The Missing Ingredient to Women’s Happiness

by Featured Guest on November 16, 2012

By Ethical

For all the debate sparked in the popular media by Anne-Marie Slaughter’s article “Why Women Still Can’t Have It All” published a few months ago in The Atlantic, aside from the demur musings of the occasional establishment poodle, men have been utterly excluded from the discussion. Some men will shrug ambivalently, but for a growing number, particularly the half of formerly married men in Ms. Slaughter’s generation who have experienced divorce, why there’s no room for our opinions on this issue is a question of growing concern. We’re uncomfortable about where the conversation’s headed, making us worry it’ll be us who’ll have to give up more of what we’re told is “patriarchal privilege” before the problem of “Why Women Still Can’t Have It All” can be solved. For more than a few of us this is privilege we didn’t know we had. As middle aged men in the huge majority of divorces today we’re still reeling from having to pay child support for the privilege of having custody of our children wrested from us and our former partners being allowed to move our children far away, after which we’re then browbeaten into taking responsibility for the fatherlessness now devastating most western democracies.

“entitlement” is [...] compelling [...] to the person who feels entitled, but is far less attractive to those who must pick up the check.

No Maam, The Nightmare of Feminism, no-maam.blogspot.ca

We’re still stinging from learning that our wives, who overwhelmingly are first to file for divorce, are free to break the marriage contract without need for cause while that same contract demands we delay retirement or even shelve lifelong dreams to pay support to her for doing so.

the desire to “have it all” [...] seems to go with an unwillingness to pay any price for it whatsoever. This violates what I consider to be a fundamental principle of economics, as well as life: “There just ain’t no such thing as a free lunch”. In the end someone has to pick up the check.

No Maam, Romantic Nonsense, no-maam.blogspot.ca

By all indications our sons will be even more sensitive to suggestions they benefit from any such male privilege. From elementary school they’ve watched as feminist education policies refused to let up and allow even a single program targeting boys with well needed support. They’ve watched programs for girls continue to march ahead full steam even as boys have been reduced to only 1/3 of some university graduating classes. And don’t think they haven’t noticed how girls are encouraged to compete fiercely against them in sports as in life, even while they’re ridiculed for losing to a girl. And despite all this, rather than being allowed to treat the girls as equals they as boys are met with harsh consequences for competing too earnestly in return. Waiting for them to change family law so marriage and family are still viable options? After seeing their fathers broken and emasculated fighting what they believe is an immovable feminist bias they scorn and ridicule men who try. They’re nihilists, answering to no one; hooking up with sexually liberated women and enjoying the party at the end of the world.

I don’t need the government to pass laws against alimony. I simply won’t marry in the USA. I don’t need the government to pass laws promoting fair child custody laws. I won’t impregnate an America girl. I don’t need the government to increase punishment for false rape accusers. I’ll cover my own back. I don’t need the government to ban trans fat to lower the weight of the population. I’ll go to Poland. While they try to change the minds and culture of 310 million Americans with their WordPress blogs, I’ll be hitting on pretty girls in a Croatian bar. I’ll be living the life that I want instead of being entitled and waiting for the government to give it to me. In the same breath they call me a pussy beggar, they beg the government for protection from pussy.

… The only true regret I have is that as part of the “manosphere” I’m automatically grouped in with those guys, who are even bigger losers than I could have imagined three years ago.

Roosh, The Men’s Rights Movement Is Dead, rooshv.com

Young and old we men have learned that whenever we have to rely on public opinion to adjudicate a conflict between us and women, public opinion will always ignore our interests. We just can’t win.

So when we hear the question “Why Women Still Can’t Have It All?” our Ritalin castrated minds have already trailed off into “I thought they did?” We honestly don’t know where to find any more we can give up in appeasement. We’re truly tapped out.

We couldn’t give you all you wanted even if we tried [...] we are starting to recognize that the more we give you the more you’ll want, and we’re getting tired.

W.F. Price, Anne-Marie Slaughter Grasping at Straws in “Have it All” Article, The-Spearhead.com

It’s difficult for women to understand the breadth of this emotional undercurrent among men, particularly without hearing men’s voices. Unfortunately even if men weren’t excluded from speaking about these issues in the popular media, with the exception of the Rush Limbaugh’s who make a living from controversy, most of us have good cause to be deeply reluctant about publicly voicing our honest opinions on feminist issues. But we’ve been far from silent. And in the corner of the internet known as the “Manosphere”, even if forced to use pseudonyms that’s been especially true.

Though “Why Women Still Can’t Have It All” was widely hailed as provocative among women, from men’s commentary they were far more likely to be struck not by the refreshing candidness of the article but by how completely the article had skirted around the real issues.

Unfortunately, Slaughter can’t seem to see the issue through to its logical conclusion, instead clinging to the notion that more social engineering will deliver women into the magical promised land of limitless opportunity [...] a feminist crusade for more power, more control, more everything.

W.F. Price, Anne-Marie Slaughter Grasping at Straws in “Have it All” Article, The-Spearhead.com

Still we men want to be helpful. In fact we’ve always looked pragmatically for solutions as our mothers, significant others, and daughters struggled with similar work-life tradeoffs to those mentioned in Slaughter’s article.

But we know better than to offer unsolicited advice to counter the illogic we’ve heard since feminism’s first wave:

“No woman should be authorized to stay at home and raise her children [...] Women should not have that choice, precisely because if there is such a choice, too many women will make that one.” — Simone de Beauvoir, “Sex, Society, and the Female Dilemma” Saturday Review, June 14, 1975, p.18

no matter how any individual feminist might feel about childcare and housework, the movement as a whole [has] reasons to discourage full-time homemaking.” — Jane J. Mansbridge, Why We Lost the ERA, p.100

Still as we continue to hear the women in our lives espouse the same “every woman can and should have it all” fantasy that failed earlier feminists, we can’t help but sigh. The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.

Rather than face up to cold harsh reality, something they had never had to do when their male mates had been willing to shoulder that part of the responsibility of maintaining a household, they changed their anthem from “I am woman hear me roar” to “I am victim, hear me whine”.

No Maam, The Nightmare of Feminism, no-maam.blogspot.ca

But then Slaughter compounds her folly by advocating women invest their efforts into changing the entire workforce rather than abandoning feminism as unproductive and simply making different individual choices themselves:

The best hope for improving the lot of all women, and for closing what Wolfers and Stevenson call a “new gender gap”— measured by well-being rather than wages—is to close the leadership gap: to elect a woman president and 50 women senators; to ensure that women are equally represented in the ranks of corporate executives and judicial leaders. Only when women wield power in sufficient numbers will we create a society that genuinely works for all women. That will be a society that works for everyone.

Being self sufficient to the point of libertarianism it’s only then we speak up to remind her of what should have been common sense: the only person any of us can rely on being able to change is ourselves.

From the standpoint of pragmatism and belief in self-sufficiency Slaughter’s article begged sharp criticism for failing to properly skewer the underlying feminist ideology that a great many men (and women) identify as the chief culprit deceiving today’s women into recklessly chasing whatever unrealistic liberal arts degree, inflexible career, biologically difficult family choices, or extravagant lifestyle she’s been told she can’t be happy without; driving her to pursue goals in each of these areas that may deeply conflict for her personally with no sense of the personal risk involved.

She[Slaughter]’s ignoring basic facts of biology here. Surgeons, for example, are known to peak in their 40s, after which their abilities decline. Trial lawyers probably follow a similar trajectory. Professional athletes, of course, peak far earlier. The thing is, there are only a choice few jobs in which people can continue to rise past the age of 50. There’s a big difference between being adequate and being in one’s prime. If you spend a large proportion of your prime working years taking care of kids, you simply aren’t going to rise as high. It’s a trade-off Slaughter isn’t willing to acknowledge.

W.F. Price, Anne-Marie Slaughter Grasping at Straws in “Have it All” Article, The-Spearhead.com

As men we know that if we want it all we’re going to have to earn it. So we tend to define “having it all” in terms of meaningful pursuits worth our sacrifice … simple pleasures, and bonds with family and friends that truly add value. It deeply rankles us that under feminism the phrase “having it all” has lost any usefulness as far as a holistic focus on achieving a “life with purpose”, and has now come to demand women acquire the luxurious lifestyle, high flung career, domestic help, and other external trappings that a hopelessly lost generation of older feminists says she should have. We are so rankled in fact, that we are no longer willing to serve as “feminist appliances” to give her more free time to devote to such selfish and self-serving fantasies of personal fulfillment.

this time you’re going to have to do it yourself. We’ll be out fishing, hanging out with our kids, making craft beer or whatever strikes our fancy in our free time. You can have your glory — without us.

W.F. Price, Anne-Marie Slaughter Grasping at Straws in “Have it All” Article, The-Spearhead.com

Woman can have it all, but they can go do it alone.

Nevertheless despite my personal misgivings about the gender politics of Slaughter’s article, after some reflection I did begin to greatly appreciate it. Its beauty lies in the difference between the way men and women tend to process arguments on sensitive issues. As any editor of an online forum will tell you, men tend to be drawn in by controversial arguments on sensitive subjects where women are driven off. Men will try to learn more about those arguments they disagree with and will actively engage their opponent to try to dismantle that logic. Women on the other hand tend to disengage from direct conflict by using ridicule to show the arguments they disagree with aren’t understandable at all. Typically women disengage online by banning the offensive person from the discussion, which the women happily carry on without any need for that opposing opinion to be fairly or accurately represented at all.

Because of this response pattern any writer who addresses sensitive women’s issues has to do so in a way that allows women to confront issues without being confronted. She must present criticism obliquely enough for her female readers to see opportunities for improvement in a wholly positive light. The writer can’t for example tell women to let go shallow unrealistic wants that are completely out of context of any holistic sense of well-being; and she can’t tell women that the closest they’ll get to achieving those goals is stressing themselves to the point where achieving more realistic goals and a more holistic balance is impossible. Instead the writer must give women readers half a compliment by saying “try not to be too perfect”. As men, by contrast, we measure the verity of our beliefs by the ends those beliefs enable us to achieve. Perfection is good or by definition it isn’t perfection, at least not for you. For us, as a useful means to an end a strategy that’s perfect demands praise, just as a wrongheaded one requires criticism. But in addressing women, using double-think like the half compliment is necessary because if the writer doesn’t catch women’s sympathies they will simply tune out. Communicating half an idea is better than communicating none of it at all.

Fortunately as a man exploring the views of men here I can speak plainly. Simply put, men overwhelmingly feel that feminists have been advocating life paths that lead to miserable tradeoffs for most women:

modern feminism is founded on women’s tendency to feel a vague (yet powerful) sense of dissatisfaction. It is the solution to the problem with no name. Betty Friedan was the founder of NOW and wrote the book The Feminine Mystique, which is generally credited with launching second wave feminism…

The “Problem That Has No Name” was described by Friedan in the beginning of the book:

“The problem lay buried, unspoken, for many years in the minds of American women. It was a strange stirring, a sense of dissatisfaction, a yearning [that is, a longing] that women suffered in the middle of the 20th century in the United States. Each suburban wife struggled with it alone. As she made the beds, shopped for groceries … she was afraid to ask even of herself the silent question — ‘Is this all?”

Sorry feminists, you absolutely own that. Vague female dissatisfaction is your founding philosophy, and solving it is your reason for being. Just because you figured out that it is a feature, not a bug, you can’t beg off having to fix it. In an amazing blunder, feminists have stepped into the scapegoat role for women’s unhappiness and are now the new henpecked husband.

Over promise, under deliver, Dalrock, Dalrock.wordpress.com

Having patiently endured feminism’s henpecking so long we can be excused for having little sympathy feminism is now taking some of the abuse in our place:

All I can do is offer some advice: Just try being nice to her feminists, maybe ask her about her feelings more and she will snap right out of her malaise. If she isn’t happy, it must be something you are doing wrong.

Over promise, under deliver, Dalrock, Dalrock.wordpress.com

To us men the solution is simple. No women has to swallow that feminist Kool-Aid. Many less fortunate women have (often by necessity) shirked feminism completely and just gone ahead and successfully taken charge of finding their own balance. Ideology has nothing to do with making empowering choices. To us feminism just makes women unattractive by turning them into victims, narcissists, and adolescents who have no power over their own happiness; like the perpetual adolescents in the book “Grow Up! How Taking Responsibility Can Make You A Happy Adult” by Dr. Frank Pittman. I don’t know whether Pittman makes any statement for or against feminism, but he nicely sums up the predominant male sentiment when he writes: “… happy grown-ups take responsibility. They take responsibility for their bodies, their characters, and their relationships. They own their lives and they own up to the choices they make. Finding the responsible thing to do is the lifelong quest for grown-ups. And it leads to real, grown-up happiness…”

Of course the idea that valuing personal attributes like responsibility can lead to happiness isn’t new, though these core values may be increasingly foreign to women privileged enough to ponder the kind of work-life balance choices Slaughter writes about. Conversely women like Slaughter are rarely ones who want for any basic necessities. And they are wholly mislead in the belief their situation is representative of other women. The kind of luxury presumed as the birthright of all women in this age of consumption has never been realistically attainable by even a sizeable minority of women (or men) at any time throughout human history. In fact even today for people of any gender who are searching for well-being and contentment, a common element of spiritual practice in all religions and for the non-religious in all meditative or psychological therapies, is detaching from love of the material and acknowledgement of thankfulness instead. Rather than allowing ourselves to believe we need some possession or outcome and not allowing ourselves to be happy until we get it, having a sense of well-being in our historically ‘without infinite wealth’ existences has always meant being grateful for whatever little we already have. It has also meant honoring our gifts. In other words “we must tend our to gardens”; we must devote ourselves to carrying out our duties to the best of our abilities in order to derive satisfaction from them.

For modern women this simple valuable message has been drowned out by the endlessly repeating narrative feminists have indoctrinated her with since birth that to be happy she has to “have it all”. And she should never in any circumstances have to settle and learn to build happiness from the ashes of compromise.

Not allowed to take joy in whatever simple blessings she has available, she is driven to pursue some grueling career that will allow her to buy the perfect life, and to hold off from years of enjoying a satisfying committed relationship during her most attractive and reproductively viable years to hook up casually until she meets the prince who will treasure her and indulge her whims without ever expecting anything in return. Then she is told to have children exactly when it suits her plans, and to expect that raising children won’t impact significantly on her career or leisure time, all the while demanding absolute control over the environment her children are raised in.

She has been force fed one expectation after another to the point of being bloated with a pathological sense of entitlement that rejects responsibility for consequences of any of these decisions. As refreshingly caustic men’s blogger Angry Harry wrote: “Are women responsible for anything that they do”?

It’s a fair question I’ve listed some of men’s answers to.

  • From all the slut walks around the world we know feminism tells women it’s unfair to be held in any way responsible if they’re raped walking alone in dangerous places during the dead of night while wearing skimpy clothing that targets them. Or for getting so drunk or high in sexually charged situations that they lose control of their faculties and engage in conduct that’s misconstrued as consent. Or for any ambivalence in communicating their consent or lack of consent to sex.
  • From feminisms love of fist fighting movie heroines, from feminism’s condemnation of films portraying violence against women at the same time it absolutely supports movie violence against men in retaliation for fighting back against those women, we know feminism encourages women to feel at liberty to strike a man full force without responsibility for consequences. Then, from feminist’s violent opposition to statistics that women initiate up to 60 percent of domestic violence; from the death threats received by long time social worker Erin Pizzey who said it simply isn’t effective to look at domestic violence as just a problem of men victimizing women rather than a problem of two people in light of those statistics, we know that feminism tells women it’s unfair for them to take any responsibility for any role in domestic conflict either.
  • On top of that feminism tells women they aren’t responsible for the fact that the majority of child abuse is perpetrated by women. Men are responsible for stressing the women out, and if no man is in the picture men are still responsible because of their absence.
  • From the number of women who raise their children without significant help from their parents solely to avoid being told what to do by their mothers, we know feminism tells women she shouldn’t have to take responsibility for managing relationships with people she needs to depend on for childcare. She should be entitled to paid childcare who will do whatever she tells them to do.
  • Feminism says it’s unfair women have to take responsibility for having children before their biological clock runs out and fertility becomes an invasive medical procedure that costs as much as a new car.
  • Feminism tells women to be deeply offended at being held responsible for domestic duties like cooking, cleaning, and taking care of children. At the same time feminism says women shouldn’t bat an eye in holding their husbands responsible for earning a living or for cooking and cleaning if the husband stays at home.
  • To women who empower themselves by using their sexuality as a tool, feminism says it’s unfair for them to be judged or criticized. They should never be responsible to the opinions of anyone who believes that such conduct devalues them.

It’s ironic that in trying to absolve modern woman of much of her responsibility and instead foisting that responsibility onto us in “the patriarchy”, feminism only robbed her of opportunities to independently achieve well-being.

the word ‘responsibility’, so often thrown at men, is nowhere to be found when discussing women and the results of their actions. The result is that, yet again, men are held responsible to underwrite or otherwise support women’s choices

Elusive Wapiti, Judas’ Evangelicals, elusivewapiti.blogspot.ca

Incredibly, having robbed her of responsibility and having seen that the desired ends hadn’t been achieved, feminism doubled down and continued to try to absolve her of even more responsibility in the mistaken idea that doing so would finally achieve empowerment. But rather than being empowering, removing all our responsibility turns us into spoiled and entitled children with less and less ability to control our outcomes, and therefore less ability to find the contentment we desire.

Because human beings rely on duty and obligation to compel us to devote ourselves to do anything for long enough, and with enough focus and commitment to derive satisfaction. Acknowledging our responsibilities enables us to feel it’s our duty and obligation to do what we’re responsible for, and this sense of responsibility is critical in building the bonds with others from which we derive a sense of well being.

It is because our own human existence is so dependent on the help of others that our need for love lies at the very foundation of our existence. Therefore we need a genuine sense of responsibility and a sincere concern for the welfare of others.

The Dalai Lama

A demanding and prestigious career, a thriving family, a well kept home, closets full of beautiful clothes, and lots of leisure are wonderful goals, but the simple truth is that for most women they are conflicting ones. Even the few lucky women who have it all will have to invest intense commitment and effort to get it, no one else will take responsibility for her own well-being and achieve it for her. None of us can achieve well-being for ourselves and those we care about without taking responsibility for doing everything within our control, even if that means letting go of the less important, to ensure this outcome.

Tragically only women’s voices can be raised in objection to the harm that feminism, in deceiving women, has caused all of us. Men’s voices speaking out against feminism are kryptonite to big media’s revenue from advertising. Provoking angry swarms of boycotting feminists we are effectively banned from the popular media and as a consequence the popular media only does feminism. But women also fear running afoul of “the tribe” and losing their feminist badge. There’s no opposing force that can compete with feminism to balance it out. And feminism has no “off” switch.

It can’t be in women’s interests that with no voice other than feminism, expressing simple joy and contentment at being a stay at home mother, even one who clips coupons, is seen as insulting and demeaning to women. It can’t be in women’s interest that expressing joy and contentment at making sure a man comes home to a hot meal every day is seen in the same negative way. Women should have the same freedom as men who have found fulfillment in being able to provide for their families if nothing else:

apparently women think that for all these years men were getting up and going to work because they were selfishly serving their own interests, only to discover on their deathbed that they wanted something else after all. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Men don’t work only for themselves, and we all know that. In fact, most of us work so that we can have a family.

W.F. Price, Anne-Marie Slaughter Grasping at Straws in “Have it All” Article, The-Spearhead.com

A women should be free to pursue well-being wherever she finds it. Why should any traditional mechanism of fulfillment be closed off to her?

The next generation of women stands to suffer even more from being sold feminism’s bill of goods. The same feminism that causes today’s women to cruelly reject the idea of boys education programs, saying “it’s about time” when told that in some cases only 30% of university graduates OR LESS are men, is the same feminism that means none of the next generation of young women will be able to escape clipping coupons when they decide to have children with the marginalized young men they’ll marry, if those men marry them at all. For many of those women finding any husband will be doubtful as marriage rates continue to plummet and young men opt out of what they perceive to be legal bondage to a partner who will bear no responsibility to him whatsoever but who can break the contract at any time and still be entitled to the punitive financial support he’ll be enslaved with when he’s forced to pay for the privilege of being denied his own children.

In the next generation or so these forces are poised to transform society radically. I have argued facetiously in the past that any problems with global overpopulation will be fixed when feminism eventually disenfranchises young men so much and makes reproduction such an abusive proposition that rather than working hard to one day be able to support a family young men instead will opt out entirely. And I argued facetiously that if the end of economic growth is looming ahead as predicted by Jeff Rubin in “The End of Growth”, then this population reduction will be good for our resource constrained world.

The truth is however is that with the great challenges ahead of us society will have more need than ever for the problem solving abilities of young men. We will no longer have the luxury of allowing feminist entitlement and freedom from responsibility to disenfranchise our sons. A global cataclysm is looming, in the face of which women debating how to “have it all” will seem a quaint historical memory.

Yet in a strange twist the resource constraints of this new world might be exactly what feminism needs to recognize that the keys to women’s well being don’t lie in “having it all” as far as consumerism or freedom from any responsibility.

Many women are wising up to the falsehood that they can have it all, that both a powerful career and a happy family can be had if you just work hard enough, get enough subsidized childcare, get enough flextime, and find a sufficiently alpha husband–or accrue sufficient ex-husbands–to enable it.

Elusive Wapiti, The Feminist Lie of Sexual Equality, elusivewapiti.blogspot.ca

Instead a more reliable route to well being lies in embracing the sense of duty, and obligation to family that has been steadily been beaten out of generations of young girls.

women are realizing once again that there is happiness in little things, in the smiles of children, and in the pleasures of a down-shifted life.

Elusive Wapiti, The Feminist Lie of Sexual Equality, elusivewapiti.blogspot.ca

Ms. Slaughter expresses some surprise at the resistance of younger women to be forced into the same confining “iron woman” stereotype that hoodwinked her. But resistance was inevitable. Choosing the “red pill” young women refuse to be told they can’t follow treasured traditions just because those gender roles have been bringing value and balance to their families since their grandmothers times. For them the hard line of “feminism” must yield to the kinder wisdom of a “humanism” that recognizes women’s uniqueness rather than trying to reshape women into men, and that seeks to embrace a modern take on the age old values that have been the source of contentment for generations of women before. So to all those women seeking a kinder existence, from those of us men who have always loved and supported you, we continue to do our best to wait patiently. We hope the institution of marriage is still here when you return. Because the blessing of your feminine attentions adds beauty to our lives. We’re glad if you’re coming home.

{ 81 comments… read them below or add one }

Somnolent November 16, 2012 at 03:22

Elusive Wapiti.

You are incorrect to assert that feminism alone is whats leading women toward a deep slough of despond and eternal misery along with all hitherto happy and free societies …

… When in fact feminists, being merely parasites, ingrates and useful idiots have simply concluded despicable bargains with bigoted and patronizing males in authority in return for votes. That is, in return for votes authorizing the en-prostitution and harlotization of all females, in payment for a selling off to them of hitherto free males, free children and free society.

Quite clearly nobody ordinary wins out of this constructed mess, not even the deluded stooges of men and women whom got free money, free property or meaningless jobs and careers out of it. Only the stake holders and share holders advancing the genderist sickness get any real returns, because they are structurally most able to avoid the consequences of it from their vantage points.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Zorro November 16, 2012 at 03:45

This may very well be the finest article I have ever read on The Spearhead. I agree with every single word.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Andie November 16, 2012 at 03:47

Wow. This is so beautiful.

Well done, Ethical.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
motanu November 16, 2012 at 04:27

hehehe
We’re glad if you’re coming home.
soft, too soft
this will never happen smooth just like that
we all will have to suffer in attending the truth and the truth will make us free

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
Spacetraveller November 16, 2012 at 05:09

“So to all those women seeking a kinder existence, from those of us men who have always loved and supported you, we continue to do our best to wait patiently. We hope the institution of marriage is still here when you return. Because the blessing of your feminine attentions adds beauty to our lives. We’re glad if you’re coming home.”

Thank you for this.
I am a woman, and I am coming home!
(Actually, to be perfectly honest, I never left…but that’s by the way).

A wise old man I know once told me that the secret to happiness is to be grateful for what you have now.
Any further thing you get in the future will be icing on the cake.
I know he is right.
This is the perfect cure for ‘entitlement’.
This Slaughter woman and all her feminist friends are simply not grateful for the presence of men. And yet without men, there would be no life. Certainly not as we know it.

Yes many younger women are simply turning their backs to feminism. We take the good (having the chance to a good education, for instance) and reject all the bad stuff.
How’s that for giving these unruly, dangerous women like Slaughter the finger…

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2
ar10308 November 16, 2012 at 05:11

“And don’t think they haven’t noticed how girls are encouraged to compete fiercely against them in sports as in life, even while they’re ridiculed for losing to a girl. And despite all this, rather than being allowed to treat the girls as equals they as boys are met with harsh consequences for competing too earnestly in return.”

I’ll be enrolling my sons in gymnastics and wrestling because they are the most physically grueling sports and require the most athletic ability of all of them.
Nowadays, girls are allowed to wrestle boys, and I can promise you that I will drill it into my sons’ heads that they are too completely crush their opponents will to fight, ESPECIALLY if the opponent is female. If they are required to wrestle a female, I will tell them to make their victory as brutal and painful for her as possible, with nasty take-downs and withering throws. I will also have them ensure that the fight goes the distance in terms of duration, by having them gain a point, then intentionally lose it once they get sufficiently ahead in score.
If she leaves the ring weeping and him to boos, then I will consider it an excellent bout. The opponent’s coaches and parents will be furious, however they’ll have no one to blame but themselves since they were the ones who put a wrestler in the ring who wasn’t prepared to or capable of defending herself at all times.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 4
BC Dad November 16, 2012 at 05:21

Good piece Ethical, very thought provoking, but I’m not sure your optimism is justified.

‘We’re glad if you’re coming home.’ If mainstream media is any guide (doubtful, I know), they’re not.

Meanwhile, the hamsterbation wheel keeps ratcheting higher, because the powers-that-be now own feminism, gain power and wealth from it. They will never let go, even if all the women ‘come home.’

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
lavazza1891 November 16, 2012 at 05:45

I agree with Zorro and Andie. Beautiful language and thorough analysis.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
American November 16, 2012 at 05:47

The American Gender-feminist Empowerment communities victories , at the expense of the hetero-mans basic equal protection under the law, will prove to be a costly phyric victory for them.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
American November 16, 2012 at 05:52

The perversions to American law enforcement that routinely enable womens violence, and persecutes the innocent hetero-man, has the effect of “manufacturing” arrest statistics that are “perversely inaccurate”.
These “manufactured statistics” from American law enforcement are the “framework” that the gender-feminist empowerment community build their “constructions” with.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
driversuz November 16, 2012 at 07:06

“She has been force fed one expectation after another”

This is something I plan to explore, if I can even manage to see the forest for the trees. Critical thinking doesn’t come naturally to most women, but we are capable of it. I need a laundry list of feminist expectations, and how they are fed to us all, so I can give it to every young female I meet.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 4
KW November 16, 2012 at 07:13

There needs to be a price in order for a gal to claim to “not be like that”. It doesn’t matter if a gal tries to hide behind gender sterotypes or what not, as it is an example of an individual human being still avoiding responsibility for their crimes(receiving stolen property aka benefiting from male persecution and opressment).

Maybe the price should be they have to get 3 feminists fired from their jobs? Be they as elected individuals, appointed prosecutors, teachers or professors, and/or professional attorneys, doctors and business people.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
oddsock November 16, 2012 at 07:32

driversuz

“She has been force fed one expectation after another”

With respect, perhaps you would benefit more by exploring Chivalry as your starting point. You see IMHO, feminism is basically a vehicle for putting into law ( with threats of punishment ) the wish/desire/expectation/exploitation of men, the vast majority of women are fed and encouraged to believe since early childhood.

Feminism has simply highlighted the true nature of most women.

Cause NAWALT . My arse !

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
keyster November 16, 2012 at 08:20

Feminism Inc. is a multi-million dollar a year industry with academia as it’s indocrination centers and the mass media complex as it’s propaganda arm. Men are the biggest supporters of it I know.

The relationship between men and women was once one of cooperation, now it’s one of competition – – only on a playing field tilted to favor women. We’re not just talking divorce wars and custody battles here; we’re talking livelihood, making enough money to afford shelter and food.

Look at all the homeless men out on street corners panhandling. Who’s complaining for them about “not having it all”?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
oddsock November 16, 2012 at 08:34

Keyster

Yes. mostly correct, but the part you miss is the horrendous position of men is not and never has been something recent.

How far do you want to go back in history to see the exploitation of men ? Long before Socialism or cultural Marxism was involved and in most cases even invented.

You waste so much time barking up the wrong tree.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 4
Doc November 16, 2012 at 09:03

Women will never be happy, as long as they listen to what others tell them, rather than listening to what they hear from within. So they will always be unhappy since they want the exact opposite of what they are told they should want. I learned that long ago – for the same reason that I learned not to listen to what women say they want, but look at what they are attracted to.

They listen to what they are told, and spout it back – but they don’t really want that. So just as when they find a man that meets their laundry list of wants, they are bored, so when they work at what they are told they should want, they are unhappy. You cannot change human nature. So they want to stay home, have children, and not have to be out in the world – that is why they are attracted to dominant men.

So of course they are unhappy when they have what they are told they should want, since it isn’t what they crave and need. You can’t fault them – they aren’t as driven as men are. They have been given stuff they don’t want, and told “Here you really should want this” – but it isn’t what they want, so they lash out at anyone close. So the key is to NOT listen to what they say – give them what they desire, no decisions, no choices, they want to keep their man happy, have children, and nest… Just as all women have always wanted – everything else is just non-sense…

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
LatinoinNYC November 16, 2012 at 09:17

Young men are already opting out of the marriage race. This is happening across all ethic groups. Go to match.com, and you see the thousands of single 28-35 women looking for beta chumps. The reality a lot of decent boys are dropping out of college because they believe that all that hard work will be stolen from them.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
zed November 16, 2012 at 09:36

So to all those women seeking a kinder existence, from those of us men who have always loved and supported you, we continue to do our best to wait patiently.

Good doggy.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Lysander Spooner November 16, 2012 at 09:43

My knee jerk response to unhappy women…..Go F*ck Yourself!!!!

I am one of those divorced Dads, not my choice, who got custody after a long battle, and come from parents, woops, Mother who chose unilaterally to divorce and destroy my birth family.

I am of the opinion that whoever initiates the divorce, mostly unhaaaaapy wimmin, should by right, get five years in solitary confinement for each child affected by the divorce. It has been shown children of divorce lose at least five years of life due to the divorcce.

So, my EX, will get 10 years, my Mother will get 25 years, I am quite sure they might not be haaaaaapy, but F*ck them.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
Lysander Spooner November 16, 2012 at 09:48

@LatinoinNYC

My 23 year old twin sons, don’t date, don’t have girlfriends, don’t want girlfriends, have no intention of marrying, don’t want children(ie. child support, alimony, lawyers, etc.) and are planning on entering Medical School. They are going to keep what they make and are opposed to supporting anyone but themselves.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Bob November 16, 2012 at 10:20

This article is dead on. The part that stuck out for me was the part about athletics. I am in college currently, but I remember that when I was in highschool the boys and the girls would have gym class together (unfortunately not in the locker room). Anyway one class we decides to play tackle football (I went to a small private school that didn’t take any money from the gov., so we didn’t have to deal with all the legal woes). Anyways, the gym teacher split us up into two teams randomly and each team had the same number of girls as the other team. Anyway we get on the field and the first play a girl (her name was Becky) ran over the shortest and smallest guy in our class. While he did get up we could see that he was hurt, so he sat out. You heard all the girls on both teams saying “you go girl, and all that bull”. Anyway about 15 minutes later Becky’s team had the ball and Becky was the running back. She was handed the ball only to be tackled by Brett( an average sized guy). She started crying and complaining that “how could you hit a girl, and all the typical feminist bull”. Long story short all the girls joined in and ran to beat up Brett, but thankfully the gym teacher jumped in to stop it shortly after. Becky ended up being fine without a scratch or bruse, but both of the guys ended up getting hurt and the only thing the girls were worried about was how becky was and not the other guys. I remember that was the day that I really started to see the feminist bull that they are trying to pull. It always girl power when they hurt a guy but when they get hurt they always blame someone else. It’s basically women just being a child and only thaking credit when things are good and then calling backup when things go bad. I will say that I have met several girls that haven’t been effected entirely by this feminist crap (my longtime girlfriend) as well as a few close friends, but instill see this stuff all the time in college (I go to a large state school (top 50 not to brag) and I see this crap everyday especially from my female professors. I signed uo for a class on women’s studies ( on only attended one class before I droped it) but I can honestly say that I was laughing the whole time. The class was made up of all these short haired ugly women who hated men. I was of only 3 guys taking this class out of over 150 students and I can honestly say I have never seen some many screwed up women in the same room before. They tried to quote statistics but I started calling bull and was ridiculed by the entire class (not even the other guys stood up for me) , the class was a full two hours long and I can honestly say that it was the funniest two hours of my lfe seeing all these uptight ugly whore beingnshot down by logic and statistics. Anyway I ended up getting laid after class by this feminist who just wanted to have some fun, and the next day I droped the class and never set foot in it ever again. I know I am kinda rambling but it feels so good tomget this stuff our every once and a while. Thanks to the author, it is great to see guys highlighting this bull feminists call “equality”.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Freckled November 16, 2012 at 10:31

@ oddsock

I don’t know where the majority gets the notion that socialism or cultural marxism or anything related to communism is responsible for todays problems.
In most ex-communist countries women are not entiteld to receive any alimony after a divorce. Child support is heavily regulated, it is far more easier for men to get custody, …
It is not the fault of a political ideology. Is is the fault of a heavily ego-centric society where abismal behaviour is rewarded instead of punishex.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2
keyster November 16, 2012 at 10:42

Yes. mostly correct, but the part you miss is the horrendous position of men is not and never has been something recent.

Welcome back sock.
Nature is never kind to what at first seems to be subtle shifts in culture. Women have been all but absolved of the risk of child birth and burden of motherhood, from the forceps to the pill, legalized abortion and exhalting of the Single Mom. Long ago women got pregnant and they sometimes died, and if they didn’t die they were saddled with motherhood. If men didn’t work himself to death supporting his family, he died defending them (or his tribe) in war.

While life is better for both men and women, it’s improved dramatically for women. She has choices and with those choices come power over men and society. She’s compelled to embrace Marxism/Socialism because of it’s Egalitarian narrative – – where gender is a “construct”, and the central government will enforce equality and income redistribution with and from men, without the oppressive dependence on an individual man. Big Government frees women from men, so it appeals to her.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Rebel November 16, 2012 at 11:11

Women still ca’t have it all?

Ask me if I care?

They can all go to hell as far as I’m concerned and I still wouldn’t budge a finger. Let them do their own way.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
oddsock November 16, 2012 at 11:12

Keyster

Thanks for the welcome

Its the same old same old. You still want to bandy on about cultural Marxism and I keep trying to tell you NO ! It has nothing to do with it.

Follow the money and power. Feminists are just useful idiots of the government to fuel womens nature backed by law to achieve a goal of world governance. The aim was to cause huge distruption and destroy the family etc etc etc. It has feck all to do with some drive by mythical fanatical Marxists or Socialists, unless of course all the upper echelons of the elite are cloaked Marxists ? Which I doubt very very much.

There is and has been for at least the last 60 years a boiling frog approach to gradually dismantling society as we know it. Look at the EU and the UK every country that had some sort of wealth and/or social security and health care has been over run with immigrants from poorer countries. In the UK this destroyed the infrastructure the social adhesion and culture drove wages to rock bottom with the majority of people now living on minimum wage regardless of the type of job and dependant on government handouts. Much the same right across Europe Look at the riots the strikes etc. People are living in extreme poverty. Look at Ireland, its basically a ghost country with people leaving faster than during the potato famine.

As I warned last year. America is about to go and perhaps already is, going through a similar fate. Did you not say you are recieving food stamps ? How many Americans now depend on them how many lost their house how many live in tent cities ? And you still shout its all down to cultural marxism ? Behave yourself Keyster, you’re a smart guy. Even someone with extreme American exceptionalism can’t deny the galaringly obvious

The point being. Republican Democrats Conservative Labour Liberal have all taken part in this, especially at the top and for many years. It is plain and simple Bankster Occupation Globalism. They easily ripped up the once great USA constitution with the help of ALL your presidents and congress the only one that stood in the way was rubbed out PDQ

Meanwhile the plebs are still arguing over left right politics and who to vote for. Get feckin real man.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3
Ethical November 16, 2012 at 11:38

@Zorro, Andie, Spacetraveller, lavazza1891:

Thanks for your comments. Deeply appreciated.

motanu said:

“We’re glad if you’re coming home”.

hehehe
soft, too soft

zed said:

“So to all those women seeking a kinder existence, from those of us men who have always loved and supported you, we continue to do our best to wait patiently”.

Good doggy.

@motanu, zed:
LOL! I struggled to find the right words to express this sentiment knowing full well what I was up against as a man speaking about such things in an almost exclusively male forum. I did my best. In any case the article was originally intended for “The Atlantic” which has a largely female audience. But they’ve refused to publish any articles from a male MRM perspective.
@Bob:
I’m always really happy when I hear how much more aware young men are than my generation was (or at least I was) at that age. I’m impressed at how much men of your age are skeptical of the BS you’re fed, even if not all are informed enough to quote stats about what’s going on like you mentioned. Kudos.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Nemo November 16, 2012 at 11:38

@ driversuz:

Here’s a quick example to run through.

Women are about 57% of all college graduates these days.

That means that men are about 43% of grads.

Imagine that every female college graduate wants to marry another college grad on graduation day. Assume that every man is straight and wants to marry, just for the sake of argument.

43 women marry 43 men.

14 women have no man to marry. That’s 14 out of 57, or about 25%.

Thus, they are forced to marry each other. So 14% of the marriages are between lesbians, because that’s the only way to solve this little math problem.

Does this make it clear that feminism has a thinly disguised lesbian agenda?

You ladies can’t all “have it all”, if “all” includes marrying a man with your level of education, unless there’s a 50/50 spilt between the genders at college. It’s a math thing.

Furthermore, note that Obama is rumored to be on the verge of applying the Title IX laws to the STEM subjects because they are the *only* major area of study where men still outnumber women and, darn it, that’s just not “fair”. Expect de facto quotas for women in these subjects in the next few years.

I expect that many foreign ladies will come to the US to allow universities to fulfil these requirements. That’s where the female talent is in the STEM subjects.

Have fun competing with those women from other countries, ladies. Leaving the US to marry a foreign bride will seem like a good idea to most men in a few years.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Nemo November 16, 2012 at 11:48

@ Oddsock:

About 47 million out of 310 million Americans are on “food stamps”. which are now usually done electronically.

So, 15% of American can’t even eat if the federal government ceases to function. It’s not quite the 47% that Romney mentioned, but it sure does give the Democrats a big stick to use to motivate their base to vote.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Jaego November 16, 2012 at 12:19

Back to normal then? What’s that? They’ve shown their true nature and should never be allowed to vote again. Yes, back to normal – back to the purdah, back to the sanity of Ancient Greece, Rome, Israel, and Arabia. Not the corruption of Rome in its latter days of course.

There was a dust up recently in Traditional Catholicism. One traditionalist woman was outraged at a writer who talked about the Man as the head of the family quoting from both Genesis and St Paul. She couldn’t stand his translation of Genesis 3: 16 as “your desire will be to rule over your husband, but he shall rule over you”. The usual translation, the one she is used to, is the ambiguous “your desire will be for your husband” which doesn’t say much. Combine that with John Paul 2′s idea of “mutal submission” or equality – and the table is set. Also Salza says another modern error is to think that playing 2nd fiddle was a punishment for her disobedience. But no – she was created for this role. Another gem from Salza’s response, “It is also implied that by eating the forbidden fruit Eve was renouncing her role as a potential mother of the human race and chose to be a god who didn’t have to reproduce. So her punishment for abandoning that role is that not only will she have children, but she will have them in pain.”

I checked a Protestant Study Bible and it said the same thing. But notice the way the author begins to walk it back: “Your desire shall be for your husband is difficult in the Hebrew. Most likely the expression carries the idea that remembering their joint-rule in the Garden, she would desire to dominate her husband. He shall rule over you asserts the divine assignment of the husband’s servant-leader role. There is no evidence that this was ever intended as a diminishment of the woman’s person or giftedness, but rather as a redemptive role assigned the husband toward the wife as a means toward reinstating the original partnership. Note: the passage does not assert male dominance over femals. It does assign husbandly responsibility for leadership in the male relationship”.

Here’s John Salza’s site for more such gems from the Bible and the Fathers. If you are really interested and want the whole exchange, it was in the letters section of the Remnant, October 5, 2012. The woman was Susan Potts, a regular columnist for them, but not lately!

http://www.scripturecatholic.com/husband_headship.html

Btw, Salza says the Douay Rheims translation of the Vulgate is very poor on Genesis 3:16. As this is the translation Trads use, the fault may not be all on her.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
El Bastardo November 16, 2012 at 12:27

Article=Awesome, Articulate, Leaving nothing left to be said.

Nuff said.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
oddsock November 16, 2012 at 12:42

Thanks Nemo

Thing is, with that sort of dependancy it is a “big stick” for any government regardless of its label.

This is what happened in the UK. Labour promotes social security and increases its votes then Conservatives get in usuallyby threatening to reduce them slightly or force the sick back into work etc and the dance goes on and on until the people get so pissed off with the farce fewer and fewer even bother to vote. We now have a coalition government of Liberals and Conservatives simply because equal numbers no longer believe any party.

Voting ? For years now each part that was in opposition promised to give the populace of the UK a referendum to see if we wanted to stay in the EU. Feck me, nobody even voted to join the feckin EU in the first place and once in power they never give the people this constantly promised referendum on membership of the EU. The elite know full well the people would vote to leave the EU.

As I keep saying it is all a load of bollocks pretending that voting makes a difference.

OT but we had for the first time in the UK a vote to elect local police commisioners. The voter turnout ? Reported as well below 15% I mean come on, if you cant even get more than 15% of the population to vote on something its time to stop this nonsense.

The whole system is corrupt and collapsing and maybe for reasons we dont know?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
oddsock November 16, 2012 at 12:53

Nemo

Are you sure its as high as 47 million on food stamps ? Thats a very high number. Are things that bad in the USA ? Its hard to get an accurate picture from the MSM.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
Elaine November 16, 2012 at 13:11

Sorry, but I agree with various opinions that the men’s movement for family law reform, men’s rights etc is doomed, doomed, doomed. Because of women ? Yes, but also because men are their own worst enemies. The men’s movement is viciously split (like the women’s movement) between the hard-line PUAs and those who would champion a return to old fashioned, Christian traditional male-based values. A clear example of this split has shown up on the Dalrock site where a woman commenter YBM dared to defend the poor hapless Mrs Petraeus, questioning why she is being pillored, mocked and ridiculed for her “ugliness”, weight, “masculine” looks when she champions military guys, protecting their financial interest whilst on their tour of duty, including the financial fallout from divorce (which happens to be common for military guys serving abroad from what I understand). She has done nothing to these men, and has even made a career of protecting men’s interest and yet she is treated worse than shit because she dared to be old and ugly and had the misfortune of having her husband cheat on her. From the many negative and nasty respsonses YBM garnered from the militant PUAs, it seems the hatred for women is so strong that even those who would support men’s interest and men’s rights are like the proverbial babies being thrown out together with the bath water. Even men from the traditional, conservative school who dared to agree with YBM and defend Mrs Petraeus got a serve by being called Beta-footsoldiers of he militant left femi-nazi wing. Scanning the manosphere, it seems the militant PUAs are on the ascendant, just like the militant femi-nazis on the women’s movement side.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
Anonymous Reader November 16, 2012 at 13:59

Ethical: Zed is right.

Modern women have made their bed. They can lie in it. Alone, or with cats, makes no difference to me or a lot of other men.

And back to the “missing ingredient” – there isn’t one. Women enjoy being unhappy, so long as there is someone, anyone, to blame it on besides themselves.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Mark November 16, 2012 at 14:56

I clicked on the link to the judgybitch site and read her advice for men on how to pick a wife. Interesting stuff. Also, check out her profile.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Jimbo November 16, 2012 at 15:24

@Somnolent November 16, 2012 at 03:22

” … When in fact feminists, being merely parasites, ingrates and useful idiots…. ” Not a complete description of feminists, but, after many years of thought, I can’t think of three more appropriate words for them. Wow!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
jay November 16, 2012 at 15:25

@Jaego
As a reformed what a tragedy that has occurred in the church since the middle ages when females started to dominate.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
keyster November 16, 2012 at 15:47

…unless of course all the upper echelons of the elite are cloaked Marxists ?

Pretty much yes, from our rich to our entertainers to our press corp to our education system. Not Marxist, but socialist…otherwise known as Marxism lite.

They easily ripped up the once great USA constitution with the help of ALL your presidents and congress the only one that stood in the way was rubbed out PDQ

Yes, beginning with Teddy Roosevelt who first openly questioned the relevance of the Constitution, to Woodrow Wilson who agreed, to FDR to LBJ to Obama. The Traditional-Constitutionalist types held on as long as they could, giving up ground as they went along. Eisenhower, Barry Goldwater, Reagan. The Left kept pulling them to the center, to where all we have are Left and Hard Left.

People can vote for taxing the rich and corporations so they get free stuff…or…they can vote for individual responsibility and self-reliance in the faint hope that somehow prosperity will “trickle down” to them. You can see why conservatism doesn’t sell very well with the immigrant class.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Josh November 16, 2012 at 17:48

Back when the media went crazy over the Rush Limbaugh/Sandra Fluke incident, I heard a woman say “we’re your girlfriends, mothers, sisters, and wives, so stand with us.” This woman was one of the many female idiots who believed America was waging a war on women. When she said “so stand with us” I almost died laughing at the absurdity of such a comment. Imagine how entitled women have to be to demand the men they are robbing blind stand with them. I wish I could be there to see the look on that woman’s face when she realizes no one is going to ride in on a white horse and save her from her selfishness.

I swear, women don’t live in the real world. But, the one thing which really gets to me is the absolute unwillingness of women to become more informed. Instead, they believe feminism is good because that is what their college professors told them, or that “Sex and the City” is a realistic view of the lives of post-Wall women, or that not getting their way all the time is considered oppression.

In addition to the phrase “it’s about time” I would like to add the phrase “you are clueless when it comes to feminism” to very annoying feminist phrases. All you feminists can try your smoke and mirror tricks on me, but I know exactly what you people are all about.

Also, I want to make a comment on the female/male college enrollment and graduation ratio. Based on my college experience, I would say the majority of men who attend and graduate college are hardcore manginas. Universities aren’t exactly appealing to men who can’t stand feminism. I bring this up because the male college graduates who have feminist beliefs will probably bring their feminist beliefs with them into their chosen careers.

Maybe I just went to a very anti-male college, but I get the impression there are other red-pill male college students who agree with me that the majority of male college students are hardcore manginas.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Attila November 16, 2012 at 18:24

The longer I live and the longer I see family and values degrade – the more sensible a traditional religion like Torah-observant Judaism and Islam make sense. And the plus side is that nobody can force you or threaten you because you can exact revenge by means of “hate speech” and “hate laws”. I think it’s a realistic option in these very weird times. Plus- they are both international – which means that you can pretty much operate in your own subcultural world anywhere in the Western world since people are deathly afraid of lawsuits for discrimination these days.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Rebel November 16, 2012 at 18:37

“We hope the institution of marriage is still here when you return.”

In reality, while women have gone to some “other place”, no one can say for sure that men will be there when and if women decide to “come back”, some day.

The men are leaving the building…noiselessly.

Women might come back, but, to an empty nest.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Morrisfactor November 16, 2012 at 19:18

Ethical-

Stirling work and writing. Thanks for the time and effort!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Rob November 16, 2012 at 19:20

Oh God! Oddsock is back spewing the same drivel against feminism being related to Marxism as he did before he left.

For fuck’s sake’s man, grow up and learn that Marxism does not equal standing up for the poor. That is only a political ploy. Who woulda thunk it? It’s all about gaining power? Well, GEE!

Fuck is it tiring hearing of twits like you, claiming globalism and the Ill-ooh-meh-naughty until your short hairs fall out, when even a simpleton could see that even if if was the Ill-ooh-meh-naughty and Globalism, they are still using Marxist techniques to bring about their goals! If you are going to claim “Globalism” then at least have the decency to learn that the term came from Marxist theory clammoring for not for the “One World Order,” but something similar called “Global Governance.”

God! Learn a few things about politics and philosophy before you stand here again stomping your little lavender slippered feet in anger, trying to tell everyone what they can and can’t say.

Then go back to fucking your inflatable sheep.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
Gilgamesh November 16, 2012 at 19:52

redsock

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Anonymous Reader November 16, 2012 at 20:07

Elaine, you have come to the wrong place to whine about mean men.

If the frying pan of Dalrock’s was too hot for you, you won’t find the fire here any cooler.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
tiredofitall November 16, 2012 at 20:27

“Instead a more reliable route to well being lies in embracing the sense of duty, and obligation to family that has been steadily been beaten out of generations of young girls.”

In a word, bullshit.

If anything’s been beaten out of anybody, it’s the men.

Women are gladly lining up en masse to reap the “benefits” of feminism. Even to their own detriment. It always seems to me like women have little or no capacity to see cause and effect.

Today they screw boys out of an education, means that tomorrow there will be no men willing (or able) to build a family with them.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Gilgamesh November 16, 2012 at 21:37

“poor hapless Mrs Petraeus” entered a marriage of convenience, and Dalrock owns, fuck off.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Nemo November 16, 2012 at 22:27

@ Oddsock:

Yes, that 47 million figure is correct:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2012-11-10/foodstamps-surge-most-one-year-new-all-time-record-delayed-release

and more directly from the US Govt. itself:

http://www.fns.usda.gov/pd/34SNAPmonthly.htm

BTW, I just looked up the data from the 1932 German elections:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_election,_November_1932

Turnout: 71.10% of electorate

National Socialist Party: 33.09%

Product of two figures: 23.53% of electorate voted for Hitler

Uncomfortably close to the 15% figure on food stamps in the USA. And our turnouts are usually close to 50% of the voters, not 71%. Do the math …

Sometimes elections DO matter, there’s always a lesser evil to vote for …

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Rebel November 17, 2012 at 00:12

“Today they screw boys out of an education, means that tomorrow there will be no men willing (or able) to build a family with them.”

You have put your finger exactly on the source of the “problem”

There is an “agenda”, if you chose to call it that way, that says the wolrd population must be reduced to 500 millions tops. This is no “conspiracy: this a a fact and there is even a statue to commemorate it.
Momen have opted for that option but men alas, have not.

As a consequence, as long as men will want to associate with women and start families, they will be subjected to this kind a of treatment.

Expect it to get a lot worse until men, collectively, understand that they must abandon any thought or idea to associate with women for anything other than simply carnal union.

The family is dead in the heads of those who own you.

Men have to understand that they must “abandon” women to their own fate they can fend for themselves and those who can’t will be part of the 6.5 billions “beloved ones” that will have to go.
At least, this gives you a slight advantage in the battle for survival that will eventually (or soon) follow.

Staying on your own and doing thigs exclusively for yourselves will give you a better chance at survivalé Failure will be the mark of the married man in charge of a family.

There is nothing you can do to stop that. But at least, the writings have been set in stone for everyone to see.

Warnings of that caliber shall not be repeated many times. And remember that more than half of mankind (women) have already subscribed to it with all their might, even though they are very slow in realizing that they must expect.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
migu November 17, 2012 at 01:34

Really?

We’re waiting for women to come back? Leave me out of this we eh? I don’t need a future ex-wife. Pussy is easy, and family is de-facto illegal.

All women treat me well, until sex enters the picture. Once that happens…..let’s just say I ain’t a dog.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
oddsock November 17, 2012 at 02:27

Rob

Ooooh ! Have you missed me so much my vertically challenged little cup cake ?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
oddsock November 17, 2012 at 04:35

Nemo/Keyster

This is interesting

http://www.globalresearch.ca/nearly-50-million-living-in-poverty-in-us/5312028

Nearly 50 million Americans living in poverty

The number of people living in poverty in the United States rose last year to 49.7 million, based on a new measure that provides a fuller picture of poverty than that previously reported by U.S. Census Bureau data. The revised poverty rate of 16.1 percent is up more than a percentage point from the 15 percent figure reported by the government in September.

————————————————————————————-

The SNAP food stamp program and unemployment insurance benefits also provide significant protection against poverty. But it is precisely these programs—along with Medicare and Medicaid—that are being targeted for cuts as part of the bipartisan assault on social programs being prepared in the wake of the 2012 elections under the cynical pretext of averting a looming “fiscal cliff.”

Those feckin socialists and cultural marxists are cutting benefits again Pftttt !!!!

Keyster I tried my best to warn you about all this last year but you still chose to shout conspiracy. Do you still think so ? Really ?

But hey you keep on believing there is some fantasy political fix if you want mate. Blame cultural marxism/socialists until you are blue/red in the face. It has nothing to do with it.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
numnut November 17, 2012 at 05:11

I heard a woman say “we’re your girlfriends, mothers, sisters, and wives, so stand with us.”

Where’s the reciprocation?
None,women use for utility and have no qualms about not ‘standing with men.’

A woman who stands with her man?
Unheard of in this day and age,they are OPPORTUNISTS.

“Men have to understand that they must “abandon” women to their own fate they can fend for themselves…
..remember that more than half of mankind (women) have already subscribed to it with all their might”

You betcha.
Hetero-solidarity has been broken by the gay-lesian-govt alliance.

You know the fix,it’s been written in stone from the ages,yet no one has the power of numbers in solidarity to pursue it.

The best hope was the “conservatives” what a neo-con-job.
Bill Bennett anal penetrator w/o the courtesy for a reach-around.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Uncle Elmer November 17, 2012 at 06:51

“PUAs” my ass. There is no split between PUAs and MRAs that comes close to the chasm between granola lesbians and lipstick lesbians that savaged the land back in the 1990s as violently as the Hundred Years War.

Everytime I succeeded in “picking up” a woman I couldn’t get a hard because the bizarreness of her acquiescing to my feeble come-ons left me unnerved and frankly, scared shitless. One expects resistance and coyness, not her dropping trou like she’s getting an oil change. You can almost hear the wailing and gnashing of teeth from deep within the maw of her twat. Run brother, run!

We should refer to them as “Armchair PUAs” for their actual combat experience vs. their bragadoccio.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
keyster November 17, 2012 at 07:58

America’s master political thinker, James Madison, said it best with his definition of “faction” in Federalist 10, as comprising “a number of citizens, whether amounting to a minority or majority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adverse to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community”.

Team Woman is the single largest and most powerful special interest group in America. They’re not interested in what’s best for the preservation and prosperity of the Republic. They’re interested in getting what benefits them, as women; men and children be damned.

When ObamaCare (predominately a female benefit) goes into effect this time next year, all Hell will break loose on the already dismal employment scene. Businesses will shift workers to part-time to lower exposure to the tax penalties, try to stay below 50 people and pay the $2000 penalty rather than pay for someone’s healthcare insurance – – sending employees to the State Exchanges. It will be an unbelievable mess.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
zed November 17, 2012 at 08:26

Yes many younger women are simply turning their backs to feminism. We take the good (having the chance to a good education, for instance) and reject all the bad stuff.
How’s that for giving these unruly, dangerous women like Slaughter the finger…

Unimpressive.

Cafeteria feminism at its finest – go to a buffet, spend all your time at the desert bar, and skip the vegetables.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
oddsock November 17, 2012 at 09:13

Gerald Celente – Trends In The News – “Unravelling Of Civilization” – (11/9/12)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5t3K9souzAQ&list=UUCs_FjJR8A7rompHCnW0-3g&index=1&feature=plcp

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
oddsock November 17, 2012 at 10:54

Here you go guys a very interesting read for us all.
Ignore the usual bias that always taints such an article, even the title has a hint of blame. Nevertheless, read the article but then scroll down and read the comments. Some of them are priceless.

Why do so many men end up living alone?

http://him.uk.msn.com/in-the-know/why-do-so-many-men-end-up-living-alone-man-male

Comment ;-

“The British society disregards men in many ways. when there’s a domestic squabble , its the man being asked to leave and find elsewhere . Women dont have any respect for their husbands, they talk to them like kids, order them around and also wants outsiders to know that ‘she has got him wrapped around her finger’. Most women in today like to show authority in the marriage . so long as this ‘girl power’ thing continues,marriages and relationships are still breaking up.

Whoever penned this article lacks knowledge about modern women behavior “

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
Josh November 17, 2012 at 10:56

I find that most women who comment on websites dedicated to men’s issues tend to be cafeteria feminists. Basically, they want to have their cake and eat it too. If push came to shove, they would choose all the perks given to them by feminism over the men they supposedly support.

I echo Zed’s comment about being unimpressed 10x. It’s always the same spiel with you women. You claim to be anti-feminism, but only when it isn’t inconvenient. You just want to gobble up all the good stuff, and leave men to feast on the table scraps. You can tell us how you really, really care about the plight of modern men, but your actions tell a much different story.

Same shit, different day.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
gilgamesh November 17, 2012 at 12:50

Carnal union is already a legal minefield as it is, the definition of consent is more subjective every day, how are you supposed to prove that?

And all that just so women can jail anyone they regret spreading their legs for. Absolutely sickening.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
djc November 17, 2012 at 12:50

zed November 16, 2012 at 09:36

So to all those women seeking a kinder existence, from those of us men who have always loved and supported you, we continue to do our best to wait patiently.

Good doggy.

Ain’t THAT the truth.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
SixStringsForever November 17, 2012 at 13:29

Generally speaking,women as a voting group will always vote for the party that gives them the biggest hand-out,I don’t believe they think too deeply on a political level for the most part,they’re after all the freebee’s,free housing and some cash to spend via the taxpayer.
It makes me sick to witness this in my neighbourhood as to how my taxes are wasted on the female workshy,buy realistically what can I do about it…….who do I speak to with my grievances???

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
livingwell November 17, 2012 at 13:42

God Zed, I love you man.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Rmaxd November 17, 2012 at 15:44

FACT:

Women dont know how to get a good education

Over 140,000 men apply to any given college, or university

Only around 20-40,000 women apply to for a college or university education

The vast majority of women CHOOSE welfare over education

THAT IS THE MAJOR DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MEN & WOMEN

Even most men on welfare, have at least a college education

Men are forced onto welfare, women choose welfare instead of an education

Women = worlds leading leisure class

Women are the ultimate slaves

Consumers, easily manipulated by politicians & corporations & advertising

Emotional & irrational& illogical = no sense of loyalty or justice or liberty, to their families, society or culture

Women are the ultimate tabula rasa …

Women, a dictators best friend & enablers of war criminals & mass genocide

Is it any wonder women need team woman, & femi-nazism to prop up their toxic unjust versions of reality

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
T November 17, 2012 at 15:45

Elaine at 3:11:

Don’t feel bad; I remember mildly criticizing something one of the guys said on Dalrock, and little minds came out of the woodwork.

They were allowed to strike at me, but when I tried to answer back, my comments were all deleted. That’s how the little men at Dalrock “win”

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
Rmaxd November 17, 2012 at 15:56

@Oddsock

What keyster doesnt realise, its the politicians & ppl like keyster who are the real conspiracy theorists …

Corporate sponsored & bribed politicians & corrupt courts & judges & cops, according to keyster is the only solution we have as a society … lmao

Modern politics & the vote, THAT is the ultimate conspiracy theory

Created by mainstream drones like keyster, for mainstream drones like keyster …

Enjoy your ignorance keyster, enablers of corporate sponsored feminism & white knighting feminist infested politics

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
Mark November 17, 2012 at 16:18

Wow. I’m a frequent visitor here. Though my ox has not been specifically gored (yet) by the issues, experiences, and trends delineated here (too old school, patriarchy-oriented, moderate of means, and just plain lucky) I se great value in the way this was articulated, and hope for its wide dissemination.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
scatmaster5 November 17, 2012 at 16:53

and hope for its wide dissemination.

While fairly well read in the “manosphere” sites such as this one are a microscopic pimple on the buttocks of the world. Coupled with the misandric MSM this articles “dissemination” will be miniscule.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Attila November 17, 2012 at 18:23

I have to laugh when people quote “scripture” – mainly because anything that has been translated several times over (from Aramaic or Hebrew to Greek to Latin to English or other European languages) will bear little or no resemblance to the original. Biblical Hebrew has a vocabulary of about six thousand words, ambiguous tenses, and no punctuation of any kind. If you want to know what the Jewish Bible and the Gospels have to say – be ready to learn some Biblical Hebrew and New Testament Greek (Koine). Same can be said for any other founding text such as the Qur’an and the Vedas.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
V10 November 18, 2012 at 03:05

@Ethical: “Welcome home, we’ve been waiting”? It sounds like a variation of “I’ve had my fun, now I’m ready to settle down”. It’s going to take a hell of a bigger act of contrition than some personal regret and lonely remorse at age 40. When I hear a woman denounce institutional misandry, without qualifiers and equivocation, on national TV, then I’ll be willing to take her seriously.

@Elaine: “…it seems the hatred for women is so strong that even those who would support men’s interest and men’s rights are like the proverbial babies being thrown out together with the bath water.”

Of course it’s not fair. Of course Not All Women Are Like That. Of course we should be building a broader consensus among both men and women in order to rollback the most grievous injustices, whenever it’s politically convenient.

Ask how many of us care. Tell us why we should care. Where was your outrage when good honest men were dropped into the grinder? Where was the marches demanding justice? Where were the demands on politicians to stop the War on Men?

So, women are turning their backs on feminism because they realize it’s ultimately a bad deal for women.

Read that sentence again.

Forget all the boys, men and husbands thrown under the bus. Only when the cost to WOMEN is apparent, then they concede that maybe they’ve miscalculated.

Of course all is forgiven.

Forget it. Fuck you. Fool us once, shame on you. Fool us twice… well, we’re done with shaming.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Uncle Elmer November 18, 2012 at 06:49

Why do so many men end up living alone?

http://him.uk.msn.com/in-the-know/why-do-so-many-men-end-up-living-alone-man-male

———————————————-

Isn’t it amazing that website looks nothing at all like “The Good Men Project”? The layout is so masculine, like how most single guys would decorate their apartment.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
ybm November 18, 2012 at 13:42

@Elaine

I’m not a woman, I’m a MGTOW of the Zed school, and I’m from a traditional culture. Forgive me for confusing you with my bizarre avatar (Its from a meme picture: http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-BN2Y2AIHgOc/Tucj8kWG0hI/AAAAAAAAAHE/gpKvSoLl28Y/s1600/cat.jpg ).

I get attacked at Dalrock’s because I am a critic of the Roissysphere and Game in general. NOT because I’m a woman.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Ethical November 18, 2012 at 18:13

@V10

So, women are turning their backs on feminism because they realize it’s ultimately a bad deal for women.

Forget it. Fuck you. Fool us once, shame on you. Fool us twice… well, we’re done with shaming.

As I said before the last line didn’t quite sit well with me either. So I got a chuckle from the harsh reaction ’cause it was as predictable as kicking a hornet’s nest. I recognized immediately on writing it that the ending had an air of “waiting like a little good doggie at the doorstep until mommy returns”. No doubt many men would be offended if the line conjured the mental image of hubby pitifully falling over himself to forgive mommy as she stumbles off the cock carousel drunken at 4 in the morning when she finally deigns to come home.

But tried as I might I couldn’t figure out how to reword and remove that implied subservience (so utterly not me) without losing what I felt was an important message. Writing is hard.

The message was that although marriage has been feminized to the point of being unappealing to most men because it’s either too emasculating or legally way too risky (or both), the company of a good (red pill) woman can be an incredibly beautiful thing. For those of us who want it, whether we have to go to another country to enjoy that commitment without a legal gun to our heads, or whether we fix divorce/community property laws here, the point was it’s good to remember how much we stand to gain.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Tom936 November 19, 2012 at 13:33

Because of this response pattern any writer who addresses sensitive women s issues has to do so in a way that allows women to confront issues without being confronted. She must present criticism obliquely enough for her female readers to see opportunities for improvement in a wholly positive light.

Instead the writer must give women readers half a ompliment by saying “try not to be too perfect”.

It sounds a lot like the way one must address royalty.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Anonymous Reader November 21, 2012 at 19:37

Ethical
But tried as I might I couldn’t figure out how to reword and remove that implied subservience (so utterly not me) without losing what I felt was an important message. Writing is hard.

“Math is hard!” – Barbie
“Writing is hard!” – Ethical

Assuming your purpose in writing is to convey thoughts, if you cannot word a text to convey those thoughts, then you should either continue to work on it until you get it right, or give it up. As is, you appear to me to be more of a mangina, patiently waiting with your collar on and your leash in your mouth for Mommy to come home and pat you on the head.

The message was that although marriage has been feminized to the point of being unappealing to most men because it’s either too emasculating or legally way too risky (or both), the company of a good (red pill) woman can be an incredibly beautiful thing. For those of us who want it, whether we have to go to another country to enjoy that commitment without a legal gun to our heads, or whether we fix divorce/community property laws here, the point was it’s good to remember how much we stand to gain.

Perhaps you should consider writing for the “Good Man Project”, where your ideas would be more in harmony with the readership?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
jay November 22, 2012 at 01:11

@Ethical

Too long have we been polite and we have been ignored. Better rather to just hold their feet to the fire with cold hard facts.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Andrew November 29, 2012 at 09:21

Great article. I’m glad I sat down to read it all the way through. Long, but good in the end — I love your conclusion; we are waiting for the adrenalized women to ‘wake up’ from their dream of being women AND men, and settle down to be one or the other, and be content with that.

I would only add that we can play a big role in waking them up. In fact, I would argue that it is our duty as men to show leadership in this way, and gently lead them back to this conclusion. Those who are ready to be lead.

“We will no longer have the luxury of allowing feminist entitlement and freedom from responsibility to disenfranchise our sons. ”

That sounds like it’s straying close to victimhood territory. We can’t simultaneously browbeat women for playing the victim card and then turn right around and play it ourselves. We are not victims any more than they are, and together, we should stop thinking of ourselves as victims and start thinking of ourselves as rational actors.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Serena March 16, 2013 at 20:28

You know, I couldn’t agree more with the title of the article- we can’t ‘have it all’.

I very plainly know that my career ‘suffers’ because I have decided that my husband, my children and my home are more important to maintain. Although I’d love to be a stay at home mother, monitarily we cannot afford that.

I don’t bat an eye when calling in sick to care for a sick child, I do not go to out of state week long classes offered to me for free because my family needs me at home more than I need another bullet point on my CV. I don’t volunteer for special projects that I know would earn me brownie points and I work the midnight/weekend shift so that I am home all week during the day with my children.

I am happy with the balance I’ve struck between family and work due to necessity. And although I know I could offer more to my family as a SAHM, that is not an option so I serve my family to the highest degree possible while still keeping my salary.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Faye August 16, 2013 at 12:00

I think you are another casualty of misunderstanding feminism completely. Many of the issues you see plaguing boys and cause by feminism are, in actuality, traceable back to the patriarchal system in which we live where “boys don’t cry.” This is extremely emotionally stunting for men, and feminism is trying to work against it.

Also, you did what we in rape-victim advocacy circles would call victim blaming. Why is it somehow the woman’s fault for going out at night, and not the man’s fault for… oh, let’s see, raping her?!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
BillowsPillow August 17, 2013 at 11:42

@Faye–
Point me in the direction of feminist organizations who are actively trying to increase awareness of the decline in male educational performance. Or domestic abuse with men as the victims. Or to put an end to the “women first” approach in divorce hearings and to reunite estranged fathers with their children. Or to demand women sign up for the draft. Or to insist that if women are going to join the armed forces, they cannot do push-ups on their knees. Or to demand full or increased prosecution for women who falsely accuse men of rape. Or to encourage women to take responsibility for themselves and quit playing victims and demanding that instead of “a man” take care of them, the government does..

Show me that Feminist organization, and then you can go on saying all these problems are a result of this theoretical “patriarchy.” I say theoretical because the idea of a societal structure created by men for the benefit of men at the expense of women is ludicrous, considering that throughout history, men have sacrificed their lives, their well being, and their comfort in order to protect and care for women. And before you go off about how women shouldn’t need men to protect them, take a long look at what feminism is building for them: instead of fathers and husbands being responsible for the protection of their daughters and wives, it’s fast becoming governmental bodies, social programs,special interest groups, and check-signing baby-daddies in their place.

One last thing. I’ll join you in speaking out against victim-shaming of female victims of rape as soon as you and other feminists stop justifying female perpetrators of domestic violence, child abuse, and infanticide.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
Swedish American August 21, 2013 at 00:21

I think everyone should have some experience in Scandinavia, where gender equality is a norm and not a new idea. As an American living in Sweden, I now see the value “feminism” has played in raising awareness on gender equality. Feminism is not bad…and is not an “ism”… it’s simply the way things should be. And I totally disagree about it meaning that we don’t need to take responsibility. It’s not about entitlements… it’s not political. American’s just don’t know how to be natural with it… just like socialism… feminism is the great evil. Which is a lie we’ve been told, for … ever.

I’ve just come back to work after being home for 12 months with my newborn, indulging in all the homemaker roles. Now my husband is home, raising our 10 month old. We share in the washing, cooking, cleaning, etc. Some evenings he washes, cleans and I go for a run… and other nights I clean. It works just fine and his manhood is not offended at all. In addition, I have not been discriminated at work for taking so much time off. In fact, I was given a pay raise and asked when I plan to have a second baby and take more time off. There is much to learn from the Scandinavians.

When I read these articles, I get confused by all the words used. So much analysis on a subject creates black and white points of view, when you’re really speaking of generalities. It’s impossible to define how women and men are and feel in certain situations. We are human. We Americans are so dramatic over gender “issues”. It’s very simple… just be thankful, do what you can to help each other and don’t prejudge abilities/potential based on gender.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1

Leave a Comment

{ 1 trackback }

Previous post:

Next post: