While at first glance this article may appear to be a history discussion, it is instead quite practical, and it speaks to the current conditions facing American men and boys. It discusses: (1) the markedly increased sophistication of modern versus ancient slavery, (2) how both the enforcement mechanisms and trappings of slavery have dramatically changed over the years, (3) why most American males don’t recognize modern slavery for what it is, and (4) how men can stay out of slavery, or at least limit the extent to which they are enslaved.
Before we get into the details of modern American male slavery, let’s define the term “slavery.” A reading of multiple dictionaries will show there are many different definitions of slavery. This disagreement about the definition indirectly points in the direction that this article expressly points: most modern American males are slaves but they steadfastly refuse to admit it, or else they are so blind that they can’t see it. Creating a through-line across these dictionary definitions, the common elements include: (1) the state of being inextricably bound to, or legally owned by, another person, so forcefully that the slave is required to work for the benefit of the other person, (2) being forced to work hard in harsh conditions for low pay, pay which is not proper remuneration for, or appreciation for the work done, and (3) being dominated and forced to submit one’s own will to the will of another person. You might want to write those points down, because they are three ideas that you may want to come back to later.
The institutionalization of slavery is facilitated by the natural differences between people. The atrocious slavery-related crimes against black people in the early days of the United States were facilitated because these people had notably different body features than white people. The atrocious and largely unrecognized current crimes against American males are likewise facilitated by the fact that males are readily identified, and then consistently treated differently from females. When natural and inherent body features are not used to separate slaves from non-slaves, other mechanisms are used. For example, the Nazis used tattoos to identify and track the imprisoned Jews in the 1940s. The mechanisms to immediately visually separate slaves from non-slaves have a long history; the ancient Romans for instance marked runaway slaves with a human brand with the letters FUG (for “fugitivus”).
The enforcement mechanisms and trappings of slavery that we traditionally think of, including whips, chains, shackles, and prisons, are for the most part no longer necessary in modern America. They are still used for the most uncooperative and intransigent of male slaves. For example, fathers who don’t pay child support on time — even though many of them can’t pay because they are out of work — are increasingly being sent to prison. When in Federal prison, 100% of the able-bodied men are forced to work, according to the Prison Policy Institute. Looking at the data for 2003, the most recent year for which this author could find statistics, the prevailing minimum wage was $5.15/hour, but the Federal prison workers were paid $0.12-0.40/hour. Minimum wage on the outside was thus 13 to 42 times as much as what these men were paid when in prison. As this differential in wages suggests, the prison labor program is tremendously profitable for the corporations (the true overlords) that use it, and that may have something to do with the fact that this system has remained in place since 1934. Even if most men who are behind in their child support payments don’t go to jail, the fact that they could go to jail has a significant compliance-inducing influence on their behavior.
The possibility that men might go to prison if they don’t pay child support is thus an indication of the first part of the definition of slavery provided above: slaves are legally owned, and forcefully bound to the mother of their child (at least supposedly their child, but lets set aside paternity fraud for now), so much so that they are required to work for the benefit of the another, in this case the mother. The conditions for these imprisoned fathers who don’t make their child support payments, are also a reflection of the second aspect of the definition of slavery mentioned above: being forced to work hard in harsh conditions, for low pay, which is not proper remuneration. Some of these fathers did not want to have children, but their objections to having a child were legally and socially ignored by the mother. The result for these unfortunate men, is that they are (and this is the third part of the definition of slavery mentioned above): dominated and forced to submit their own will to the will of another. As you read this article, you might want to repeatedly think about the current conditions of American men, and how so many of those conditions, where treatment differs by gender, are in fact a reflection of at least one of these three aspects of modern slavery.
So whips, chains, shackles, and prisons are for the most part now unnecessary. This is because most men comply, and go along with the program that enslaves them. Putting women exclusively in charge of training boys facilitates the indoctrination of slaves-to-be. Making men who wish to teach and support children out to be potential pedophiles not only discourages such men from assisting in the raising of young boys, it also lets them know that the full force of the law (via false accusations) might come down on them if they persist in meddling in a woman’s domain. Think about it: who in America does the teaching of small boys? Babysitters, teachers, mothers, grandmothers, and the vast majority of these people are women. Part of this indoctrination is to teach boys that they are not subject to the same rules as females. For example, males are informed that they cannot hit females, but at the same time they must put up with females hitting them. Young males are told that they should not cry, and that people don’t care about how they feel, emote, or think; at the same young females are indulged and permitted to not only to cry, but to whine, and talk on-and-on about their feelings, emotions, and many other aspects of their interior reality. Later the laws are used to force males to bear burdens that women do not bear, and to pay prices that women don’t pay. For example, only men are required to register for the draft, and if need be, go to war, and be maimed or die for their country.
Such a female-dominated teaching environment helps to reinforce the reality that a whole different set of rules applies to slaves (males) than it does to the ruling class (by numbers, primarily females). It should be noted here that females are not the ultimate beneficiaries of American slavery; they are only the secondary beneficiaries. The super rich, the high level managers at the large corporations, the major stockholders of such corporations, and the politicians that are lapdog servants of these super-rich people — those are the true beneficiaries of male slavery. The vast majority of American females are largely unwitting accomplices who have been bought off with perks such as the latest fashions and preferential treatment in divorce court. Many of these females continue to support the male slavery system because it clearly favors women, and allows women a bit longer to live in their egotistical narcissistic fantasy worlds where they can indulge, among other things, the feminist notion that women are superior to men.
Thus, we see that the female supremacist movement, or if you prefer the more common term, the feminist movement, has successfully been coopted by the power brokers in super-rich big corporations and government in order to enslave men. While the female supremacism movement has always rested on morally unjustifiable grounds (the exclusive blame of men for society’s problems, fantasies like testosterone poisoning, claims about the non-existence of female domestic violence, etc.), it has become tyrannical and oppressive recently because it is now used as the moral justification for male financial slavery. If they played their cards right, egalitarian feminists (who truly focused on equality) might have had a future. But the female supremacist feminism now widely in evidence in America is on a self-destruct collision course with reality, and this is in large part because the latter theory has been tightly lashed-up with male financial slavery.
No doubt sensing that a change is coming, the male financial slavery enforcement mechanisms are becoming more and more stringent, cruel, demanding, and difficult-to-escape. For example, if American males don’t register for the draft, when they turn 18, they will not be eligible to receive federally-provided college financial aid or federally-funded job training. Those men who do not register cannot be hired for a federal job. Young men who are not in compliance with draft registration may also be fined up to $250,000, and/or put into prison for up to five years. Many of the states also deny driver’s licenses to those young men who don’t register. If you examine the enforcement mechanisms for many financial obligations of men these days (alimony and child support being of primary concern here), you will see that these mechanisms have similar onerous draconian consequences if a man doesn’t get with the financial slavery program. In the near future, the reader should not be surprised when those in power start committing troublesome men to mental asylums, as has historically been done by the Russians, as a financial slavery compliance-inducing mechanism.
And men are meanwhile told that this special service, this additional giving, which is not required of females, that it is an “honor,” that it’s just “what men have gotta do.” The cultural mantras surrounding these special male duties are intent on reinforcing this notion, that it’s normal and expected that men give, but that women do not. Take the whole notion of being a hero… when you think of that word, you think of a man — you don’t think of a woman. Hit popular music contains many similar notions. Consider the hit by Bryan Adams entitled “Everything I do, I do it for you.” A woman would not be singing a song like that. That’s a hypnotized slave’s song … the song of one who has given up all sense of self-determination. It’s reminiscent of the men who so strongly believed the dictates of chivalry that they willingly sacrificed their lives in favor of women and children when the Titanic went down. Just one more music example: consider the Shania Twain hit song “Forever and for always,” which contains the words “I’m keeping you forever and for always.” Those are words of a slave-master, telling her slave to just stay put, not to even consider escaping. Slaves have no choices about leaving.
So let’s zero-in on the enslavement mechanism: the financial system, combined with the notion that men must be the provider for not only their wives, but also their ex-wives, and their children, whether they wanted or asked for these children or not. In order to eat, put a roof over your head, drive a car, and otherwise obtain the necessities of life in America today, one must have money. The American economic system has been engineered to channel the survival needs of people, to lash those needs up with the economic system, and to compel people to act in certain ways in order to get money. For example, it forces men to get a job, and to work hard at that job, to stay in that job, etc., and this ultimately benefits the overlords, and also of course their accomplices, and here I speak of women. The economic system can encourage individualism and freedom (as having your own farm did some two hundred years ago in America). Alternatively, the economic system can encourage the concentration of power and widespread slavery (as was once done on Southern plantations with black slaves, and same general approach has been refined and has morphed into modern institutions like the military, coal mines, and factories — institutions where legions of male slaves work).
How one gets money can be, and has been, engineered to support, perpetuate, and make still more cruel the existing male slavery system. Take the expectation that all men must work as an example. With social approval, and legal support, women are given an opportunity to be stay-at-home moms supported by a man, be stay-at-home moms supported public assistance, be married women with no children supported by a man, be married women with grown children supported by a man, work part-time, or work full-time. To be socially and in many cases legally acceptable, particularly if they have taken action in response to the natural biological instinct to have sex with a woman and have children, then men have only one option: work full time. Free people (or at least secondary beneficiaries of the system, namely women) have choices, while slaves do not.
Said a different way, the economic system, combined with laws requiring men to support their wives and children, forces men to make money. If men don’t do that, then they are socially ostracized and called “dead-beat dads,” “slackers,” and “bums” (note that all these, and a variety of similar words, imply the man isn’t working hard enough). There are no comparable derogatory words for women who don’t work, or don’t work hard enough. This language of ours is part of the control system, it’s part of the indoctrination system that makes whips, chains, shackles, and the like largely unnecessary.
To get back to the economic system, the structure of the economic system is the most compelling mechanism used to force men to work in jobs that they hate, work in dangerous jobs that pay relatively well (such as coal mining and taxi-driving), to get the money to pay to people such as ex-wives, people with whom these men often have no current relationship, to pay people that currently do nothing for them. Why would men willingly do that? Go back to the third element of the definition of slavery, and note that slaves are dominated and forced to submit their wills to the will of another (in this case the mother, but the system also takes its cut, for instance in the form of a rake-off for the child support collection machine).
The language used to eliminate the need for most physical constrains on slaves warrants some additional illumination. A sophisticated system of shaming and female disapproval is used to get males to adopt an unnaturally unfair set of gender discrimination rules, and to work according to the slave program (marriage and kids notably). Words like “man up” are used to indicate that men aren’t acting in an acceptable manner, in other words they are not behaving like good slaves. There is no equivalent “woman up” phrase for women. A rigid, legally-mandated, and economics-supported role model is foisted onto American males, but there is no comparable rigid role model to which females must comply. For example, males must be the “provider.” Sure, females can elect to have a career, but many soon find that (contrary to what the feminists have told them) working is not all that much fun, and they would really much rather stay at home and take care of kids, or perhaps just not work at all in spite of the fact that they don’t have kids. Males from their very young years are told not to cry, and they are later told it is unmanly and unbecoming to complain. Males cannot change the male role definition without great difficulty and resistance from others, but females are invited to do whatever they want. Slaves are not permitted to redefine their role, because their role is already established, and if men were permitted to readily redefine their role, then those men would naturally seek to escape their slavery. This is illustrated by a so-called joke: “A man who concedes a point when he is wrong is wise, but a man who concedes a point when he is right is married.”
Modern society has built a sophisticated propaganda system that reinforces and clarifies the slave role for males. Among the most pernicious of these propaganda systems is the notion of romance (as described in advertising, movies, books, etc.). Men are told to place great emphasis on their feelings and emotions for females, to base their decision to get married, and have kids, on their natural instinctual attraction to females (assuming the men involved are heterosexual, and gay men are lucky because they escape this trap). Men are discouraged from thinking seriously about what this big decision will mean to any individualized plans that they had for their life. They are instead encouraged to drop all their personal desires and plans in favor of supporting their wife and family. They are told that to do so is “mature” and “responsible.” To abandon their own life plan, and be dominated by a woman, and to support her in the creation of the house and family that she wishes to create, all that is supposed to be what a modern man should do. Again, we see men being pushed to step into the slave role, and pushed to do this at a young age, so that they never have much of a taste of the single life, lest they get to liking that single life and then decide not to get with the enslaved-and-married-or-divorced-with-kids-enslaved-provider role.
Prevailing stories about romance reveal a lot about the slavery racket. The system harnesses a heterosexual man’s natural desire to have sex with and have a partnership with a heterosexual female. With this harness in place, men soon become pack animals expected to carry a heavy load (make a lot of money). Consider the way in which a man is expected to ask a woman for “her hand in marriage.” The whole process is set-up to look like it is such a big deal for a woman to say “yes” to a marriage proposal. The man is expected to get down on one knee, as if he is subservient (a foreshadowing of married life) and beg her to say “yes.” The reality is just the opposite. Men are not desperate for marriage. But a very large number of heterosexual women desperately want marriage and they are trying to get their boyfriends to ask them to get married. It is as though conceptual mirrors were being used, with the sexes reversed. In reality, women want marriage and kids, in large part, because these things benefit them far more than these things benefit men.
The widespread, largely female-dictated cultural propaganda that reinforces that it is noble and proper for men to become and stay financial slaves, is further indicated by the current attitudes surrounding abortion. Never mind that the Constitution says that the country is made up of “free men,” it should have said that it is made up of free men as long as you neither get a woman pregnant, nor marry a woman, and you are sure not to violate any serious laws (parking tickets are OK), then and only then can you be a free man. Getting back to abortion and responsibility for a baby on the way, a woman can choose from a much larger array of commercially available birth control systems than a man can, and if she does get pregnant, she is the one who has exclusive control over whether or not the baby will be aborted. The woman is also the only one who can unilaterally put the baby up for adoption, or simply leave it on the steps of a hospital (in some states) with no questions asked. The man cannot terminate the pregnancy or his fatherhood. It doesn’t matter if he was tricked by the woman — perhaps because she poked holes in a condom — he is still responsible for financially supporting her baby, and there is no legal way to escape this duty. Paternity fraud likewise is alive and well in many states, and the fact that this assignment of fatherhood to the wrong man can continue is a good indication that something nefarious is going on. The fact that a husband is, in many states, still by default legally responsible for paying support for his wife’s child, a child born during the marriage, a child for whom he is not the father, and even when this is shown definitively via DNA evidence — that is yet another landmark revealing the contours of the financial enslavement system discussed here. The fact that, in many states, a husband cannot legally get a vasectomy without first obtaining his wife’s written permission, is yet another contour of this same system.
What is happening in America, and the reason why a heterosexual man often has no choice about these matters, is that he is being biologically, psychologically, culturally, and socially pushed into financial slavery. Rather than whips, chains, locks, prison bars, and the like, the economic system is used to enslave him. Once he has a child with a woman, or gets married, or both, he is a slave. Irreversibility is a hallmark of slavery. When the slave boats forceably captured African people from the west coast of Africa and shipped them to America, the process was irreversible. You could die, and maybe you could try to escape, but the latter was very difficult and dangerous. Just as there were many pre-Civil-War laws between the states to return an escaped American slave to his or her master, so there are now many intricate legal mechanisms to force a man to stay a financial slave once this virtual point of no return has been reached.
Oh, sure you can get a divorce. But you will have to pay a lot of money. Perhaps you will even have to pay alimony for life (still legal and required in Florida for example). Look at who has to pay alimony. By far, it is men who have to pay alimony. Never mind if the wife is very smart, has a marketable skill, or is able to support herself, the husband is still expected to pay. Very very rarely do you hear of any wife paying alimony to her former slave, oh, sorry, I mean former husband.
The story about the system, that both men and women tell, claims that male financial slavery is the price of being with a woman, having children, and having a family. Enslaved men hardly ever tell other still-free men about the in-the-trenches realities of the slavery system. Because they don’t share their experiences, except perhaps anonymously on the Internet, they do the still-free men a very great disservice. Why are enslaved men so quiet about this? Because, if these revelations were discovered, their slave-masters, or at least the secondary beneficiaries of the slave system (their “mates”), would come down on them very hard. Enslaved men seriously fear the consequences from females if they were ever shown to be revealing the male financial slavery system. Why do you think that male-only clubs and spaces are virtually outlawed these days? It’s because enslaved men aren’t allowed to tell the still-free men about the slavery system; the still-free men are expected to figure it out for themselves, after they have gone beyond the point of no return, when they are already enslaved. Not too far different from the old laws in South Africa, that prohibited slaves from congregating, in America we have feminist shaming and fits used virtually universally to prevent enslaved men from getting together and talking. Women and the slave-owners (the corporate and government elite) couldn’t have that, because the enslaved men might riot, or scheme about how to break out of their slave conditions.
When it comes to modern American men, there are three events that lead to their slavery, and only two of them are things over which men have any control. The first of these is the fact that an individual happens to have been born male. Barring extreme, and for most of us out-of-the-question, gender reassignment surgery and hormones, being something other than a man is out of the question. But men still decidedly do have control over getting married and they decidedly do have control over fathering one or more children. When one honestly sees the system for what it is, aside from moving to another country that is far more supportive of males, the rational things to do, if one still wishes to have sex with women, is to get a vasectomy and never get married.
In summary, the American economic system is set-up to entrap heterosexual men in financial slavery. The strategy: take advantage of men’s instinctual attraction to, and natural desire to be in partnership with women, and to have children, and use that to financially enslave men before they realize what’s happening. Although it may originally have had the provision of needed support for the woman and her offspring as an objective, the system now is simply a process of squeezing men for all they can possibly provide. For example, alimony and child support amounts are based on the ex-husband’s income, not on the actual needs of either the mother or the children.
Thus the American system is now an anti-male twisting of communistic slavery, or if you prefer, male financial slavery justified with just half of the communist credo. Rather than “to each according to their need, and from each according to his ability” the system gives “to women (and the largely-physically-absent rich overlords) as much as can possibly be extracted from financially enslaved men.” Note that women don’t need to account for money paid to them on behalf of minor children, and that child support paid by men need not in fact be used for the “benefit of the child.” The pretense of child support payments actually supporting children is now clearly eliminated; the system is now simply a financial transfer from men to women (and to rich overlords). This prioritization is also seen by the family law courts’ consistent refusal to enforce divorced fathers’ visitation rights with their children. The system doesn’t care about fathers, parenting, or children; it only cares about, and only enforces, what makes money (via soul-destroying jobs, onerous child support and/or unfair alimony).
Anyone who has any lingering doubts about the existence of an American male financial slavery system needs only to acquaint themselves with the existing laws that require male victims of statutory rape to pay child support to their adult female abusers. The notion that male children should be held financially responsible for the rape-generated offspring borne by their adult female abusers is beyond offensive. It reveals that, in the eyes of the law, males have next to no rights. Makes you want to sign up, right?