Conservative Responses to NY Times Happy Bachelors Article

by W.F. Price on August 5, 2012

A commenter pointed out a piece on Rod Dreher’s blog in American Conservative criticizing the four 30-something men living together in NYC for being self-absorbed and not contributing to society.

It’s a bit depressing to see how conservatives simply can’t help but frame things the same way decade after decade, despite the fact they have lost – badly – over and over again in the culture wars.

However, a lot of commenters on his piece defend the men, although not always in the way we might prefer here. One female commenter, for example, says that they are not that bad, because at least they are not deadbeat abusers…

I, for one, am happy to see that men are finally questioning their “duty” in these matters. It is perfectly reasonable for men to ask “what’s in it for me?” Actually, if a man even asked “what’s in it for society?” I don’t think your typical conservative could give a very convincing answer as far as things stand today.

This isn’t to say that there’s anything wrong with family and childrearing, but instead to point out that that kind of lifestyle simply isn’t viable for a lot of men these days. We have to recognize that not only have a lot of men been priced out of the marriage market, but also that family is a very serious risk to take these days, with a failure rate of about 50%. The consequences of failure, of course, are brutal for men. Worse in some ways than falling on the battlefield, if you count slavery a fate worse than death.

But do we see conservatives doing anything to change that? Nope. They just keep flogging the dead horse of “duty.”

However, there may be hope yet. Even on a conservative website we find comments such as this:

Charlieford says:

I think you may be over-reading all of this. I have a couple friends pretty much like that: unusually bright fellows–too bright and too independent to lie and fake their way through an organization’s hierarchy, but not bright enough, ambitious enough, egotistical enough, to become any kind of super-stars.

Once upon a time America had more room for these people. They lived with their parents, or with a sibling, or they hoboed around. Not so much anymore. We should lament the shrinking options for the congenitally non-conformist.

And, let’s face it, the more standard roles the majority of their peers choose aren’t any great shakes. Yeah, you may have health insurance (probably inadequate) and once you sign for a mortgage, you’re stuck with the house and the job to pay for it, but it is a kind of wage-slavery that the majority loathe–hence their saying, “Thank God It’s Friday,” perhaps the most eloquent expression of our culture’s fundamental spiritual failure around.

The vast majority, I suspect, hate their lives and hate themselves for their cowardice in putting up with their hateful lives, but cannot face that fact–so they find someone else to hate, to distract them.

Yes, there is light at the end of the tunnel.

{ 87 comments… read them below or add one }

Justinian August 6, 2012 at 00:25

I went over to freerepublic to see if they commented on this article.

However I did dig up this article on a similar topic from a year ago and the posts are quite entertaining.

If You’re Not Married by 40, You’re a Freak

Even they realize a problem.

For those of you who are unfamiliar, Freerepublic is inhabited by some of the very worst of baby-boomer conservatives and white knights.

The average age over there is north of 50, and the forum is strictly policed by blue-haired old conservative women who ban you in a second if you stray from the partly line laid down by the crippled, psychotic founder who runs the place.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
piercedhead August 6, 2012 at 00:30

The shamers are nothing more than the guns defending the target. They wouldn’t bother firing if they didn’t know how valuable men really were.

Stories like this frighten them – one day soon enough men will run off the reservation, leaving even the traditional men wondering about their own choice.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0
Brian August 6, 2012 at 00:42

Conservatives are blind to social woes that exist and “liberals” (leftists is a better label because they are only liberal in forcibly taking away other people’s money and spending it) react to social woes that don’t actually exist (they’re liars and make up problems to gain political power and tax money).

Libertarians are the most sensible bunch IMO. It’s tragic that Americans don’t value freedom very much, economic or political.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
Irish August 6, 2012 at 00:43

I can understand if people want to take a stroll off the beaten path, but it’s a little much to then turn around and say to those who have a “traditional” job, “You’re miserable, and you hate your hateful life.”

Not so. I have a house, and a job that I need in order to pay for it, and I’m happy with my life. I personally flourish in a regimented work environment where you positively compete with your coworkers. I still have time to work on my car, write music, and create whatever pops into my head (and lead a decent social life) and I couldn’t be happier.

But I won’t criticize anyone who finds their fulfillment outside of this role. And I would expect the same respect in return.

Yes, advocate for acceptance of people like these four, but don’t go too far in the opposite direction and advocate AGAINST people who aren’t like them. That’s my 2 cents.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
The Whammer August 6, 2012 at 01:19

For those of you who are unfamiliar, Freerepublic is inhabited by some of the very worst of baby-boomer conservatives and white knights.

And how did you come to that conclusion? It just looks like a nothing website to me that’s not even worth reading and where they’re always begging for money to run it. That should tell you something about the value of any website since it’s very cheap to buy a web address, rent server space etc

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
The Whammer August 6, 2012 at 01:58

I don’t think that the story of the 4 men living together really meant anything. They probably just figured that renting one large place was nicer than each of them renting some small apt. and they may have saved a little money by doing it too. It appears that they have 2 floors and maybe even the roof if they’re on top. Even if they didn’t move in together for any financial reason it still has to be better than individually renting. Each one has their own quarters plus a lot of common space they can use if they want to invite a lot of guests over. These buildings that were renovated and were once warehouses or factories really are built like fortresses and usually have a lot of large windows and high ceilings so it feels spacious. If you have the roof too you can practically landscape it because the building is so strong You really can’t do this if 4 people just rented their own apt.
This was just one of those stories that papers write about different lifestyles and really didn’t have any deep meaning so anyone writing something critical about this is just plain crazy.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Lyn87 August 6, 2012 at 06:46

What a depressing article. The author, Rod Dreher, flaunts his utter disdain for four guys who have chosen a path he doesn’t like – that doesn’t fit his idea of what a man does.

I’m tempted to just say, “It’s none of his business,” but the four guys did agree to be featured in the N.Y. Times, and by putting themselves out there they have to accept the brickbats as well as the laurels. Somehow I don’t think they care what the Rod Dreher’s of the world think, though.

What really bothers the Drehers of the world is that they see civilization crumbling and refuse to place the blame where it belongs. It is far easier (and far safer) to criticize four “bohemian” men on a conservative website than to point out that the women he wants them to “man up and marry” are mostly un-marriageable. Rather than focus on whether these men are failing in their “duty,” perhaps he should do an article on the state of womanhood. In place of dissecting the decisions of four bachelor’s he could survey the women he wants them to pair off with. Dreher could ask them such questions as these:

How many men have you had sex with?
How much debt do you have?
What kind of men are you attracted to (note: not the kind you say you want – the kind you usually end up with)?
How many children do you want and when do you want them?
Have you ever broken off a friendship with a woman who initiated divorce?

Mr. Dreher might be surprised by the results. The average American woman of today would have been considered utterly depraved in his grandfather’s day. He wants men to follow the Ward Cleaver “script” from 50 years ago, but denies that society stopped mass-producing June Cleavers before these men were even born.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0
Samizdat Jones August 6, 2012 at 07:10

This was just one of those stories that papers write about different lifestyles and really didn’t have any deep meaning so anyone writing something critical about this is just plain crazy.

The reason people are getting so excited over this article (both positively and negatively) is because these men are ahead of the curve on a trend. There are no women of worth (or at least it is very difficult to separate the wheat from the chaff) so why bother to do anything but enjoy life? Since it is common knowledge that more people working together make lighter labor, why not pool your resources and get a larger space to live in? Why not combine incomes and get that larger television? We used to call such an endeavor the family unit, but since that has been utterly destroyed by feminists carefully deconstructing and removing the functional bits, other avenues have to be explored now. The principles haven’t changed–just the people involved.

So if true adulthood is denied, why not return to dorm-life within a fraternity of close friends?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Uncle Elmer August 6, 2012 at 07:37

“I personally flourish in a regimented work environment where you positively compete with your coworkers.”

That is not the norm for most regimented work environments Mr. Irish, as they are jammed with women with whom positive competition is not an option. If it’s working out for you that’s great and no matter your path you will have to make some compromises, so Encorpera can still be a viable option for many men if they manage it well. If you pull it off and build some equity that you can later coast on you have worked it to your advantage. Everything has a down side. Personally I could not fathom a career in the military but now 30 years later sometimes think I should have weathered it to retirement as my civilian job experiences over that time span were not any better than whatever inconveniences the Army might have dished out.

As for the four fun-guys, perhaps conservative outrage is about Men of Lack of Color not keeping their nose to the stone to float the rest of the boat. Maybe that’s why we are seeing an uptick in ForeignBride Outrage lately, as that is still a good option for these guys when and if they are ready to take on a wife.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Jim August 6, 2012 at 07:39

Sure they should be worried. Hell, if enough men realize there are greener pastures outside the norm, do you honestly believe they’ll contemplate setting themselves up for what amounts to being lowly pack mules for society?

I’m 40 and single and while guys my age are putting in extra hours as work to STAY AWAY FROM HOME because it’s miserable, I’m hitting the pool. Why should any man put in the effort to work MORE than he has to? For this society? Hell no. You want a bunch of ignorant morons to be the majority of the make up of it and charge me to feed them via taxes? And what’s worse, keep me in line as a serf while allowing them freedom from choices and responsibility under the guise of welfare, poverty, and feminism. I don’t think so. Take your culture and shove it where the sun don’t shine. I’m going to get a tan.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0
Tom Smith August 6, 2012 at 08:01

The article in the NY Times demonstrates that in the cities some men have “opted” out of the traditional lifestyle of getting married and having kids. I do not see this as a problem, it’s an alternative, which the conservatives cannot seem to understand- IN SPITE OF THE FACT THAT THESE FOLKS HAVE EMPOWERED WOMEN TO DO THE SAME.

It’s interesting to know that at least two of the guys have girlfriends. And interestingly, one of them who is over 40 has a girlfriend in her mid-twenties.

Perhaps this type of lifestyle will only grow as time passes. But it’s hard not to want to be single in a city like NYC where there are more available women than men. If you could erase the “attitude” US women have, it NYC might be seen as one of the few ideal cities for a single male.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
John August 6, 2012 at 08:09

Hey, where the hell have all those hard working joes gone?…….. Oh shit!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
reality August 6, 2012 at 08:31

This is how some people in Sweden live. Although, it can be both sexes too. It is a type of communal living, intended to save resources. They have the famous tvättstuga there too, a laundry place where everyone takes turns to wash their clothes.

The Soviets also had communal apartments (even small ones), where usually two families lived in two separate apartments, but shared a kitchen space.

In TV series “Friends” there is a similar arrangement. To each his own.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Keyster August 6, 2012 at 08:46

My neighbor told me I was really lucky that I don’t have to work. I replied the reason I don’t have to work is because I don’t have a wife and two kids, a mortgage and a car payment. This is a guy that works as a construction foremen, out the door every morning by 6AM, home by 6PM every night to his perpetually unsatisfied/demanding wife and screaming kids. He wishes he had my life of leisure.

Yes, it’s lonely at times but I have a very low tolerance for domestic strife of any kind. The grass isn’t always greener.

Another friend is close to retirement and just wants peace. He no sooner kicked his drug addled daughter out of the house, and another daughter moves in with hubby and grandchild…because he can’t find work. Now they’re fighting all the time, and hubby is stressed and very irritable towards everyone. There’s so much dysfunction and stress I can’t even bear to visit them anymore.

I like peace.

My other neighbor came over yesterday crying at my door that she locked herself out and that it was all her boyfriend’s fault because he didn’t keep the house key on the other car key chain. “I see, so it’s ALL Jim’s fault that you locked yourself out.” I said. When I asked her for a credit card she said she didn’t want to pay for a locksmith. I said, “Just give me a credit card, anyone will do.” She said “Here take this one I never use it”. (It was Victoria’s Secret!). I had the door opened within 30 seconds. A couple of hours later she came back and gave me a bottle of beer and thanked me “for being my hero”.

You can’t escape the drama.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
Rebel August 6, 2012 at 09:31

Four guys in their thirties are not married and everybody is up in arms?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
walking in hell2 August 6, 2012 at 09:36

Guys, you might enjoy this:

Faces of rejected bachelorettes; or when all the female dreams of alimony, child support, and hypergamy, fly out the window.

http://facesofrejectedbachelorettes.tumblr.com/

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
MRA August 6, 2012 at 09:55

Something you can notice in those men are the fallowing:

-The are in pretty good shape
-Well dressed
-Mature and well spoken
-Some “game” skills, considering their girlfriends are not single moms, are in good in shape and feminine

I think if the number of men living like this increase (Is a fact in going to increase) feminists will find a legal penalty to forbid men from living like this, like many male-only clubs were banished after they were hit by legal consequence for not allowing women in.

In internet there is a big trend for “bachelor apartments” (google “bachelor apartments” and look), there are many sites and guides on how to do it, most come from late 30s early 40s never-married-single guys, taking in hands that most men have carpeting, plumbing and construction skills, it would be easy.

By the way men are more adaptable than women
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=juWaO5TJS00&feature=player_embedded

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Doc August 6, 2012 at 10:33

Hmmm… As a conservative (well fiscally conservative – socially liberal) male, I see these guys as recognizing that today marriage, and anything more than “hooking-up” is foolish….

I would expect any intelligent male who looks at things objectively to see the present set-up as a no-brainer when it comes to relationships. Why saddle yourself with an asset of decreasing value (a wife) when you can trade in at any time for the latest model? Of course women are always criticizing me, and more than a few of the married men who envy my life – but I see the guys in the article as recognizing that today’s marriage laws unfairly benefit females at the expense of males. So the only same choice is – “not to play the game”…

But then, I guess I would fall into the “libertarian” regime more than “conservative” as it is used here…

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
a_guy August 6, 2012 at 10:40

I am familiar with FreeRepublic. It is a conservative site where the members discuss the current issues in the news. There are quite a few older people there, boomers and whatnot, who are still holding on to standards they learned in the 50s and early 60s, before the world went insane, and they can’t seem to grasp how much things have changed, but that seems to be a characteristic of getting old in general – you think today’s music sucks compared to your day (which isn’t always wrong), you think today’s kids are freaks (which isn’t always wrong), and you think the world has gone to hell (which isn’t always wrong). However, as a whole, FreeRepublic is a good place to go to see what American conservatives are thinking. A lot of times, some real good discussion goes on there. And there are a lot of younger people on the site as well. After all, it has something like 150,000 members.

On the subject of older people, such as baby boomers, being white knights, I’d have to agree with that, and the reason is obvious: these people grew up in a time when the country was still sane, where women acted like women, men like men, and gays were still in the closet instead of in your face everywhere. This older generation simply cannot understand the extreme changes in culture and the nature of women over the last 40-50 years. They simply can’t. I’ve had discussions with older guys (in the 50-70 + range) on other sites regarding marriage and dating and universally, they seem to be stuck in the 1950s version of the USA where a good man marries a woman before demanding sex, etc. Even when you try to explain that women are largely uncouth whores these days, they simply say that you must be a guy who hates women or some such nonsense, because they cannot conceive of a world in which it is common for a woman to have fucked 20-30+ guys by the age of 25-30, with a history of disease, abortions, or bastards to show for it. They also cannot conceive of family courts that treat men as slaves and criminals.

There are younger guys who do the white knight thing because they are weak and gullible, but the older guys do it because, at the time of their formative years, it was appropriate behavior, because women were worthy of it, in general, and these older guys do not understand how things have changed.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
gunner451 August 6, 2012 at 11:10

The problem with most conservative websites and conservatives in general is that they are typically operating from a fixed view of how the world should work that was set around the time Queen Victoria was at her height of power. This gives them a fundamentally flawed view of human nature and in particular the nature of women. Add to that the expectations of how men are supposed to behave in this idealized society that they have constructed in their head and you can see why they appear to have a disconnect with reality. They just can’t seem understand that the society and laws have radically changed and that those changes really do drive men to make choices at odds with their view of how the world should work. They also just can’t seem to understand that their Victorian views on the nature of females is totally out of whack with reality.

Trying to have an intelligent conversation with conservatives is an exercise in futility as they just cannot make the mental leap from their world view to what is the reality on the ground. It usually takes a terribly traumatic event to shake them out of their world view and open up their eyes like getting hit with a divorce and having their kids stolen by the ex-wife. And even then most of them will refuse to accept reality and turn their problems in on themselves as something that they did wrong.

It is understandable to a certain degree since these people have been indoctrinated their whole lives with this world view and it is quite disconcerting to have the whole mental frame work of how the world should work pulled out from under you.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
uk Fred August 6, 2012 at 11:15

We seem to have reached the stage where anyone who does not conform to the social norms decreed by the powers that be is no longer considered eccentric, but rather considered dangerous to society.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
bobsutan August 6, 2012 at 11:38

The 4 men in the article are at the vanguard of MGTOW and it scares the shit out of feminists and conservatives alike. All the ire levied towards them is just a rehashing of what women faced in the 60s and 70s as women’s roles in society changed. These men are a clear example of the wheel turning. It’s men’s turn to shed social expectations and only now do people appear to recognize the long-term problems this will bring about. Don’t get me wrong, I’m happy men don’t have to be slaves to women and society at large any longer, but long-term men (and women) not contributing to society, to withdraw inward and only live for themselves, this is what causes civilizations to crumble. As more men opt to go their own way, to use Game and reject traditional relationships, when all of this comes to a head we’re going to see explosive cultural change in the form of some very serious economic downturns and women seeking/resorting to more traditional relationship dynamics in order to be provided for when the entitlements run out.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
TFH August 6, 2012 at 11:39

Remember that ‘social conservatives’ are often just leftists who have a thin veneer of Christianity (aka Churchianity) to cover up their leftism.

But the small-government, fiscal-con types are the ones most likely to see Men’s Rights concepts most clearly.

The Republican Party (like the Dem party) is a conglomeration of disparate and even incompatible factions, with ‘SoCons’ being leftists with a thin layer of Christianity, and thus quite incompatible with the small government fiscal-con types.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
pb August 6, 2012 at 13:12

Dreher has read Roissy before, and may have been even more open-minded about what men have to say about contemporary American women, but he is dismissive of some of the responses as being from “Roissy followers.” I wonder if that one post by Roissy about Dreher offended him enough that he’s rejected everything else.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Anonymous Reader August 6, 2012 at 13:14

Dreher’s just another Gen X pedestalizing SoCon who is totally out of touch with the modern SMP and MMP. He probably is convinced that “Sex in the City” is totally fiction, for example.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Anonymous Reader August 6, 2012 at 13:26

Here’s the tell. In this comment:
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/boys-to-men-or-not-whatever/comment-page-1/#comment-372299

Dreher writes:

Not impressive.

Little to no savings. Flitting from this to that. Not committing to women. Never thinking about the future. Yeah, old age is going to be a bitch for these guys. Maybe they count on being young forever.

There’s the evidence. Dreher, pedestalizing SoCon that he is, is really worked up because — eeek! — these men are not committing to women, i.e. they are not submitting to the Feminine Imperative, as he, manly Rod Dreher does.

Perhaps the real problem Dreher has is…jealousy.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
MKP August 6, 2012 at 13:43

The Japanese are a few years ahead of us on this one. Their male societal drop-outs, sometimes called “sou-shoku” or “Grass-eaters,” have been a recognized phenomenon for nearly a decade.

Articles that characterize Japan’s sou-shoku as fashion misfits, or as effenimite nerds too “weak” to compete, are way off-base. They simply responded to the situation in the way that was best for them, the same way these gentlemen in the NY Times are doing.

Japanese media and trad-con types responded in three steps. First, it was mocking. “Ha, ha! Look at the pathetic grass-eaters!” Then, it became anger. “You better grow up and put on a neck-tie and get a corporate job in an office! We order you!”

By this point, they’ve reached the stage of pleading. “PLEASE, go get a good job and start paying taxes! We NEED you to grow up! Please!!!” That’s where American talking heads are headed within a few years with respect to men who won’t “man up.”

Don’t despair, guys. It’s a great time to be alive. Savor every free, relaxed, self-determined evening. Don’t respond to people who say that Western Civilization needs you. Western Civilization has been mocking and attacking you for decades now. Go do your own thing.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
keyster August 6, 2012 at 13:55

The Republican Party (like the Dem party) is a conglomeration of disparate and even incompatible factions, with ‘SoCons’ being leftists with a thin layer of Christianity, and thus quite incompatible with the small government fiscal-con types.

There is a divide taking place between God fearing tradcon conservatives and Tea Party “extremists”. Ironically, it’s women that dominate Tea Party leadership. Shrink government and you starve the single-mom culture.

Rick Santorum was rejected because of his tradcon perspectives, along with Michelle Bachmann. The Religious Right is a “special interest group”, that most Republicans are not entirely comfortable with…but then freedom of religion in general has become a Conservative notion, as liberals seek to have government take the place of “faith”.

When Bill Bennett and like-minded dinosours die off within the next 10 years, a whole new generation of conservative thought towards family and/or freedom will reveal itself. The Free Market always finds a way around social engineering or pressure to adapt the way they want you to.

It will be conservative women that stand up for men and marriage, because the men can’t and liberals certianly won’t. Give it time. Conservative women still like men. Liberal women like men as long as they’re non-threatening, androgynous, metro-sexual Democrats.

I apologise for Conservatives not fighting feminist governance harder, but the entire Secular-Progressive movement has been a bit of an onslaught the last several decades – in our schools, our media and our government…indocrinating one generation at a time.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Rebel August 6, 2012 at 14:16

@MKP:
“Western Civilization has been mocking and attacking you for decades now. Go do your own thing.”

Yes!

And on top of that, feed on the sick society that has been feeding on you. Take full advantage, just like the Japanese grass eaters do.
And have a great time doing it.

Carpe Diem all the way!

And for the love of God, do not worry about a “collapse”. There will be no collapse: just a gradual decline. A civilizational decline can be much fun: everything becomes smoother and easier.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
zed August 6, 2012 at 14:32

I apologize for Conservatives not fighting feminist governance harder, but the entire Secular-Progressive movement has been a bit of an onslaught the last several decades – in our schools, our media and our government…indoctrinating one generation at a time.

There’s nothing to apologize for here, Keyster – least of all having you apologize for something that isn’t your fault.

Conservatives are paying the price – just as they would pay a price for not having fought a fire that was burning down their own houses, hard enough to put it out.

It really is like a sinkhole that opened up in their back yard 35-40 years ago. Those that took the attitude – “Well, it isn’t very big, and will never grow enough to be a problem” are now confronting the fact that their whole back yard, their gazebo, and their back porch have disappeared into it, and the back wall of their kitchen is caving in.

The biggest problem the socons have now is that they have to turn to cannibalism – they have to eat their own. The people being hardest hit are the ones who share their values.

We “go pound sand” people have skated through this with nary a scratch.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Anonymous Reader August 6, 2012 at 14:41

keyster
It will be conservative women that stand up for men and marriage, because the men can’t and liberals certianly won’t.

Well, yeah, for some definition of “marriage”, and some definition of “men”. But given that what passes for “conservative” is simply what was “liberal” 30 years ago, I’m pretty sure my definitions aren’t the same as yours. Consider the NRO site. Jay Nordlinger is a “conservative” just as Lyndon Johnson was a “conservative”. Mike Potemra approves of women leading the churches, approves of homosexual marriage, approves of feminism in general, but he’s against abortion so DING! he’s “conservative”.

You won’t find any “conservative” defenders of marriage who have one peep to let out about men’s-fault divorce, about the Bradley amendment, about VAWA, about anti-Family court, about chil-amony. So I dunno where all these “conservative” women are hiding for now, all I see are gynocentrists who are less hateful towards men than the average feminist is.

My take is this: the average “conservative” women wants a man to “lead” her, but only where she has already made up her mind to go. So what she really wants is not a leader at all. She wants a chauffeur. In a nice uniform, with a tidy hat, who opens doors for her and does what he’s told to do.

Give it time. Conservative women still like men.

Sure, so long as those men know their place, and stay in it, and do as they are told.

Liberal women like men as long as they’re non-threatening, androgynous, metro-sexual Democrats.

In other words, they are just like “conservative” women, they just want different wrapping on their toy robot / walking ATM / sperm vending machine. Got it.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
W.F. Price August 6, 2012 at 15:10

Dreher has read Roissy before, and may have been even more open-minded about what men have to say about contemporary American women, but he is dismissive of some of the responses as being from “Roissy followers.” I wonder if that one post by Roissy about Dreher offended him enough that he’s rejected everything else.

-pb

I went back and took a look and, yeah, Roissy really skewered him. But he kind of deserved it for suggesting that it’s worse when men cheat than when women do. The pedestalizing in that article Roissy pointed out was above and beyond all but the most extreme social conservative posturing.

Anonymous Reader August 6, 2012 at 15:35

Welmer
I went back and took a look and, yeah, Roissy really skewered him. But he kind of deserved it for suggesting that it’s worse when men cheat than when women do. The pedestalizing in that article Roissy pointed out was above and beyond all but the most extreme social conservative posturing.

Oh, well, then, alles klar. Dreher is just another butthurt beta who gagged on the red pill, knocked the glasses off his head and ran off in the dark crying for Mommy to make the bad men stop saying those scary things.

In other words, a typical social conservative member of the GOP.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
TFH August 6, 2012 at 15:43

Since Rod Dreher’s whole argument seems, on the surface, to be around the creation and raising of children….

Dreher should strongly approve of Toban Morrison, the Canadian man who decided to bypass the risks of child support and hire a surrogate in India to become a father as a single man.

http://photogallery.thestar.com/1038282

So he has done everything Rod Dreher demands, *except* be a provider to a woman.

Yet, somehow I suspect that Rod Dreher would disapprove. A child needs two parents after all, except when the single parent is the mother.

Toban Morrison is not even using taxpayer money, or extracting money from some mother (the way a single mother would leech off of the father while still excluding him from the child’s life).

This example would expose the huge double standard and groveling nature of Rod Dreher.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
ode August 6, 2012 at 15:50

Elmer says:

As for the four fun-guys, perhaps conservative outrage is about Men of Lack of Color not keeping their nose to the stone to float the rest of the boat. Maybe that’s why we are seeing an uptick in ForeignBride Outrage lately, as that is still a good option for these guys when and if they are ready to take on a wife.

So let me get this straight: Social welfare Liberals, SoCon Conservatives, Black civil rights advocates, Feminists, and White nationalists are ALL in agreement that this is a bad thing? Now that’s what I call a VERY unusual coalition.

What do all these different groups have in common?
answer: they ALL rely on men to “keeping their nose to the stone” so they can enjoy their lifestlye. All these different ideologies can be placed in the same boat and kicked to the curb. If the rest of society wants us men to work hard and bring home the bacon then they have to put a better offer on the table then what we can get elsewhere.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
zed August 6, 2012 at 16:09

What do all these different groups have in common?
answer: they ALL rely on men to “keeping their nose to the stone” so they can enjoy their lifestlye.

they ALL rely on WHITE men to “keeping their nose to the stone” so they can enjoy their lifestyle.

What is so funny is how thoroughly some guys have been brainwashed. A left-leaning friend of mine recently praised Michael Moore’s book “Stupid White Men.” I wanted to hold up a mirror to his face and say “Notice anything about your own complexion? Do you realize that Moore is talking about you, as well.”

All this would not have been possible without brainwashing men into loathing themselves and other men.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
TFH August 6, 2012 at 16:11

Not committing to women.

What-a-fucking-slimy-coward……

Here is the proper response to someone like Rod Dreher (unfortunately, he deleted this when I posted it at his blog) :
____________________________

Rod Dreher performs an important role in society. Without him, the present status quo would not be possible :

Pickup artists want to have sex with women.
Women want to have sex with pickup artists.
Rod Dreher gets to pay the bills !

Everyone performs their ‘duty’ and reaches their full potential, so everybody wins!
_______________________

The text enclosed between the two horizontal lines is the proper response to any SoCon/mangina. It is designed to cause them the most apeshit fury for the fewest words to text.

Use it often, my friends.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
zed August 6, 2012 at 17:36

I apologize for Conservatives not fighting feminist governance harder,

It wasn’t just that they didn’t fight it hard enough – some conservative factions threw their full support behind it. The religious right enthusiastically jumped into bed with two of sickest feminists who ever lived – Andrea Dworkin and the god-mother of feminist governance, Catherine MacKinnon. One thing both sides agreed upon – men are the only members of the human race who experience that awful, horrible, EVIL sexual desire!

If one of their Evangelical American Princesses gets caught butt-in-the-air with her panties down around her ankles, THEN IT MUST BE THAT THE EVIL MAN “RAAAAYYYYYPPPPPPPED” HER!!!”

Remember when Bill “Judas” McCartney sold out an entire stadium full of honest, genuine, Christian men to the feminists? What had been the most dynamic movement of Christian men since the Mormon Migration collapsed into a heap overnight.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Buddy Guy August 6, 2012 at 18:01

@TFH

Toban Morrison, the Canadian man who decided to bypass the risks of child support and hire a surrogate in India to become a father as a single man.
http://photogallery.thestar.com/1038282

Thank you for this. I haven’t thought about this path and will strongly consider it.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
troll king August 6, 2012 at 18:33

OT.

Apparently manboobz is going to be on Al-Jazeera tomorrow to talk about misogyny online.

http://manboobz.com/2012/08/06/i-will-be-appearing-on-al-jazeera-english-tomorrow-afternoon-and-you-can-be-a-part-of-it-too/#comments

Maybe we can get some info out.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
TFH August 6, 2012 at 18:34

I haven’t thought about this path and will strongly consider it.

Good. If you really do, there are many clinics in India where this costs just $25,000.

The clinic in Anand, Gujarat, run by Dr. Naina Patel, is well-known. Check it out.

Donor eggs can be of any race woman you want. If you want something other than the local Indian, you can have white, Chinese, or whatever flown into the clinic.

You can even do two kids in parallel with two surrogates. It just would cost more.

I, and many others here, will heavily, heavily encourage you if you do this, and provide an endless supply of moral support against all the haters you encounter upon making this choice (they don’t want men to have ‘choice’, you see).

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Theo P. August 6, 2012 at 18:41

Since when was art not a contribution to society? Why, I have a copy of The Burning Wheel right here. Hail Luke Crane!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
TFH August 6, 2012 at 18:41

It wasn’t just that they didn’t fight it hard enough – some conservative factions threw their full support behind it.

Oh, they are desperately doubling and quadrupling down in support of demanding men sacrifice themselves no matter how unworthy the female recipients may be.

On the Rod Dreher blog post’s comments, a number of commenters are pointing out the risks inherent in the law, and he totally avoids those comments, or even deletes them (he deleted my comment that linked to Wedded Abyss).

And Roissy pointed this out to Rod Dreher 3 years ago. So clearly Rod Dreher has heard the point about the risks of ‘family law’ many, MANY times. Yet he does the ‘la la la……I can’t hear you’ as hard and as desperately as anyone possibly can.

Second point : He claims to be for ‘children’, but he deleted my comment that posted the Toban Morrison link.

Toban Morrison did exactly what Rod Dreher claims to be supporting – having children and raising them in a stable environment. All Toban Morrison did aside from that was avoid having to support a woman for life.

Yet Rod Dreher deleted the Toban Morrison comment. Imagine the mentality of someone who deletes a comment that might inform someone of that. He really doesn’t want any men to know about that (the way Buddy Guy learned about it a minute ago).

That tells us all we need to know about uber-mangina Rod Dreher.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Society Contributor August 6, 2012 at 19:10

“A commenter pointed out a piece on Rod Dreher’s blog in American Conservative criticizing the four 30-something men living together in NYC for being self-absorbed and not contributing to society. ”

What do they consider “contributing to society”? Having kids? That’s more like leaving a huge carbon footprint and in fact leeching off the environment. They pay taxes, even if its just on video games they buy, hence they contribute financially to society. They are also contributing to the mental and psychological health of 3 other members of society by living together and being friends, offering support.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Great Books For Men GreatBooksForMen GBFM (TM) GB4M (TM) GR8BOOKS4MEN (TM) lzozozozozlzo (TM) August 6, 2012 at 19:15

zlzozozoo

when conservatives say “man up”
they mean “lube up! and marry and pay for a butthexed woman so she can butthext you din divroce court and transfer your assets to d fedz bankersd divorce lawyers and take your kidz! lzozlzloz”

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
V10 August 6, 2012 at 19:36

@Rebel: “Four guys in their thirties are not married and everybody is up in arms?”

Feminism is the nagging fear that somewhere, somehow, some man is happy with his life. Here are 4 of them, conspiring together to pull it off. This a fucking September 11th terror emergency.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Reader August 6, 2012 at 19:54

Do I understand correctly that The Spearhead is making common cause with… wait for it… the liberal New York Times?

I do understand that there’s a huge clash between TradCons and MGTOW. But in this instance, the blogger’s praise for the men’s lifestyles is amazingly consistent with what the NYT’s readership (liberal feminists!) are saying, too.

I found more than a few female feminist commenters praising these men.

Did you see these comments, all from left-leaning women?

“This was a wonderful story. Family comes in all different shapes, sizes and genders. I see a reality show (okay i said it) on Tv coming soon.”

“Follow your bliss boys! I’d live with my girlfriends and sisters if we all weren’t unhappily married and raising children!”

“Fantastic! Ithink it’s great that these guys get along so well and are happy together.”

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
Society Contributor August 6, 2012 at 20:20

@Keyster,

“Rick Santorum was rejected because of his tradcon perspectives, along with Michelle Bachmann. The Religious Right is a “special interest group”, that most Republicans are not entirely comfortable with…but then freedom of religion in general has become a Conservative notion, as liberals seek to have government take the place of “faith”.”

>>>The concern for non-Christians like myself is that they will attempt to replace the our government with *their* faith.

“When Bill Bennett and like-minded dinosours die off within the next 10 years, a whole new generation of conservative thought towards family and/or freedom will reveal itself.”

>>> Again, family values are great, but there are many, many other religions out there practiced by Americans like myself than Christianity. Their attempts to turn this country into a “Christian nation” is worrisome.

“I apologise for Conservatives not fighting feminist governance harder, but the entire Secular-Progressive movement has been a bit of an onslaught the last several decades – in our schools, our media and our government…indocrinating one generation at a time.”

Christian indoctrination is just as objectionable to non-Christians such as myself as Secular Progressive indoctrination is. At least Secular Progressive indoctrination is either neutral when it comes to religion or respects the right to religious freedom of choice for everyone.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
a_guy August 6, 2012 at 20:59

I think one thing that needs to be done is to define our terms better. There are a lot of people who are called “conservative” in the USA who are not conservative at all. Just being Christian, for example, does not make one a conservative in any sense. For proof of this, all you have to do is look at what is happening with many of the Protestant churches these days. The Episcopalians have all but embraced devil worship: they ordained women as priests, then lesbians and gay men, all while endorsing and performing gay marriages. There could not be a more severe rejection of Biblical scripture if they began their masses with “Hail Satan”. Yet, if someone were to say he was Episcopalian, most would assume he was a social conservative. Not so.

We’ve all heard the horror stories about the feminized churches which preach that women are infallible and men are to blame for everything. In my opinion, those stories are largely true. That female-centric attitude is a wholesale abandonment of scripture. Biblical scripture, both Old and New Testament, SPECIFICALLY says that the man is in charge and the woman is subordinate, both in the family, and in the church. Women are NOT to be leaders of men in the church. They are only supposed to advise other women and children. This is for a reason. Therefore, any so-called Christian church which has female priests, pastors, deacons, bishops, or whatever, has effectively abandoned the Bible and the true worship of God. In that sense, they are the farthest thing from conservative that there is, yet, because they attend church and claim to worship God and Jesus, they are called conservative, and every time they do or say something stupid, conservatives are blamed.

The churches have been deliberately infiltrated by Marxists, particularly by homosexuals. That may sound paranoid, but all one has to do is look closely at the Catholic Church and its priesthood since the 1960s, when the ban on homosexuals in the priesthood was lifted (originally those with homosexual desires were banned, but Vatican II changed it so that non-practicing homosexuals could be priests,since they were supposed to be celibate anyway). Once there was a critical mass of homosexuals in the priesthood, they began to discriminate in favor of other homosexuals and recruit other homosexuals into the seminary. It is fairly well documented that militant homosexual advocacy groups had deliberate intentions to infiltrate the Church in order to remove what was then one of the last bastions of resistance to cultural acceptance of homosexuality. The result was abandonment of scripture, sexual abuse of children (altar boys and such) and large scale feminization of the church.

The fact that other churches, such as the Episcopalians, have made acceptance and promotion of homosexuality a priority in direct defiance of scripture should be proof enough that infiltration of the churches has occurred. Well, once the root of the belief system is abandoned, then the church becomes a social club that is subject to all of the influences of pop culture just like anything else.

The end result is that members of the various Christian churches are often not conservative, but left wing in their world view. A lot of these “man-up” types are left wing “Christians”. I’m willing to bet that you’ll find many of them are also ardent Democrat supporters.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
TFH August 6, 2012 at 21:16

I found more than a few female feminist commenters praising these men.

That is only because they have not yet figured out that the money these men earn is not going to women.

The bar a woman has to clear before she can truly be considered against misandry is very high. Only a few women have ever consistently demonstrated the moral maturity needed for that status.

Don’t overrate those comments….

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Society Contributor August 6, 2012 at 21:21

“I think one thing that needs to be done is to define our terms better. There are a lot of people who are called “conservative” in the USA who are not conservative at all. Just being Christian, for example, does not make one a conservative in any sense.”

And there are a lot of conservatives in the USA who are not Christian at all and have zero interest in Christianity. Such as myself.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
The Whammer August 6, 2012 at 21:25

Looks like the Fatboy Futrelle is at it again.(look on the boobpage) I was going to give a video response to this but after thinking about it it may be better to just ignore him and deny him any attention or publicity. Nobody really pays any attention to this Intenet stuff outside of his band of freaks and they are all losers with no power or influence.
David is a failed writer and from what I can see is probably trying to tap into this niche market of lesbians, alleged DV “victims”, obese females who are “depressed” and think the government(men’s taxes) should support them, fugly females who want to shake down former spouses for excessive support, females who can’t fiqure out which sex they are and make up stupid words like “cis”(it means a normal person who looks and behaves the way a member of his sex would), females who never leave the house and think “rapists” are hiding under their bed, girls who have to ride the Fatmobile when shopping at the supermarket, and just plain old fashioned man haters and crazy cat women etc. etc. This is David’s audience, a handful of abnormal weird fringe lunatics because I’ve never encounted any of these types in real life and they can by no stretch be considered anywhere near normal. I know some pretty eccentric people too but the Fatboy’s followers are from another species and planet.
As I said, David is a failed writer and likely needs to make some money so if you give him any attention he may get lucky and get to earn a little money writing some dumb article regardless of how crappy it may be. It may be better to just starve this guy and ignore him.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
TFH August 6, 2012 at 21:50

“Not Committing to Women”..

When women say this, it is already hypocritical and selfish. But at least we see what they are trying to get away with.

When a *mangina* like Rod Dreher says this, that is another level. He is more than just a ‘man up’ SoCon. He is deeply disturbed. He is a goddess cultist.

What type of men says ‘Men are bad for not committing to women’, when clearly, no women were interested in committing to *him*?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
walking in hell2 August 7, 2012 at 00:29

This kook Rod Dreher won’t post my comments.

Once I was a Reagan supporter and very conservative. Then I was dragged through American divorce.

I don’t think anything can quite make you realize what an oppressive anti-man, anti-family, country America is than getting sodomized and abused by a rotten American woman and the evil American divorce courts.

Divorce is the event that makes you realize you have no real friends and allies in America.

Divorce makes you realize that 50% plus of the American population–American women–are your bitter enemy and you should not be defending them, but instead use them as human shields or completely abandoning them.

If the majority of American men every realize the truth–that the “sisters and daughters of America” are obese, greedy, hypergamous, child abducting and bastardizing sluts–all morale jumps out a highrise window, and with it any conservative and patriotic notions.

This is why Dreher suppresses any information that paints his beloved “sisters and daughters of America” as the human garbage that they are.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Whammer August 7, 2012 at 02:50

Bridgett Nielsen is still looking hot. It’a amazing how some females just retain that girlish innocent nubile look.

http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/gossip/brigitte-nielsen-haggard-disoriented-bizarre-appearance-public-park-article-1.1129774

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
walking in hell2 August 7, 2012 at 04:14

Hi guys, I wonder if anyone has seen this.

http://www.manhood101.com/

http://www.youtube.com/user/101principles?feature=em-comment_reply_received

They sent my friend this message on youtube.

“Wrong. you should stop being an emasculated male and learn how to exercise authority over women. Try our free ebook: ManhoodAcademy. com ”

They appear to me to be using the most disgraceful shaming tactics to get men to “man up” and buy their book. They are scavenging victims by posting anti-femist videos on youtube.

The website does not say who the owners are except Dr. LeDice & Prof. Plum. My guess is that it is one or more Jezibels. Maybe someone should report them to the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Rocco August 7, 2012 at 04:34

What’s truley scarry to the PTB is that these men vote. The more that vote the better for men.

Here’s an article on single women voters, typically in their 40′s.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/07/us/politics/in-weak-economy-an-opening-to-court-votes-of-single-women.html?_r=1&hp

For every one of them there is a single male voter, statistically.

The NYT’s ignores this and only considers tradcon women vs traditionalists, but single men are a huge voting block.

We need a MGTOW voting drive!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Mr. J August 7, 2012 at 05:37

Rocco-

To “vote” for what?…The Democrat and Republican crime machine?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Rocco August 7, 2012 at 05:57

@ Mr. J

What comes first, the chicken or the egg?

As most of won’t expat, if we start voting and call this, like most of the world, activism, maybe the parties will pander to us and change the misandric laws.

It’s already happening with the republicans hesitating before voting for VAWA. As the economy worsens and the cost of feminism becomes prohibative, and single men become a cohesive voting block, we could start swinging elections, just like all the other groups.

I’m an independant but will vote republican in local elections. A majority repub’s could stop the VAWA. I’m considering Romney to send a message.

To not vote is like keeping our mouths shut and that hasn’t worked out to well for men over the last 40 years.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Mr. J August 7, 2012 at 06:00

Lets see, who to vote for……eenie meenie meinie mo

I see “Americans” as an ocean of zombies, bugged-out eyes, arms straight out, chanting….dem-o-crat—re-pub-li-can–dem-o-crat–re-pub-li-can–dem-o-crat–re-pub-li-can………………

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Mr. J August 7, 2012 at 06:23

I see your point, my last comment got posted late.

I suppose, if men start paying attention, unlike at any time in the last 40 years,it may help, some.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Mr. J August 7, 2012 at 07:16

If, somehow, Americans could get COURAGE… Despite all the blather, “Americans” as-a-whole are perhaps the most cowardly people on earth.. Always “afraid” of what some other country is going to do if America does the right thing politically.

Thats why Ron Paul never had a chance……Cowardly America and Americans.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Migu August 7, 2012 at 07:51

To not vote is like keeping our mouths shut and that hasn’t worked out to well for men over the last 40 years.

Voting hasn’t done much better for last 236 years.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Keyster August 7, 2012 at 08:46

Which begs the question, which is worse for men:

A few 3rd rate has-been TradCons “shaming” men into “manning-up” and marrying and raising a family…?

…or…

The National Organization of Women
AAUW
The Women’s Media Center
The Democratic Party of Women,
and so on and so forth, composed of thousands of full-time professional feminists taking in a Billion dollars a year in “donations” to sway legislation, funding and jurisprudence towards women and away from men???

Conservatives are NOT your enemy.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Great Books For Men GreatBooksForMen GBFM (TM) GB4M (TM) GR8BOOKS4MEN (TM) lzozozozozlzo (TM) August 7, 2012 at 08:49

in bloated william bennet’s “book of man,” he leaves out the heart and soul of western civilization. a better name for bennet’s book would have been, “the book of fanboy manginas.”

lzozozozolzolozoz

in bloated william bennet’s “book of man,” he leaves out the heart and soul of western civilization. a better name for bennet’s book would have been, “the book of fanboy manginas.”

jesus battled with the old, pedantic, dead-souled scribes in matthew 23, for which he was put to death. king leonidas had to consult with the corrupt, rotting, old counsel. in braveheart robert the bruce’s corrupt father had a face of rotting flesh. bill bennet reminds me of all of these, after a seven-day vegas-bender whence millions of fiat dollars, earned from an insincere, copy-and-paste “book of virtues” were gambled away.

ye shall know them by their fruits, it has been written, and bill bennet is the godfather of all the debt and debauchery–of all the divorce and destitution–of the incessant asscocking, buttcocking, and desouling of the culture and currency–of the false, fiat virtues he is paid fiat dollarz to espouse and promote as the hollow man blimps up on CNN.

bennet ignores the central, exalted message of genesis, and then ups the ante (as a gambling addict) by debauching and debasing the iliad faster than a neocon can debase a dollar to fund the perpetual warfare/welfare state. to top it all off, bennet ignores the most-decorated war veteran of all time in his “book of fanboy manginas.”

completely absent from bennet’s book is the awesome work of the jews in genesis:

14 And the Lord God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life:

15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.

16 Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.

in the classical, judeo-christian, chivalric context, a man would man up as he would be guaranteed a non-asscocked, chaste woman who be shamed out of not acting on and serving every gina tingle and butt tingle. instead of serving her butt and gina tingles, a woman would be expected to serve god, man, and family. for this, she would be honored in a civilized context, and she would realize her greater mythology as a mother, wife, and grandmother, instead of an asscocked, aging spinster with cats, working to expand the fed’s debt alongside her ass.

completely absent from bennet’s book is the divine RAGE of ACHILLES–the very center and circumference of homer’s iliad. the first word of the iliad is RAGE, as achilles is robbed of his prize and property by his commander; and so, his anger ignited, achilles quits the greek army in the first showdown between man and state. zeus sides with achilles, exalting the Natural Law that John Locke and Thomas Jefferson would someday exalt in their respective poetry–the very same Natural Law that Moses exalted when he rebelled against the corrupt Pharoah–the Natural Law that William Bennet detests in all his blundering ignorance regarding the monetary system which robs the common man and places future generations in debt to send today’s best and brightest to die on foreign shores in foreign wars. achilles rages as he reasons, “if i’m the one fighting, doing all the work, why are you–the king and his william bennett vegas cronies who never ‘buckle on armor’ getting all the rewards?” indeed, so might a marine wonder these days, if he’s taking all the risks for a few hundred dollars a month, why does bill bennet get to sit back home in vegas, gambling millions away while ballooning up like a big old blimp of debauched, foul hot air? so it is that bill bennet is working for the fiat bankers in all his blustering, bloating books, which serve far more to debauch and desecrate–to contort and confuse–than they do to exalt and enlighten. why isn’t bill bennet telling all the army-wives to “woman up” and stop with the buttcocking adultery, and serve their men with loyalty as Yahweh commands them to, and as Penelope does in Homer’s Odyssey? It’s because bennet is well-paid in fiat dollar to hate on homer, the bible, and the honorable serviceman like ron paul, while bennett himself never served in any branch of the armed forces. CNN rewards him for his supreme ignorance of the spirit on the Great Books and Classics, which he makes his arrogance.

finally, bill bennet, who “never buckled on armor nor suited up for battle” in the words of achilles, also ignores the most-decorated general of our own era–the noble Smedley Butler:

[quote]
“War is a racket. It always has been. It is possibly the oldest, easily the most profitable, surely the most vicious. It is the only one international in scope. It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives. A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of the people. Only a small ‘inside’ group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many. Out of war a few people make huge fortunes.”
In another often cited quote from the book Butler says:
I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during that period I spent most of my time as a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras right for the American fruit companies in 1903. In China in 1927 I helped see to it that Standard Oil went on its way unmolested. Looking back on it, I might have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents.
[/quote] –http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Is_a_Racket –War Is a Racket is the title of two works, a speech and a booklet, by retired United States Marine Corps Major General and two time Medal of Honor recipient Smedley D. Butler. In them, Butler frankly discusses from his experience as a career military officer how business interests commercially benefit from warfare.

Compare warrior Smedley’s words to those of Achilles, who also questions the utility of war for the heroic soul:

[quote]
Ulysses, noble son of Laertes, I should give you formal notice plainly and in all fixity of purpose that there be no more of this cajoling, from whatsoever quarter it may come. Him do I hate even as the gates of hell who says one thing while he hides another in his heart; therefore I will say what I mean. I will be appeased neither by Agamemnon son of Atreus nor by any other of the Danaans, for I see that I have no thanks for all my fighting. He that fights fares no better than he that does not; coward and hero are held in equal honour, and death deals like measure to him who works and him who is idle. I have taken nothing by all my hardships- with my life ever in my hand; as a bird when she has found a morsel takes it to her nestlings, and herself fares hardly, even so man a long night have I been wakeful, and many a bloody battle have I waged by day against those who were fighting for their women. With my ships I have taken twelve cities, and eleven round about Troy have I stormed with my men by land; I took great store of wealth from every one of them, but I gave all up to Agamemnon son of Atreus. He stayed where he was by his ships, yet of what came to him he gave little, and kept much himself.
[/quote]

And so you see why the gambling, warmongering, chicken-hawk, mysandric, soulless Bennett is calling upon men to man up while debauching and deconstructing their heritage–it is because, at the fiat baneker’s behest, he needs the men to take all the risk, while bennet and the fiat bankers get all the rewards, celebrating their conquest of other men’s future wives with the famous buttocker and secretive taper of butthext tucker max rhymes with goldman sax, who the weekly standard casts as a six-foot tall hero, repeating the butthexer’s lies, while ignoring the true, selfless heroism of those Achilles and Smedley Butlers fighting and dying on foreign shores in foreign fiat wars.

In his later years, Thomas Jefferson wrote, “They all fall off, one by one, until one is left with Virgil and Homer, and perhaps Homer alone.” Jefferson advocated the gold standard and railed against central banks. Jefferson penned the Declaration of Independence. And so you can see that William Bennett is a Judas, selling out Jefferson, Virgil, and Homer, all for a few fiat dollars and short-lived fame. Nay–he is worse than Judas, as at least Judas was paid in Silver, while William Bennet is paid in fiat debt for his soulless, ignorant debauchery, which he gambles away as sure as tomorrow is a new day.

lzoozozolzozozz

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
joeb August 7, 2012 at 11:13

I talk to my Son all the time about being non-committal . Nobody has to speak for him ,He was a product of a family high-jacked by the feminist family Courts .
He doesn’t feel pressured at all to conform to Male shamming tactics . He watched his old man sleep in a car in the northern winter .
Being disturbed by the Idea of Nobility is natural . The Lack of emphasis being put on rough shooting over idea’s of Non slavery and no deters prison and No Nobility is what concerns most of us These self evident truths in are constitution are not money makers .
Hiding these men away in sweat shops may make the author feel better simply because he doesn’t have to see it but, I’m sure having these men bow before his God like image would make him feel real good .
Becoming a society of wig wearing sensitive Queens , Or nobility is what they want . What they will get is the spear .

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
ActaNonVerba August 7, 2012 at 11:25

Most men (of all races, religions, political affiliations, etc..) are, from birth, so hopelessly brainwashed, manipulated, and abused that they will fight to their last breath to keep themselves or other men from embracing freedom. I know MRA’s like to reference the blue pill/red pill a lot but it really can never be over-emphasized. Just like in the movie, men that have not woken up are usually our de facto enemies.

They will do anything to stop us. Their brains just can’t process that so much of what they think they know about the world and themselves and, especially, women, is a big lie. It’s VERY difficult to admit you’ve been duped and manipulated so thoroughly.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
MaMu1977 August 7, 2012 at 11:26

There’s a joke that women tell…

“Every woman needs four animals in her life: a mink on her back, a Jaguar in her driveway, a tiger in her bedroom and a jackass to pay for it all.”

My father heard that joke in the early 80′s. In 30 years, he has spent less than two years total living in America (to the point that he retired from the Air Force when he received orders to return to his home country.) In the last decade, he was paid over $1 million tax-free in government contracts to work overseas (as he said, “I’d have been paid less than $40,000/year minus taxes if they had kept me overseas, but if they’re just *giving away money*…”

And as I’ve said before on this site, there’s more than 500,000 working African-American men on this planet who *refuse* to come back to America for any reason less serious than a death in the family. Their loss is well-felt by AA women. You can find them working as engineers/mechanics/doctors/etc., in most industrialised/modernising countries. If they came home, news articles about how hard it is for a single, “strong and independent” black woman to find a man would disappear. But they won’t come home, because they saw the writing on the wall back in the 1980′s (whether through frivolous divorce, or from living with their “strong, independent” single mothers, or from living in a subculture in which they couldn’t win for losing.) GYOW.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
MaMu1977 August 7, 2012 at 11:28

Addendum: most black guys know that they’re either the tiger or the jackass. As we are still men, we bristle at the idea of being the jackass. Be a tiger, or leave it all behind and go somewhere and be a man.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
TFH August 7, 2012 at 12:11

Rod Dreher didn’t even allow a comment through that featured Wedded Abyss as a source on how the laws are rigged against men.

Wedded Abyss is a polite, simple site. But he would not allow it to be posted on his blog, lest some men learn the truth about the laws.

This shows that Rod Dreher is not merely oblivious about the anti-male nature of laws (given that people have been pointing this out to him for 3 years), but that he actively wants to suppress the truth, and block men from learning about it.

That is pure evil.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Bskillet81 August 7, 2012 at 12:24

This isn’t to say that there’s anything wrong with family and childrearing, but instead to point out that that kind of lifestyle simply isn’t viable for a lot of men these days.

Indeed, nothing wrong, and a whole lot good, about family and childrearing. Problem is, our unjust laws, written to enforce the feminine imperative at the point of a gun, make family and childrearing nearly impossible for men. These SoCons aren’t for family and childrearing, they’re against men who rationally seek to protect themselves from financially and emotionally rapacious feral women.

Men observe the deck is stacked against against them and they therefore quit playing. Women lose out on divorce for cash and prizes. Therefore, these men must be shamed.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
RTP August 7, 2012 at 12:24

It doesn’t make a significant difference, but Rod Dreher hasn’t exactly endeared himself to fellow conservatives over the years.

http://theothermccain.com/2011/05/08/ruh-roh-rod-drehers-pseudonymous-postings-could-cause-him-big-trouble/

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Rico August 7, 2012 at 12:56

“At least Secular Progressive indoctrination is either neutral when it comes to religion or respects the right to religious freedom of choice for everyone.”

I can’t believe someone would claim that with a straight face. Just look at the Chik-Fil-A brouhaha to see how wrong you are.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
ode August 7, 2012 at 13:15

Reader

Do I understand correctly that The Spearhead is making common cause with… wait for it… the liberal New York Times?

I found more than a few female feminist commenters praising these men.

Did you see these comments, all from left-leaning women?

“This was a wonderful story. Family comes in all different shapes, sizes and genders. I see a reality show (okay i said it) on Tv coming soon.”

That sounds like a comment from an ignorant minded young woman in her early 20′s who thinks she knows how the world works because she just graduated from college. A woman in her 20′s is still in her “Sex and the City” stage of her life who thinks she’s going to take on the world, get a really cool job, her potential is sky high. It’s not until she hits her 30′s that she becomes emotionally mature enough to understand that she’s NOT: smart, hard working, and ambitious as she THOUGHT she was. That is when she grows hungry for a nice hard working beta-male’s paycheck.

Ask any woman in her 30′s what she thinks of these 4 men and I guarantee you, regardless of political affiliation left right whatever, what she sees is a lost opportunity. For every man who chooses to remain single, that’s one less potential paycheck a woman could of latched onto.

Remember boys that’s what a woman sees in you……a paycheck.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Common Monster August 7, 2012 at 13:50

Rocco, they pander first, then maybe we’ll think about.

Make them earn it. We don’t and shouldn’t trust them, so it’s payment in advance before I give up my vote.

When you start to think you’re joining some mythical team which is going to do something to benefit you, you’ve been had. It’s not that we have to speak up and beg to be noticed. They know we’re here and they don’t care.

Who it is that gets elected Yuppie-In-Chief (this time) is not going to make any difference.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Metsfan August 7, 2012 at 16:26

This just goes to show that the Conservatives are worse than the liberals. Conservatives like Bill Bennett criticize men who choose bachelorhood and tell men to “man up” and marry. Even Fox news guys like Bill O’ Reilly have been known to mock men who go MGTOW.
Finally conservative women are the most dangerous expecting men to marry, work long hours to “serve and protect” and take care of a wife. This article and the responses in the comments confirms that conservatives are the most dangerous to men.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Anonymous Reader August 7, 2012 at 16:34

Keyster asks which is worse:

A few 3rd rate has-been TradCons “shaming” men into “manning-up” and marrying and raising a family…?

…or…

The National Organization of Women
AAUW
The Women’s Media Center
The Democratic Party of Women,
and so on and so forth, composed of thousands of full-time professional feminists taking in a Billion dollars a year in “donations” to sway legislation, funding and jurisprudence towards women and away from men???

You are asking which is worse, to be accidentally crushed to death by a senile elephant or crushed to death by a pack of hyenas.

The so-cons have willingly colluded for years with NOW, WMC, the AAUW and other feminist groups. All that the feminists have to do is ululate “save the WIMmen” and socon/tradcons come bouncing out of the weeds, ready to serve. There weren’t enough feminists in the California legislature to put men’s fault divorce into law, not by a long shot. Bill Bradley was not a feminist, but he did their bidding in 1986 with the Bradley Amendment. Sen. Bill “Hair Plugs For men” Biden was and is surely a mangina of the first order, but he had to convince social conservatives to vote for VAWA in the 1990′s, and every renewal since then has seen some number of politicians who are proud of their “traditional values” step right up and vote for re-authorization.

It’s only been in the last few years that a few – a tiny handful – of social conservatives and/or traditional conservatives have kinda sorta awakened to reality. All too often due to being divorce raped – ask Zed or Anonymous Age 70 about that story, eh? But go and look at all the social conservative / tradcon ‘zines, sites, etc. Ever seen an article about how bad men’s fault divorce is at National Review, at American Spectator, at Commentary, etc.? How about anti-family court, any exposes? Bradley? Heck, did any of those even cover the debate over VAWA reauthorization? How about the drugging of boys in K-12? Any articles even remotely wondering why fewer and fewer men are going to college?

Nope. Nope. Nope. Nope. Nope. Nope. If doesn’t have to do with abortion or homosexual marriage, it isn’t interesting to conservatives.

The best I can say about socon/tradcons is that they are stupid and easily fooled by feminists into supporting yet more misandry. That’s the best I can say.

And the fact remains, as Zed reminded us all, social conservatives willingly allied themselves with the despicable Andrea Dworkin and her sidekick in “all penis in vagina sex is rape” insanity, Kathleen McKinnon. So keen were socons to go after porn that they deliberately allied with two of the most anti-men feminists around in the eary 1980′s.

The first thing socons should do is admit where they were wrong, and then they can talk with the rest of us. So long as conservatives keep pretending they had nothing to do with the creation of anti-family court, Bradley, VAWA and all the rest, it’s impossible to take them seriously. Because until they ‘fess up to their blunders, errors, etc. it is obvious they’ll jump up and run over to serve the feminists any time they are called. That’s not the behavior of an ally.

That’s the behavior of something else…

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
zed August 7, 2012 at 19:19

Which begs the question, which is worse for men:

A few 3rd rate has-been TradCons “shaming” men into “manning-up” and marrying and raising a family…?

…or…

and so on and so forth, composed of thousands of full-time professional feminists taking in a Billion dollars a year in “donations” to sway legislation, funding and jurisprudence towards women and away from men???

Conservatives are NOT your enemy.

So, what point are you trying to make here, Keyster? I don’t see conservatives putting themselves in direct opposition to the feminists by trying to sway funding and jurisprudence away from women and toward men, even though educational achievement has tilted so far in women’s advantage.

Idiots like Bennett are simply ignoring that the social and cultural foundations which would enable men to “man up” just aren’t there. According to a November 2011 Pew Social and Demographic Trends Report, the average net worth of people under age 35 decreased from $11,521 in 1984 to just $3,362 in 2009, a 68 percent drop.

Unemployment figures are dismal, the divorce figures are terrifying, and the exhortation to men to keep on doing what they have always done without acknowledging that it is becoming increasingly impossible comes across like “let them eat cake” – and probably in some people’s minds merits the same trip to the guillotine.

Where do you draw the line between conservative and “libruhl”? Asking which is worse – the cancer, or the doctors who aren’t doing anything about it, but expect the patient to keep working – is disingenuous.

What is clear from reading the commenters here, and on blogs like Dalrocks, is that marriage is in real trouble these days. Millions of men have had their families stolen from them, and are trapped in Bradley Amendment debt. If the conservatives are not doing anything to address that, while at the same time claiming to be pro-family, then they are worse than useless.

“We’re doing this because we are stupid, but the liberals are doing it because they are mean” just isn’t a compelling argument.

I really don’t know why you have such a compulsion to defend conservatism or the Republican party. If they were doing anything of substance for men, most people would probably see that. Women are very clear on what the Democratic party does for them, but all the right seems to have to offer is “well, we aren’t worse than they are.”

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Myshkin August 7, 2012 at 21:40

Hmm. What’s the secret to not have your comment deleted at americanconservative? I notice a comment about denying women suffrage not deleted, but I’m not allowed to say that I don’t like it if a woman doesn’t have a Christian modesty???


I’m glad I woke up in my early 20′s, so I didn’t fall to the temptation to marry a modern woman. You might pretend that women who can commit to raising a family might still exist, but women can’t make any legal commitments anymore; there are no legal structures whereby a woman can make a commitment.

All the modern women have disappointed me, except for one I met in grade school who, by all accounts, is everything I gauged her to be at the time – a combination of a certain seriousness, femininity, and a Christian modesty. But I sure wouldn’t allow myself to find out exactly what happened to her in the intervening 40 years. If I found she were anything like these Girls Gone Wild sluts, that would extinguish the last flicker of light still within me.

Praise these 4 guys; they are just trying to survive in an ice age, just trying to find some grass to eat.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
walking in hell2 August 7, 2012 at 23:57

“Praise these 4 guys; they are just trying to survive in an ice age, just trying to find some grass to eat.”

In this day and age, that is a brilliant way to describe the man’s plight. Men need to be concerned about survival.

The New York Times has been for many decades, an intelligence tool and shaper of public opinion. My guess is that with this article, the Times is probably engaging in a little predictive programming. By doing so, the Times is managing expectations for both men and women at how things will be in the future: poor men with poor career prospects and histories, no marriage, no children, and no home ownership.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
The Whammer August 8, 2012 at 05:06

@MRA

I think if the number of men living like this increase (Is a fact in going to increase) feminists will find a legal penalty to forbid men from living like this, like many male-only clubs were banished after they were hit by legal consequence for not allowing women in.

This is not correct. It is perfectly legal to have a private club and discriminate. The US Supreme Court ruled that private clubs with 600 or less members are Private and can basically do anything they choose.

It’s also legal to discriminate in NY in housing providing you reside there yourself and it’s 4 units or less. So if I own a 4 story towhouse with an apt on each floor and I live in one of them I can choose who I want to live in the other 3. I can advertise the apts for rent specifying, White Christian males over 40 only, or whatever I want. Of course a newspaper likely won’t take the ad but there are ways of renting especially in apt short NY with only tiny vacancies.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
zed August 8, 2012 at 12:28

All the modern women have disappointed me, except for one I met in grade school who, by all accounts, is everything I gauged her to be at the time – a combination of a certain seriousness, femininity, and a Christian modesty. But I sure wouldn’t allow myself to find out exactly what happened to her in the intervening 40 years. If I found she were anything like these Girls Gone Wild sluts, that would extinguish the last flicker of light still within me.

The most horribly screwed up woman I have ever known in my life was the “little red-headed girl” (literally) of my Charlie Brown youth. On her bedroom door she had a sign that read – “Caution, you are looking at a high performance woman! I go from zero to BITCH in 0.2 seconds. Warning, the bitch switch sticks!”

Truth in advertising.

Best leave your fond memories as memories, Myshkin. Imagine your old friend waving a knife at you, saying “Remember John Bobbit” and being totally surprised that you didn’t think it was uproariously funny.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Sun August 8, 2012 at 19:14

zed August 6, 2012 at 16:09
[quote] What do all these different groups have in common?
answer: they ALL rely on men to “keeping their nose to the stone” so they can enjoy their lifestlye.

they ALL rely on WHITE men to “keeping their nose to the stone” so they can enjoy their lifestyle.

What is so funny is how thoroughly some guys have been brainwashed. A left-leaning friend of mine recently praised Michael Moore’s book “Stupid White Men.” I wanted to hold up a mirror to his face and say “Notice anything about your own complexion? Do you realize that Moore is talking about you, as well.”

All this would not have been possible without brainwashing men into loathing themselves and other men.[/quote]

This. You should’ve done the mirror thing.

Liberals are so individual that they do tend to forget what they are themselves. They tend to hate the group that they belonged to due to a largely misplaced altruism, with a certain historical/cultural/educative narrative, along with the desire to feel better about themselves as champions.

After the mirror he would’ve back peddled and said not all white men but white men who are rich/conservative/ right wing/elite or whatever. But all you need to do is remind him to take the first step, as a “Stupid White Man” who bought a book about “Stupid White Men.”

The same thing goes for men in general. The pathological denial is quite astounding to be honest.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
dannyfrom504 August 8, 2012 at 21:34

and sadly…..most women have ZERO problems ADMITTING they can cause finacial ruin to the husband.

i’m the only never married guy on my block. a few of the dad’s met up for beers at a local sports bar. one of the guys told us he overheard his wife tell a friend that she hopes to find out that the husband were cheating and that she’d “make sure he’s living off beans and rice for the rest of his life.” he looked devestaded.

“i’m trapped.”

then the other guys reminded me of what a lucky guy i am.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
zed August 9, 2012 at 06:32

she hopes to find out that the husband were cheating and that she’d “make sure he’s living off beans and rice for the rest of his life.”

Oh, but I am just sure that the conservatives would step up in defense of this guy it that should happen. Being “conservative” and all that they could not stand idly by while men were reduced to peonage. Would they? /sarcasm

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Myshkin August 9, 2012 at 07:40

^
Sometimes single men report that some married man is decrying their being single, or otherwise pushing them to marry. They speculate that these men want miserable company or are doing their wives’ bidding???

Dunno, I’ve never been subject to this. Only women have ever been frustrated at the idea of my being a single man. Some of these married men are just slack-jawed whenever they get a glimpse at a single man’s life. They look the same way a dog looks seeing a man eating a burger when the dog knows that it won’t be getting any.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Patrick August 9, 2012 at 08:44

I predicted that guys would start doing this very thing a long time ago. I predict that, once gay marriage becomes the norm, that (hetero) guys like these will start getting married to take advantage of tax breaks, insurance premiums, etc that traditional marriage offers.

This is the product of conservatives giving in to the relentless chipping away at their social norms by liberals. Even liberals are beginning to complain.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: