our country.

Here is what they have done and have vested interest in continuing to do. The Newsweek article, if you read between the lines is pushing an agenda. Again, if you pay attention the message is that men should accept the lack of a sovereign economy and embrace the service sector economy by submitting to non production and entry into female oriented or service type jobs. They are shaming men who attempt an argument to this. That is what the ad-hominem section was about. The article is a deliberate attempt to demoralize men from resisting. If we do, we prove we are the pathetic, unevolved brutes who latch on to symbolic elements of masculinity.

Again, if you pay attention and read between the lines they are trying to legitimize an economic agenda propagated by the moneyed interests who benefit.

The idea behind the propaganda in Newsweek was to maintain the progression of the below until all the wealth of the country is aggregated into the hand of the few and the Republic is destroyed. Read the article again if you have to. :

Take a look:
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_IU3iQnIt6Nc/S15PWr48dbI/AAAAAAAAATo/jRcEL1iXrdM/s1600-h/Copy+(2)+of+ScreenShot001.bmp

“I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country. Corporations have been enthroned and an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until all wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed.”

U.S. President Abraham Lincoln

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 0
Paradoxotaur September 22, 2010 at 13:59

crella- after all the time you’ve spent here . . . you still respond to Skabi?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1
Thag Jones September 22, 2010 at 14:01

It really would be so much simpler to just have women be women and men be men, but no, feminists have this weird agenda toward androgyny that frankly gives me the willies. There are a lot of men in my city who act like women and talk like valley girls and it really makes my skin crawl. I mean, people can do what they want, but I would find the whole house-husband thing a bit embarrassing; I’d feel too much like some shrew with her husband’s balls in her purse.

Malestrom September 22, 2010 at 14:02

It is not even possible for “most women to marry up” today. There aren’t enough “higher level” men for every woman.

The answer to this so far has been the increasing prevalence and acceptance of soft polygamy and de-facto harem keeping, this looks like to continue for the forseeable future.

Expect at some point to see a legal recognition of polygamy, feminists will whine that it demeans women, but ultimately it will be women’s desires driving this trend.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 1
Szebran September 22, 2010 at 14:06


Thag Jones:
Of course the irony is that now that so many women have been duped by feminism, women are on the whole less happy now than ever”

Isn’t it ironic, now that women have all these jobs and all this money and all the advantages in family court, that they are now less happy than they used to be. AND, with all this new freedom, crimes committed by women (both violent and non violent) are skyrocketing.

BTW Thag – good article.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 1
Red0660 September 22, 2010 at 14:07

Do you understand that the expectations men put on women these days are simply schizophrenic? Do one thing, and you are put down. Do the other thing, and you are again put down. Yea you want her to go out and work, but she must not be “independent”. So which one is it? You need to make up your mind.

Skadi, it is not men who destroyed the possibility for women to stay home, is women. Women entered the workforce, diluted the labor pool which effectively made it necessary for both men and women to work to make the same income the man would make if the labor pool were not diluted with surplus labor. We now both work to pull in an equivalent standard of living. Women did this to themselves. Furthermore, this dynamic is exacerbated by anti-male “equality” legislation and litigation to make up for “the pay gap”.

The pay gap of 78 cents to the male dollar is the Raw Wage Gap or the aggregate disparity of earnings over all men and women in the workforce and NOT FOR THE SAME JOB. In order to resolve this, women create Affirmative Action, Title IX, and workplace legislation. It is now impossible for men to support a woman and child by ourselves. Women MUST now work. You have done this to yourselves. Men want to support a woman while she weans an infant but because of the very same actions and economic policies women have enacted, men no longer can, nor should we.

We both lose. Again, you have done this to yourselves.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 25 Thumb down 0
Redpill September 22, 2010 at 14:08

There is no feminism. Yes, you read that right. NO such thing.

Its all an attitude and attitudes only last as long as there’s food in tummy and a safe place to sleep. Think of it as kids throwing a tantrum. This thing call feminism will disappear in minutes when the shit hits the fan.

Even the most hardcore feminist knows very well that she depends on men for her security and comfort. However that is nothing new and does not gain her any attention.

What’s going on is male-bashing and gossiping on a much bigger scale and the root cause of it is a lack of respect. Women in the west have lost respect for their men and we men must take responsibility. Thats the only way to change things for the better.

Men and women fighting is as smart an idea as two people swimming in a lake with one of their ankles cuffed to each other fighting. Its suicide.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 3
Skadi September 22, 2010 at 14:14

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 20
Red0660 September 22, 2010 at 14:15

Skadi, you need to realize that men and women are in direct competition with each other at virtually every level.

From elementary school, to college admissions, to business hirings, to economic and workplace legislation, to secular representation by gender within government, to the judicial system.

The idea is to out compete, outproduce and out do men by any means necessary. To make us “equal”. More and more, women are getting what they wanted and will soon realize what they have done.

There is vested interests that are behind this and women are their pawns. You have been played into their hands and you are still doing so.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 0
crella September 22, 2010 at 14:24

I just got around to reading the whole Newsweek article…oh boy…

All told, most new fathers take off two weeks or less for a new child, no matter what. Baby time is simply not seen as masculine.

I’d think that in this economy, they’re trying to keep their jobs…how do they draw the conclusion that they don’t take the time off because it’s no masculine? I see no supporting evidence.

If a man refuses time at home with the kids, he faces questions from friends, family, and, yes, other guys.

So there is social pressure in Sweden on men if they don’t toe the line. Why am I not surprised?

crella, not to diminish men’s work in any way, but how often does one have to paint the house and how often does one have to cook and do the dishes?

How hard is painting the house, and how hard is washing dishes? Skadi, you will never have a good relationship if you keep score like this. This is how women kick every relationship in the behind. The petty score keeping ( how many socks you picked up this week vs. how many dishes he washed) nagging and disregard of the man’s efforts at home and at work, always thinking you have it worse.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 2
Nergal September 22, 2010 at 14:26

Besides when women are self-sufficient, they will pick men based on other traits such as sexiness and how they are as a partner.

Feminists have been saying this for 50 years. Women are earning more degrees than men and childless young women make MORE than men. It ISN’T HAPPENING and it won’t happen. If you give peahens long enough, do you think they’ll select peacocks on some other criteria than their plumage? WON’T HAPPEN. Women and peahens select what they do because they are animals, and nature has told them that these qualities are desirable in a mate.

The conclusion? This shit is hard-wired,not “socially-constructed” as feminists claim. Continuing down this path of forcing men and women to behave as the opposite sex is sick,degrading, and motivated by the inability of feminists to handle the fact they they are women. It is motivated by a mental sickness, a sexual identity crisis. These women are sickened by their own identity as women. They are mentally ill,sadistically wicked,and hideously destructive in their aims because they hate themselves and don’t care if everyone,including themselves, is harmed.

I will not argue with you further, I don’t have to. The facts are there for anyone who wants to see. Feminists themselves admit everything that I’ve said,aside from their aims being evil and sick, which is to be expected as sick people are not aware that they are sick and evil people usually believe that what they are doing is ultimately a good thing.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 29 Thumb down 0
crella September 22, 2010 at 14:27

Paradoxotaur, she very often provides perfect opportunities to refute basic feminist tenets.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 2
Skadi September 22, 2010 at 14:29

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 20
Herbal Essence September 22, 2010 at 14:34

I just tried to post this over at the Newsweek article “Why we need to reimagine masculinity” It hasn’t shown up in the comments yet though…

Women are ahead of men at this point in time because: 1. They have access to billions of dollars’ worth of educational, employment, and social safety net resources systematically denied to men. 2. The majority of Female-oriented positions are in Government, Education and Health Care. All three of these industries get money from the Federal Government, which can just print up more worthless paper whenever it feels like it. Private industry, where men are the majority, do not have this luxury. U.S. society is like a game of soccer with 11 female players on one side, 2 male players on the other side, and the losing team is told “Ha Ha, MAN UP you sacks of testosterone!” No surprise men are hurting, but women’s advantage is entirely due to the Government’s willingness to put her on a pedestal.
And as far as the new girlie men: Women DESPISE girlie sensitive men. Women want dominant men. So much so, they will line up around the block to bed the neighborhood meth dealer as long as he has a cool motorcycle and knows how to get physical with her. So when you advise men to “get in touch with their inner girl” you’re basically telling him “Enjoy the celibacy, bro.” Secondly, I don’t know how “girlie men” are even supposed to get jobs in female-dominated industries without the government-required membership card of vagina ownership.
Women are standing tall right now, on a pedestal made of men bending over. Attention men: Do you want to get ahead? Just stand up for yourself. It’s that simple.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 33 Thumb down 0
Richard September 22, 2010 at 14:34

@Nergal

You are the MAN!

Excellent comments sir.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
Skadi September 22, 2010 at 14:35

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 22
Skadi September 22, 2010 at 14:44

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 23
Skadi September 22, 2010 at 14:48

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 21
Skadi September 22, 2010 at 14:55

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 23
Rebel September 22, 2010 at 14:58

@Retrenched:
“No man should be friends with any woman who thinks of men as subhuman.”

No man does.

Those who do are not men. There is even a word that designates them. And they are a huge crowd.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 0
Herbal Essence September 22, 2010 at 14:59

Skadi “Herb, men who work and carry out the responsibilities of parenthood are not “girly men”.”

If fathers are so great, then why do Feminists use family courts and divorce laws to rip children away from their fathers?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 1
Rebel September 22, 2010 at 15:02

Does anyone have a fly killer?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 1
Anonymous Reader September 22, 2010 at 15:26

Brainless Skadi:
I once saw a man holding a small child in Stockholm, and he smiled at me and, of course, I smiled back when I saw him holding the child. After a short while all these women showed up and started talking to him and they were all over him, he looked really peaceful and content. It was an amazing sight.

Only to someone who is ignorant of evolutionary biology. A man with a child is displaying strong social proof that he has both the alpha traits to impregnate a woman and the beta traits to remain after childbirth. That is pure catnip to women, and you will flock around such a man in the hope of taking him away from his woman. It’s no more amazing to people who understand women, than the sight of men flocking to a titty-bar filled with 20-something strippers is to those who understand men.

But that in no way justifies the feminist androgyny you are pushing, that is increasingly forced on Swedish men. Quite the opposite, in fact.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 1
Skadi September 22, 2010 at 15:31

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 21
Amax September 22, 2010 at 15:40

Does anyone have a fly killer?

Yes, it’s called STOP FEEDING THE TROLL!!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 1
Skadi September 22, 2010 at 15:40

Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 20
Lovekraft September 22, 2010 at 15:59

@ Amax: “No matter what the situation is, women WILL whine about the lack of the opposite as soon as the current situation no longer favors her.”

I concur, using a term of my own to encapsulate this notion:

ABT syndrome, or Anything But This Syndrome: the mental deficiency which renders normal people incessant whiners.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 0
Epoche* September 22, 2010 at 16:14

Skadi, I sincerely want to know why you continue to post here? I dont think you are a bad person, I just dont think anyone likes you here that much and you seem to be trying to convince us of your vanilla positions in a very dispassionate way. I am personally very concerned about the future of the country when we debate such foolishness as the future of gender roles when the national debt is a threat to the security of the nation. I personally think we as a country are whistling going past the graveyard.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 0
crella September 22, 2010 at 16:22

On a side note, I can’t say how much I dislike the word ‘reimagine’….if the ‘reimagined’ movies and comics I’ve seen online are any indication, it means ‘take something that ain’t broke to begin with and change it so much it’s unrecognizable, and a much poorer version than the original’

So, reimagine masculinity? No thanks!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 2
Nergal September 22, 2010 at 16:36

I am personally very concerned about the future of the country when we debate such foolishness as the future of gender roles when the national debt is a threat to the security of the nation.

The feminists haven’t gotten the message yet. They think that they can simply radically change the framework of society and things will keep moving along as before because they refuse to admit that men are the ones propping this society up. Likely, it never even enters their minds,as they are so focused on themselves and other women that they don’t even think about men’s part in the equation other than portraying us as an obstacle in some way or another.

I hesitate to use the phrase “Wile E. Coyote moment”, as it is already used in another context, but that is what we will see. Feminists will keep chasing that elusive roadrunner,barrel over a cliff, and the last thing they will be doing before they plunge to their death will be paddling their little legs in thin air,still trying to move still farther away from terra firma.

Unfortunately, when they do, they will take our entire society with them.

It’s sad, but men can avoid their fate,complete decimation, if we just remember the things our grandfathers knew,how to fish,hunt,farm, preserve food,build and persist despite adversity, how to use the seasons to time our actions and how to use the abundance of nature to our benefit.

If we relearn these things, and teach them to our sons, we can rise out of the ashes of society stronger and better than we were before,we can rebuild a healthier society,one that will not be bent to the insane demands of feminists.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 0
Anonymous Reader September 22, 2010 at 16:43

SkadiTroll:
I was more concerned with the man.. he seem very, very content. He was in fact beaming.. and he was really appreciated. Isn’t that what matters the most that the guy feels happy, that he’s healthy and peaceful…

Most men would be beaming if they were surrounded by attentive women of fertile years, that’s evolutionary biology at work as well. It still does not justify the man-killing androgyny that you are pushing.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0
Paradoxotaur September 22, 2010 at 16:49

Re: Sanger

On Mother’s Day I send Michelle Obama a card asking her how she feels about Hillary Cankles receiving the Sanger Award, since Margaret Sanger would have been delighted to have seen Michelle abort her children. I can’t help but imagine that a bit of tension arises from time to time.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0
Thag Jones September 22, 2010 at 17:01

crella, also with the term “re-imagine,” it implies something imaginary to begin with.

Epoche* September 22, 2010 at 17:05

Likely, it never even enters their minds,as they are so focused on themselves and other women that they don’t even think about men’s part in the equation other than portraying us as an obstacle in some way or another.
——————————–
I think that feminism is a part of the progressive agenda that sees anything harmful to white male privilege as beneficial to ‘society’

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1
Epoche* September 22, 2010 at 17:08

I think Skadi wants to meet a traditional man, otherwise I dont know why she would post on this website.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2
Epoche* September 22, 2010 at 17:15

In other words, feminism like communism is part of what Nietzsche terms slave morality. The weak really would cut off their nose despite their face.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 0
SM September 22, 2010 at 19:40

The article is nonsense screed.

Anyone who equates National Socialism with liberalism –in his first paragraph no less– is a crack pot.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 4 Thumb down 16
Shawn D September 22, 2010 at 20:04

@demirogue
“You can’t dismantle it. The mere fact that birth control and on demand abortion rendered the provider role for which most men were brought up for obsolete gives women total power now. Toss in the jobs and who honestly thinks they’re going to give it up? The natural roles of women has been diminished now because of it and in turn made the natural roles of millions of men un-needed and unwanted”.

Sound like freedom but to quote Esther Vilar “Men have been trained and conditioned by women, not unlike the way Pavlov conditioned his dogs, into becoming their slaves”. For fuck sake, look at the how you gents constantly feed the trolls on here.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1
Rebel September 22, 2010 at 20:32

“Amax September 22, 2010 at 15:40
Does anyone have a fly killer?

Yes, it’s called STOP FEEDING THE TROLL!!”

Does anyone have a troll killer?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0
Travis September 22, 2010 at 22:02

Okay. I hate to be a douche. And I don’t want to offend anyone. But I just visited the Newsweek article and saw that in the time since the link was posted here there was a total of one comment by Spearhead readers (thanks, Herbal Essence). Why is it that we can post hundreds of comments here, but it’s too much trouble to post one where it might actually make a difference. All the readers on the Spearhead already agree (well, except for Skadi…). If some of this stuff was posted on more mainstream sites it’s not hard to imagine that some poor sap who had lost everything in a divorce, been passed over for a promotion for a less qualified woman, been arrested on false DV accusations, etc, might actually read it and think “Hey. This guy is right. This is bullshit. Maybe I should educate myself about this a little more…”
But instead we slink off to our corner of the internet and commiserate with a bunch of guys who already agree with everything we’re going to say. As far as I’m concerned, this is the one major flaw of the MRM. The complete and total lack of will to actually do anything about it. We refuse to organize, refuse to seek out pro-male candidates for political office, and refuse to even post comments stating our beliefs anywhere they might be read by people who don’t already completely buy into everything we’re saying.
That’s why the feminists are kicking our ass, and why they will continue to kick our ass. Because they understand that public perception is the key to controlling policy. And with out a counter voice, they completely control public perception.
Like I said, sorry if this post pisses anyone off, but it’s a bit frustrating to me…

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 0
fondueguy September 22, 2010 at 22:47

@Nergal September 22, 2010 at 12:23

‘”No wonder they mention Sweden. Swedish dads are simply fantastic.”

Swedish dads aren’t allowed to stand when they pee. They aren’t “fantastic”,they have been beaten into a cowed and compliant state by the feminist government. You are a very sick person.’

Here is a really good video about fathers rights (or lack thereof) in Sweden.

It is a documentary with a subtle but high impact kind of feel to it. One of the father’s gives a great insights as to why things are the way they are. The title is “The right to be a father”.

Oh ya, the women’s shelter in uppsala (Sweden) protested and put a stop to the amnesty international entry, even getting it removed from the AI website. You can see them bragging about it here. A clear cut example of feminist war on fathers and domineering methods.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0
Kaushik September 22, 2010 at 22:48

The biggest problem of feminism was that it was never about equality. It was about female privilege. While men have not been absolved of their traditional responsibilities — man it up –, women, it seems, no longer need to be traditional. Nobody weeps for a man who works himself to an early grave, but if you are a woman and asked to do housework, or live within what your husband earns, defer to him, then it becomes patriarchy and what not.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 0
dubcik September 22, 2010 at 22:56

And on another note, the UN just declared 40 billion will go toward “women and children’s health”. I’d really like to know when the UN considers a boy becomes a man (at 13, 14?) and is no longer a worthy human being.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 0
fondueguy September 23, 2010 at 00:28

@Travis September 22, 2010 at 22:02

Just posted as Tom w.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
fondueguy September 23, 2010 at 00:34

“And on another note, the UN just declared 40 billion will go toward “women and children’s health”. I’d really like to know when the UN considers a boy becomes a man (at 13, 14?) and is no longer a worthy human being.”

Good point. It about the women and children but men don’t matter so ultimately boys don’t matter. So its women propagating themselves. They (women) are important because they make other women who are important and who just make more women… So why are women important?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0
piercedhead September 23, 2010 at 00:39

Why is it that we can post hundreds of comments here, but it’s too much trouble to post one where it might actually make a difference.
-Travis

Travis, have you any idea how many times I’ve posted on mainstream media sites? Of course not – you haven’t asked. Instead, you presume from the number of comments the mainstream site lets through the filters.

Be assured that many of us have posted time and time again on mainstream media sites, changing our tone, slimming down our message, doing whatever it takes to get past their censors. But it just doesn’t work. Messages favorable to men and anti-feminism are deliberately held back as a matter of course, presumably on commercial grounds. If we post freely here, it’s because we know it will go public. You can be sure many men have answered this Newsweek story, and the censors are holding back on how many they will let through, so that the argument looks lop-sided in favor of editorial policy.

If you want to see men being vocal in the mainstream media, visit those papers that actually publish their writing, like the Daily Mail.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 1
Migu September 23, 2010 at 01:08

Fondue, Travis.

I do it all the time. Saan is one monicker Use. Those sites have mod teams. You can get a rebuttal in, but unlike here it gets deleted after awhile. They even delete responses.

You have to be sneaky and PC to prevent deletion. Sometimes the best way get people here, or Paul and robs site is like this.

“wow looks like we have a long way to go girls, check out these losers at the phallic site the spearhead.” use anchortext for a link. It’ll bring trolls, but it’ll also bring the confused men who think they are alone.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0
Migu September 23, 2010 at 01:22

Anon reader;

To be clear I was speaking of siblings. I have no children and am a bachelor.
There is no burden in it. More like relief. I’m sure glad I wasn’t the one chosen for Hoover food. That and hatred for my mother.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
crella September 23, 2010 at 01:29

I posted. It took several tries to get my message posted, though.

Why are women forever trying to make men into copies of themselves? Has ‘live and let live’ or ‘viva le difference’ never crossed their minds? It’s always about how ‘men can change to be better liked by women’. I’m sure they wouldn’t like a mainstream media article about what’s wrong with them….

The author’s assertion that men take only a week or two after a baby is born because it’s not masculine, is something I’d like to see evidence for. I’d assume that they are trying to keep their jobs in a bad economy. Whatever decisions men make are always wrong, and due to their sex.

“Re-imagining” masculinity ? If it’s like a re-imagined TV series or movie, it means taking something that ain’t broke in the first place, completely screwing with it, and usually results in a hatchet job. Why can’t women let MEN decide the parameters or masculinity for themselves and then live with it? No woman I know would let anyone tell her how to be a woman, and make up lists of conditions to be met. Give men credit for having both brains and hearts and let them follow them.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 2
Travis September 23, 2010 at 03:13

@Piercedhead,
Okay. Sorry. Looks like I might have hit a sore spot. I didn’t realize that comments would be removed by moderators. I posted several that weren’t PC at all, and they all went up just fine. I didn’t stop to think that someone was gonna’ come in and remove them. But so far they’ve been up for almost 24 hours. That’s plenty of time for quite a few people to see them. I don’t know. It just seems like we have kind of a defeatist attitude in the MRM. Things CAN change. The reason all of these politicians bend over backwards to please the feminists is because they know that it’s gonna’ get the women s’ vote, and for the most part it’s not gonna’ cost them the men s’ vote. If enough guys got together and said “Sorry, but we’re not going to vote for you unless you start looking out for our interests a little better (or a LOT better), I can pretty much guarantee they’re at least going to start taking notice.
But we’re never going to get enough guys together to do anything if we don’t start doing a better job of getting our message out there. Hell, I had no idea that websites like the Spearhead even existed until I started looking for them. I just wish more guys out there knew that not everybody is willing to go along with feminist orthodoxy. And to me, posting comments on articles like the Newsweek one is a good way to accomplish that. Numbers equal power.
Also, I just want to say “thank you” to Crella, Migu, and Fondueguy. I really appreciate you taking the time to head over there.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
thehermit September 23, 2010 at 03:22

I guess a few years ago an article like that (Newsweek) would not get any counter-opinion., just the usual feminist BS.
Times they are changin’. The anger is out there, and soon it will explode.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0
fmz September 23, 2010 at 04:02

This 40yr old is less happy today then he was 60 years ago.

That happiness survey is too dumb to contemplate. That they came up with it and the media is reporting it like its meaningful speaks volumes.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Philip September 23, 2010 at 04:08

Very mush enjoyed the article Thang, a good 3 coarse meal for the brain. Topped with a good drink with the men n women, even had a lickle baby girl to take care of (awww bless)

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
Migu September 23, 2010 at 04:19

Travis,

Get an IP blocker. You’re gonna be on the list soon. Quarrying is simple work, but it isn’t easy. Keep at it though and you’ll find the keystone.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Jesse September 23, 2010 at 04:41

And they wonder why suicide is the leading cause of death for Australian men under 40? Self-esteem? In the cold light of reality despair is the overwhelming state of being, not self-esteem. Has there ever been a time anywhere that despair is the leading cause of death? Our civilisation isn’t dying, it’s dead – we just haven’t buried the corpse yet.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 1
crella September 23, 2010 at 05:22

Travis, glad to….I was working on some translations today -I’m one of 6 neighborhood reps, the only bi-lingual one, so it falls to me to make sure the foreign residents are up to speed…fun work, but time consuming. It took me a while to get over there. :-D

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2
Thag Jones September 23, 2010 at 05:33

SM September 22, 2010 at 19:40

The article is nonsense screed.

Anyone who equates National Socialism with liberalism –in his first paragraph no less– is a crack pot.

The ignorance of people…. Dude, try reading up on the history of modern “progressive” liberalism just a little, then compare and contrast to Classical Liberalism, and you’ll see that what you call liberalism is so-called progressivism, out of which came fascism. Before WW2 fascism was seen as a progressive social movement and the label didn’t have the stigma it (rightly) has today.

I didn’t make any equations, I stated a well documented fact about Margaret Sanger, darling of progressive modern liberals everywhere. If you’re too lazy to fact check, that’s on you. If you discover something you don’t like about your shallowly held beliefs, it’s perfectly OK to change your mind. Oh, and I’m female.

Why people cling so hard to defining themselves through some dogma or other, I’ll never know. Seems like unnecessarily taxing work. I guess they figure it’s easier than thinking. I know he won’t read it, but this reader should give “Liberal Fascism” by Jonah Goldberg a go. It’s not an easy read (I didn’t get very far myself but he also has a series of videos on YouTube for those of us too tired to read by the time we have a bit of peace in which to do it) but it’s full of useful information so long as you’re not just going to dismiss it all out of hand because you just can’t stand to have your bubble burst.

Feel free to live in a bubble if you wish; it’s all our funerals though.

Thag Jones September 23, 2010 at 05:35

I wish I’d remember that for some reason the tags seem to close if there are line breaks on here. Weird.

It’s supposed to read:

SM September 22, 2010 at 19:40

The article is nonsense screed.

Anyone who equates National Socialism with liberalism –in his first paragraph no less– is a crack pot.

Anonymous September 23, 2010 at 05:52

fondueguy, your video link just shows a list…?

Just posted a short comment on the Newsweek article. I’ll copy it here in case it gets removed, but it appears to be up for now.

The problem here is that “re-imagine” implies something imaginary to begin with. Masculinity is not some socially imposed imaginary idea but a biological reality. What is imaginary is the idea that we can “reconstruct” people this way, and this androgynous utopia created by fascistic laws that force people to raise their families in a way that the government thinks is appropriate. That’s not making paternal leave a choice but a mandate. It’s smiley faced fascism.

It’s not that I think paternal leave is a bad thing, just that it shouldn’t be enforced by government. Furthermore, it actually doesn’t make a lot of biological sense, considering that mom is the one with breasts full of milk, which she will then have to pump at work so dad can feed the baby its proper food rather than some industrial “milk” product. This is why we have maternal leave in the first place – and so mom gets a chance to recover from the birth.

This whole thing is asinine. Let people make their own choices. Nuts to Sweden and nuts to “re-imagining masculinity.”

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Thag Jones September 23, 2010 at 05:53

fondueguy, your video link just shows a list…?

Just posted a short comment on the Newsweek article. I’ll copy it here in case it gets removed, but it appears to be up for now.

The problem here is that “re-imagine” implies something imaginary to begin with. Masculinity is not some socially imposed imaginary idea but a biological reality. What is imaginary is the idea that we can “reconstruct” people this way, and this androgynous utopia created by fascistic laws that force people to raise their families in a way that the government thinks is appropriate. That’s not making paternal leave a choice but a mandate. It’s smiley faced fascism.

It’s not that I think paternal leave is a bad thing, just that it shouldn’t be enforced by government. Furthermore, it actually doesn’t make a lot of biological sense, considering that mom is the one with breasts full of milk, which she will then have to pump at work so dad can feed the baby its proper food rather than some industrial “milk” product. This is why we have maternal leave in the first place – and so mom gets a chance to recover from the birth.

This whole thing is asinine. Let people make their own choices. Nuts to Sweden and nuts to “re-imagining masculinity.”

Thag Jones September 23, 2010 at 06:12

If I read that whole Newsweek article I’ll be compelled to fisk it, then I will never get anything done around here. I left another comment but I’d better walk away now…. *backs away slowly from her computer*

It’s such ill-thought out daydreaming it’s pretty close to unreadable for me anyway.

Lost_Y September 23, 2010 at 06:58

Good article, Thag! I agree with all points. I’m one of those twenty something brats that grew up with “self-esteem,” BTW. Also agree with Gunn’s comments (as usual).

I put up the Newsweek article in the Forum a while ago if anyone wants to discuss it in a dedicated thread.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Anonymous Reader September 23, 2010 at 07:35

Migu:
To be clear I was speaking of siblings.

So was I.

I have no children and am a bachelor. There is no burden in it. More like relief. I’m sure glad I wasn’t the one chosen for Hoover food. That and hatred for my mother.

That’s pretty much what I was trying to say.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Anonymous Reader September 23, 2010 at 07:38

Youtube appears to have changed its format, or form. Vids now spawn an external viewer rather than playing within a web page, and links thus point to a list of vids all too often.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
The Man On The Street September 23, 2010 at 09:01

I don’t know which is more fun; watching skanki get her arse handed to her time and time again or watching thr thumbing down of every-freaking-thing she says….

TMOTS

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0
zed September 23, 2010 at 09:05

Before WW2 fascism was seen as a progressive social movement and the label didn’t have the stigma it (rightly) has today.

But, at least the trains ran on time! :D

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0
NURBS September 23, 2010 at 10:16

Women have been like men for decades though.

You wish. Women have been propped up by government for decades. Everything women have achieved has been off the back of government law and men’s hard work. Filthy parasites like you are biologically useless. You have no idea what it is to be a man but like a dumb feminist you kid yourself into thinking you are one. In reality you and your feminist sisters are the most pathetic females of any species on the planet.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0
Thag Jones September 23, 2010 at 10:17

lol zed. I actually recently overheard a couple of morons walking down the street using that as an example of some of the good that Mussolini did. I mean really, we’re in for a hard battle here. Give me convenience or give me death!

On a side note, I love it when I comment over on something like that Newsweek crap and no one says a word to me. What, no witty come backs?! I’m pisaddointed.

Skadi September 23, 2010 at 11:45

fondu, I agree with the men in the video. It’s great that there are such videos.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 11
Herbal Essence September 23, 2010 at 14:40

Thag Jones and Crella are kicking ass and taking names over at Newsweek guys. It’s a sight to see.

Also-I posted this under the “New Macho Helps Women” article and thought I’d share.
Attention men: Do you want to be macho? Stop caring about what any woman thinks about you. Women’s demands change by the hour and by whatever the TV tells her to care about. You’re never going to make her happy long-term by acquiescing to what she wants. She’ll just find something else to complain about. Find your approval within, live by virtues you (or your belief system) define, and go your own way. If you must live with or marry a woman (a mistake IMO) then create a great life for yourself FIRST and a great woman will likely want to come along for the ride.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0
Thag Jones September 23, 2010 at 15:23

Ha! Excellent comment HE. Too true.

crella September 23, 2010 at 17:41

Yeeps. (Laughs) I got a smack-down from one poster bragging how she likes to do intensive research before posting an opinion (unlike me) instead of ‘relying on intuition’ , then a few posts down as “evidence” that sex differences are due to social programming she gives the example that *she * has never known a straight guy who likes pink.

Grasping at straws. However, she does say that she and her sisters have different fathers and neither of them know their fathers, so what would she know about how male and female parents react differently with their children? I feel sorry for some of these people, so many in this generation have been given the sh end of the stick, really been shortchanged.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2
trent13 September 23, 2010 at 18:03

Perhaps the undeserved praise we lavish on our children is a subconscious effort to make up for the way we’ve killed our collective spirit. We make children disposable, then treat the ones we “keep” like special snowflakes so that they never quite grow a spine.

How many times have I seen this in women? My husband and I have dubbed it “savior complex” b/c this is the same syndrome derived of guilt that causes women to have undue attachments to animals, and to meddle in the lives of other parents (i.e. like calling the cops on my family for “child-abuse” – they saw my dad giving my daughter a sip of his beer at the beach). Woe to the parents who end up with one of these types of women as their radiology tech when they bring their kid in for an x-ray on a broken arm! Stupid witches.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2
crella September 23, 2010 at 18:13

I don’t know what causes special snowflake syndrome, but I see it all the time in the US. My sister is her daughter’s best friend, with the expected consequences.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2
Thag Jones September 23, 2010 at 19:35

I think part of the special snowflake syndrome, besides guilt, is people waiting until they’re almost past it to have kids (because of women focussing their careers and waiting until the last minute to spawn – you can have everything!), so that the ONE they have that doesn’t have Down’s Syndrome is a near miracle, with its concomitant of making the kid into a project and living vicariously through that.

Also the whole “everybody’s special” kindergarten bullshit that seems to be part of the culture these days. What so many people fail to realize is that if everyone is special, no one is.

Krobelus September 23, 2010 at 20:56

“Herb, men who work and carry out the responsibilities of parenthood are not “girly men”.”

I fail to see why there are so many down votes for this statement. Are we just blindly down voting Skadi, even if she says something we agree with and is actually in line with what we want? To reaffirm the right of the father in childcare?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 9
namae nanka September 24, 2010 at 00:42

““Herb, men who work and carry out the responsibilities of parenthood are not “girly men”.””

“I fail to see why there are so many down votes for this statement.”

WTF is parenthood? and secondly what sense does it make to what was being said?
men being “parents” following the rules taught in books about how to be good and responsible parents will come off as girly simply becaues they are being like little girls following their teacher’s orders.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Herbal Essence September 24, 2010 at 05:45

Krobelus- If fathers are so wonderful, why are women deliberately becoming single mothers and ripping children away from their fathers in record numbers? Typical woman. “Fathers are heroes, until I get bored with them!”

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0
Thag Jones September 24, 2010 at 07:52

Krobelus,

Forcing men to take paternal leave to look after an infant (a job better suited to mothers) is not “reaffirming the rights of the father in childcare.” There is a world of difference here.

Skadi September 24, 2010 at 09:59

“If fathers are so wonderful, why are women deliberately becoming single mothers..”

The problem is exactly that many of them aren’t that wonderful… many are, yes, but many young men aren’t fit to be husbands and fathers. They are too selfish. It is better to be single than to have a “grown up child” that you have to nanny. Relationships are work too, btw, and sometimes the men are not worth the work.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 11
Skadi September 24, 2010 at 10:05

Thag, if he doesn’t want to take care of the kid, what use is there for him? Except, sex and companionship (if the guy is indeed likable). Those are nice, but you can get sex without serious investment and sex and companionship are not the main purpose of life. Having children is much more important. So what is the use of being with a man who is unable to take care of the kid? Or, make enough money to support you while you’re nursing, raising them, etc.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 11
namae nanka September 24, 2010 at 10:14

Just because a child comes out of a woman’s vagina doesn’t exactly make that woman a fit mother either, or maybe it’s the times that we live in, that for a woman to bring a fetus to birth is enough…

Devolving into a feminine society which spends an inordinate amount of time on relationships and physical proximity, when fathers spend perhaps the greatest amount of time with their children than ever, and yet, paradoxically, they aren’t fit to be so…

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1
Alte September 24, 2010 at 10:30

I’m a bit late to the show, but excellent article, Thag.

I’d be interested in seeing the historical perspective more fleshed-out, tracing the links from anti-miscegnation to pedestalization to feminism/socialism.

Also the whole “everybody’s special” kindergarten bullshit that seems to be part of the culture these days. What so many people fail to realize is that if everyone is special, no one is.

Good stuff in the comment threads about the Snowflake Syndrome. No sign of that in our house. I’m a bit of a hard-ass, I think. My kids are very attached to me, though, because they trust me and know that I love them. I think a lot of kids aren’t sure if their parents actually love them, in the sacrificially way. My mother used to gush about how wonderful I was, and how much she loved me, and then she’d dump me in daycare. I was in daycare when I was only 2 weeks old. Talk is cheap.

I think perhaps the “everybody’s special” is a bastardization of the “Jesus loves you” idea. The idea was that Jesus loved us even though we’re all sort of crappy, and if we want to be elevated above that level we have to go out of our way and exert a great effort.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 3
Skadi September 24, 2010 at 10:45

nama, that’s a big problem today.. many guys are only fit to be sex partners, and nothing more. They’re not fit to be dads in an equal relationship, because they don’t want to be “like women”. Ok, fair enough. But – they’re not fit to be the provider either.. because they don’t want to be. Of course, there are still good men, but there are also very many like what I just described.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 11
crella September 24, 2010 at 14:56

skadi, how exactly are you proposing that men ‘take care of the kid’? I just wonder what exactly you refer to.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2
Krobelus September 24, 2010 at 15:05

“Herb, men who work and carry out the responsibilities of parenthood are not “girly men”.

“Forcing men to take paternal leave to look after an infant (a job better suited to mothers) is not “reaffirming the rights of the father in childcare.” There is a world of difference here.”

That’s not what the first statement was saying at all. I interpreted as simply saying that men can both work and be great fathers. That statement alone didn’t say anything about paternal leave, merely that being a father doesn’t diminish masculinity in any way. And isn’t one of the goals of the MRM to promote the idea that fathers can and should be involved with rearing children, and that is not solely the realm of the mother? (Hence the general MRM opposition to custody cases that unfairly favor the mother)

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3
Thag Jones September 24, 2010 at 15:55

STOP RESPONDING TO THE TROLL!! You can’t reason with people like this. It’s like talking to a 15 year-old who just got indoctrinated in social studies class and has a burning need to correct your poor prehistoric views. Even when she does say something that isn’t completely wrong, it’s pointing out the obvious, i.e. there are some stupid men too. You don’t say!

armorknight September 24, 2010 at 16:29

It’s high time to put to rest the myth that men don’t participate in childcare. This myth was created in the same way as the myth that men don’t participate in housework. Many women have conveniently redefined childcare as including only basic things like diaper-changing, feeding, nursing, etc.

However, things like entertaining and playing with children when they are full of energy, providing intellectual stimulation, instilling a moral compass, etc. are also very important parts of childcare. Furthermore, it’s the father who must perform this higher-level childcare because most women are incapable of doing so. That’s why all these children who grow up with single mothers turn out to be messed-up basket cases.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0
Thag Jones September 24, 2010 at 17:03

I agree, armorknight.

Men typically do more as the child matures. As I said before, infant care is better suited to women than men – it’s a matter of biology. As one example, the rough housing play that fathers more often do with children is incredibly valuable as through it, children learn to make quick judgements and think on their feet. Before anyone says “women can do that to!” it’s just not the same when a woman does it. I don’t know why that is, but perhaps it’s because a mother tends to be more careful and worried about injuring a child, whereas a father knows that kids are tough enough to withstand a few bruises or even a broken bone. Not that he doesn’t care or wants his kid to end up in the ER because of play time, but I hope my point is clear.

Lirazel September 24, 2010 at 22:49

I saw him holding the child. After a short while all these women showed up and started talking to him and they were all over him, he looked really peaceful and content.

Is it ok for someone masculine to enjoy holding babies/children?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3
Anonymous September 25, 2010 at 01:39

of course unless it’s like this:
http://roissy.wordpress.com/2007/08/22/unmanliness/

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
Lavazza September 25, 2010 at 13:31

Anonymous: I do not get it. What is the problem with Baby Björn’s? I think they are an excellent invention how to carry a child around while still being able to use both hands.

Maybe the producer should publish an and with a guy carrying a child in a Baby Björn and carrying a rifle or a shot gun in his hands.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2
Thag Jones September 25, 2010 at 17:30

Baby Bjorn is not really an “invention,” but a crappy knock off of a sling/papoose for yuppies – and they are uncomfortable once a baby weighs more than 15lbs anyway, as well as bad for the baby’s spine. Carrying a baby on your back leaves your hands freer than the front carry too – and no spilled Starbucks latte on the poor sprog!

Maybe I’m an asshole (or a sucker for an asshole), but this comment Roissy made on that post cracked me up:

If any woman has a man who is too much of a man to help with baby-minding

define help.
disciplining, playing catch, acclimating the kid to adventure and risk-taking… that’s fatherly help.
carrying infants in papooses… in the front… a mother’s job. millions of mothers do it without nannies. any man who does that will, i assure you, be laughed at and pitied by other men. heartily.

Have you heard of the term “4th trimester”? It’s the idea that all babies are essentially born premature – their nervous systems are not fully developed at birth and proximity to the mother for the first 3 months outside the womb helps this development along. Babies sleeping close to mom will breathe along with mom and are less likely to stop breathing and not start again (also known as crib death or SIDS). Again, biology. Babies are meant to be close to their mothers, which also happens to be where all the food it needs for at least 6 months is.

W.F. Price September 25, 2010 at 18:38

Babies sleeping close to mom will breathe along with mom and are less likely to stop breathing and not start again (also known as crib death or SIDS)

-Thag Jones

I’m pretty sure a significant proportion of SIDS is infanticide. It’s a pretty good excuse, actually. “My baby just ‘stopped breathing’ when we were all sleeping. It must have been the pillow’s fault.”

Actually, as a parent of young children, I know that they say that statistically speaking SIDS is often “caused by the pillow.” I was instructed to keep my son on his back at all times while sleeping, because otherwise he’d be at risk for sudden death from a rogue pillow or mattress.

Hmmm… I think we need a law against those strangling pillows that get up and start killing children in the dead of night. Those naughty pillows have a way of pressing themselves against infants’ mouths and noses, just like cats supposedly did in the old days…

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
Thag Jones September 25, 2010 at 19:40

Hmmm… I don’t know about that. Babies do just stop breathing sometimes and with no signal from the mother, as in sleeping next to her, it sometimes doesn’t restart. There are smothering deaths caused by pillows – leaving a baby by itself with fluffy soft bedding is a bad idea – but I would hope the majority of cases were not infanticide. Premature babies often have “apnea of prematurity” because of underdeveloped nervous systems, so it does make sense.

As for the back sleeping, I couldn’t get my babies to sleep that way for love or money, so I let them sleep however they would (including on me). They also slept next to me though, or in a bassinet without pillows right by the bed, and I made sure to tell the pillows “no funny business!” I did notice every little whimper though, and I used to be a pretty heavy sleeper. Their dad usually wouldn’t even know they’d woken up. There’s just something with mom and infant that is natural like that. I’d even wake up just to “check” on them sometimes, so maybe there’d been some little stop in breathing I wasn’t even consciously aware of.

W.F. Price September 25, 2010 at 19:50

I did notice every little whimper though, and I used to be a pretty heavy sleeper. Their dad usually wouldn’t even know they’d woken up. There’s just something with mom and infant that is natural like that. I’d even wake up just to “check” on them sometimes, so maybe there’d been some little stop in breathing I wasn’t even consciously aware of.

I don’t know if it’s just a mom thing. I still check on my kids at night and in the morning to make sure they’re OK, even though they’re healthy and well past the SIDS age. If they sleep in even a half hour I get worried and have to check — I really can’t prevent myself from doing so.

It’s just because you care. Hell, men even do the same for animals in their care — I think it’s instinctive for both sexes.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2
W.F. Price September 25, 2010 at 20:12

There are smothering deaths caused by pillows – leaving a baby by itself with fluffy soft bedding is a bad idea – but I would hope the majority of cases were not infanticide.

We’ll never know. Doctors say that one case in a family is SIDS, two is suspicious, and three is homicide. That means scrutiny is dependent on a pattern, because smothering a baby leaves no marks. Obviously, not all murderers are serial killers, so we can assume from that that a whole lot of people get away with killing their babies.

What we do know is that infanticide has always been exceedingly common, on the order of 10-15% of live births consistently throughout the ages. Abortion may have reduced killing of delivered children, but anyone who thinks it is now vanishingly rare is very naive.

I am convinced that a significant proportion of children who are supposedly casualties of SIDS are in fact infanticide victims. I challenge a physician to tell me otherwise on his honor.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
trent13 September 26, 2010 at 13:36

I did notice every little whimper though, and I used to be a pretty heavy sleeper. Their dad usually wouldn’t even know they’d woken up. There’s just something with mom and infant that is natural like that.

Ditto. I found that very weird – and once my babies were over a year old, for some reason I was able to sleep through the night without hearing them when they started crying right away. I think it’s some sort of heightened hormonal thing. With my first kid I had a really hard time adjusting to the fact that I would be wide awake at the first hint of noise (every two hours), simply b/c I was always a heavy sleeper and never woke up at night. Husband slept through everything.

I think every guy is different, my dad was a “checker” type – would wake up three times in the middle of the night and check all the doors and windows, check on us and cover us up – but I don’t know how much of that was by necessity, b/c my mom was a “princess career woman” and well, someone had to “mother” us. I have to give my dad props for that, sacrificing himself and his sense of masculinity for our sake.

In my family, I am “checker” and husband is “prince career man.” My dad loves him. (My mom too, although she does go overboard with trying to make sure I am properly submissive to my spouse – and I’m thinking, “really, mom, you are telling me?”)

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2
woman September 29, 2010 at 22:54

Hello, I’m a happy woman who enjoys the fact that I can go to school for anything offered, and get any job available, based on qualifications and not gender. I love that I can aspire to anything that any other human being should be able to aspire to. Not without hard work, of course, but I’m willing to put that work in because I am blessed to live in a part of the world that doesn’t silence or oppress women.

I like men and I have great relationships with them. I respect their gender and what it means to them, as they respect mine.

The stable world that you believe has collapsed never existed. I believe that happiness is the goal, and that no one should be forced into any kind of role they are uncomfortable with.

Cheers!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Steve October 1, 2010 at 08:56

@ woman

It is great that you can do what you want to do. Typically a man will do what he has to do, until the burden becomes too high. Then a man will also do what he wants to do, which is just to survive. When that happens women really are on their own, and may be forced to put their wants aside.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Curiepoint October 1, 2010 at 23:59

I saw him holding the child. After a short while all these women showed up and started talking to him and they were all over him, he looked really peaceful and content.

Is it ok for someone masculine to enjoy holding babies/children?

No, of course not. But then again, that is not what the women who oohed and aahed over this guy wasn’t doing it because they admired him as a man. They admired him for embracing his “feminine” side.

Real men don’t have feminine sides.

They were regarding him as a curious abnormality; a statistical fluke. This is because women, with their walnut-sized brains, cannot wrap their senses around the fact that a man is just as good at nurturing a young life as any mother. To do so would be to undermine the enormous self-conceit they build up around themselves as being the sole purveyors of life. The treatment that fathers get in the eyes of the law and society in general is indicative of that monstrous, and un-deserved female conceit.

I raised two children, nurtured and nursed them, and did all the things that women think men are not capable of doing, and I did it all very well. Every man I know who is a father did the same.

Men don’t need the praise of vacuous women. We don’t need to be treated like we are freaks of nature. We know that we are every bit as good at raising children as you are. We are not concerned with your false admiration. So get off your collective high horses.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

Leave a Comment

{ 1 trackback }

Previous post:

Next post: