Todays young women are absolutely brainwashed to be entitled, toxic narcissists. My three daughters have unrealistic expectations, while my son has withdrawn into his online world. If I had to do it all over again, I would move to the Alaskan bush, cut off all television and technology except for VHS cassettes of Little House on the Prairie, and homeschool them on nothing but the classics. Alas, it wasn't until we caught a glimpse of what they were teaching our kids over covid-zoom-school that we began to realize how toxic the programming driving a wedge between the genders had become. I worry for my son....
While I understand the sentiment, men have zero leverage to change this system. Deliberately ending your bloodline is not a wise "protest" against "the system." So no, I will not brainwash and fearmonger my son into evolutionary death. I will simply encourage him to choose wisely and avoid women who show signs of instability or narcissism.
There's roughly a 50% chance he'll regret it bitterly for the rest of his life. That's a fact, not fear-mongering. Young men are not exactly renowned for their wisdom, either. But I certainly wish him and you the best of luck.
Refusing to marry, cohabit or have kids is the only leverage men have.
Thanks for the ad hominem. You ought to try communicating without those - it makes discussions considerably more interesting.
What is 'our' side? I don't know yours but can guess. My view is that men and women should be able to have relationships and kids without fear of punishment by the state. Men don't have that right now. That needs to change.
Thanks for the ad hominem. You ought to try communicating without those - it makes discussions considerably more interesting.
What is 'our' side? I don't know yours but can guess. My view is that men and women should be able to have relationships and kids without fear of punishment by the state. Men don't have that right now. That needs to change.
Most American women under 50 are crazier than fucking loons with very unrealistic expectations about men, the economy, and marriage. Get married to an American woman in this shitty economy and you are asking for hell.
The younger they are the more mentally ill they are. The urge for totalitarian control of all aspects of their surroundings and living of life is why so many who become so-called leaders are so often fascists is an amazing transformation of woman and pretending men are women helps them regress into tragic mental illness.
In the end, life will teach us all - I still remember being heartbroken, not able to understand the world anymore (I even hardly knew at that point) and survived finding the next forever Love until the one after her ;-)
Biology is a law of nature and you can break laws made by men but not by nature, that keeps me optimistic even amongst terribly naive, uneducated and sometimes even lost people I meet on my way through life.
Your kids will make it in the long run, we all want to be with others, we are social creatures and die when we are really alone.
So as long as they have you, they will prosper one way or the other.
Oh woe, woah to our sons, our male relations. Reminds me of a time, say 20 years ago…my dear friend told her middle school aged sons…never, correct, never as in absolute, find yourself in a situation, with the ladies, in which you could/would be compromised. The “kids” in middle school needed strong parental guidance as to keep their sons on the straight and narrow. Even back then, the boys were so suspect if the gals said…he did such and such. Old lady, approaching 7th decade, with a virtual kat❤️🐈⬛
There is no limitation to what women can and do contribute to society, but those contributions are increasingly drowned out by increasing mental illness and the need to hate men for everything that goes wrong in their lives.
I think female resentment of men is actually innate and inevitable, so everyone should stop catering to that resentment. It does not matter what men do. A large fraction of women will resent men anyway.
A real man inspires feminist resentment for being stronger and more aggressive than women are, and more successful because of those strengths. That is the true origin of the so-called "pay gap".
A weak man inspires contempt and loathing in women.
Is this why women try to out do men in how fascist or back stabbing they can be? The pay gap has been a myth for the last 40+ years yet it remains a talking point for angry women everywhere..
There are lots of limitations what women can and should do to society, in my opinion.
I personally don't want to see women on oil riggs, crouching trough a sewer to remove obstacles, lifting or carrying heavy weights in the moving business for a living etc.
Men are disposible and women are precious, thats why at every catastrophic event and at sea we say, women and children first, men then handle the situation or die.
Mental illness is a nice excuse for people that refuse to function as an adult or are unwilling to accept that life comes with challenges. Plus the pharmaindustry can't have enough 'mental illnesses' to hike up their profits.
I don't know why people worry themselves to death about how many men some pornstar sleeps with. I mean what else do you expect, she is a pornstar that is her job. I see no need to criticize her or make comments on entire the society as some seem to do. If you disagree just ignore these folks and that would be the best thing for your cause.
But her mother and sister are her manager and agent, respectively. She cries about her self induced trauma. If it was old school LA valley porn, I would understand the actual joke, but to give interviews saying how traumatic it was beggars belief
"manosphere". This is a ridiculous, misanthropic term. Part of an identity vocab that should be utterly rejected. If this word ever came out of a real person's mouth, I'd reject that person out of hand as a fool or worse. Here's the funny thing. I've never heard the term uttered by a human being in person. Like most of this jargon, it's just a psyop whose currency is vastly overstated on the Internet and only fools those who haven't "touched grass" in awhile, as you say.
On this topic, I again suggest Michel Houelebec. He's done a good job of presenting artistically the cultural shift from the 60s to present in the sexual arena. It's difficult to understand how we got here unless you see the historical, cultural movement and he presents this in a highly entertaining way. Elemental Particles is a good place to start. He also presents the psychological consequences, particularly for men, of this alienation, very well.
His view: The sexual revolution which was supposed to free us and make us all happier and healthier has produced the exact opposite result: extreme alienation.. In the US, it's worse than that. The cooptation of the women's movement by the Dems and it's conversion into an "identity" that lauds women who are permanently hostile to men with the title "strong woman". This is contrasted to those women, presumably "weak" in the dem cosmology, with healthy relationships with their father, husband, sons, which are still the majority of women world wide. Culturally, female disdain and mistreatment of men is highly encouraged and rewarded in our society, which naturally alienates and separates the sexes into rival camps. And it works. Just notice how they can mobilize all the "strong women" when they need to.
So from the free love left, we've come to the metoo (the most Victorian, anti sex, anti democratic psyop possible) Dems currently promoting a sex strike by women as punishment for the reelection of Trump. No shit.
It's the same game as to race. In the end, these are just myriad ways the Dems use to keep the working class at each other's throats, scared of one another, unable to interact with one another. Healthy happy sexual relationships have even become threatening to them and must be undermined. They are very desperate. I don't expect it to last much longer.
I'm not saying Republicans don't manipulate the working class. They just dont have the cultural power of the Dems. They don't run Hollywood, the unions or the schools. They lost the culture war decades ago. For the most part, they approach the problem of class conflict in a traditional, nationalist way. They encourage the idea that rich or poor we're all Americans and then put up a billionaire Capitalist who is said to represent the best interests of the working class. Of course, they do divide the workers against themselves, but it's again on more traditional nationalist lines. Billionaires and war mongers drain the public coffers, but it's the guy picking the lettuce who is the scapegoat.
Yes, it works. There is scores of women believing society makes life harder for them than it does for men (LOL), as well as their individual life being tough "because they are women" (LOL).
I see some, as I am of elder years. I sense more, especially reading comments. Like a puzzle. The pieces falling into place. I am interested in the split of humanity from a spiritual perspective as well. Given I have had no formal religious training or indoctrination? I appreciate the work of our pal, Simple, he keeps me on the edge of my seat, in a good way. Thank you for you comments and civil type engagement. Old lady with a virtual kat❤️🐈⬛
Goodness me. Surely any human has the ability to see that we have more similarities than differences, whether we are men or women.
The similarity is what we work with to get things done, and the differences make it special.
Nowadays, as rightly pointed out in this article, the internet provides a platform for these cowards (women and men as well as the ones that think they are something else🤮) to conveniently sit and blame everything and everyone for their shortcomings. Typical victim mentality brought on by a fragmented society, fragmented community that exhalts the individual.
Weirdly enough, we are social animals that need other animals to help us with the things we aren't good at. There are a multitude of roles to fulfill in a functioning community/society, and some people are just better at some things. But if you find yourself alone, lashing out at everyone around you, you are going to have to fulfill all those roles by yourself and you are bound to fail.
Cowards, the whole lot of them- whiney little ingrates that just can't look past their own selfish individuality.
Oh well, they will either have to learn to live together or die alone behind their keyboards and screens.
Life isn't fair, it's tough, and the best way to deal with it is to keep quiet and DO things, meaningful stuff, like helping others and being kind.
Meow, he he. Anyway, if your kitty photo was a grey kitty, I would say …you are my X, using a different screen name. His online name, or part of it is also…Finster. Have a Tom cat day? Thanks for sharing❤️🐈⬛
"it's an unsuitable image to present to the unmarried because it appears to confirm what they fear about women without any redemptive context."
What men should truly fear about women is more basic: being trapped into a fatherhood that consists solely of a lifetime of child support checks; being dragged into 'family' court and stripped of kids and assets, plus a lifetime of child support AND alimony, being falsely accused of sexually assaulting your own children; the list goes on.
Yeah, this article seems to assume that every unmarried male has no experience with women outside of the internet. We don't 'fear about women' due to ignorance, we have a pretty good idea about what women are like from personal experience and observation.
I think it's a good piece, but you're right. "Manosphere" is an effect, not a cause. Men will always analyze. And many will over-analyze. But in a healthy culture, that analytical ability doesn't get turned to something as generally fruitless as "figuring out" women... this is because, in a healthy society, women aren't allowed to be a chief problem. It's really that simple.
They are beautiful in all their contradictions. But they were not, and cannot be, in any public position of power. The ancients understood this; we've forgotten, to our detriment.
Incidentally, as to your exchange above, there's a good case to be made that the insouciance-to-incomprehension of the boomers on women issues is a product of demographics: women among that age cohort outnumbered men. This relieves pressure on everyone.
The article and the linked Kurtz article seem to assume that those who checked out of dating did so due to a lack of experience with women. Those with little experience with women are the most likely to idealize and place them on pedestals. It is personal and observed relationships with women that lead to a negative opinion of them.
Any man that gets married is utterly retarded. With the possible exception of marrying a woman with a lot more money than him (which carries its own costs), it is a foolish risk for little gain. I know a few men who love marriage, a few men who hate marriage. Almost all in the middle seem to regard it as another job, nothing but responsibilities and duties, but instead of getting a paycheck you do the paying. That's ignoring divorce, which has it's own set of horrors. Like how even men who get equal custody somehow end up having to pay child support, or losing 1/2 your retirement fund including what you earned before marriage.
Not all, but generalizations had to be made for the sake of time and purpose. The most vocal often fall in that category, but of course there's plenty who do have experience. After all, I don't think the movement would have survived if it was *only* the ones living in abstractions, for the movement to work there had to be concrete foundations.
But this is meant to only address a small slice of the conversation and not all of it writ large.
You should plan and think and ponder over second-tier decisions, like buying a car. The most important life decisions like choosing a partner? Instinct, chance, luck....Over thinking won't help, it will probably spoil things....
I just love having women blamed for the depredations of late-stage capitalism. It’s Adam and Eve all over again… Eve getting poor Adam kicked out of the garden (a sin used forever after to justify keeping women in chains.)
Men are subject to the same pressures and are not falling for it as women are in their droves ........ until they hit that wall. So yes it is right to blame women. Now women don't have the "chains" of a loving family they have their cats that "love" their human tin opener. Good swap, well played.
Oh fuckonouttahere. My mother couldn't have a credit card in her own name. sign for a mortgage or even control her own fertility. Let's talk about those 'chains' of a loving family: when my mother was a young woman, there was no escape from an abusive marriage. When a husband beat his wife, she was enjoined to be a better wife. As she was unable to get credit in her name, and as a woman was closed out of most professions (as well as out of higher education) - those chains were damn near inescapable. Not all families were loving.
Now, we live in a system in which paying the bare minimum bills requires two people to work full time plus farm out child care (which eats a quarter or better of their salary), and good union jobs have been eliminated.
Women didn't fucking do that. They availed themselves of a more levelled out playing field where you can't really argue that men deserve more money because they have bigger muscles.
(And PS: I am in a really loving marriage, with a husband who is proud of my accomplishments. The difference between the two of you is that he actually likes women.)
That's the conversation-stopper right there. No one ever asks why he hit her or who hit first (statistically it's the female, because she's relying on his chivalry not to hit back). Lots of research out there, have a look.
A lot of women abuse their spouses in non-violent ways. My own mom was one of those. They are never called out for it. Woman good, man bad.
"Women didn't fucking do that."
Well actually yes they did. When women decided that they need a man like a fish needs a bicycle, they turned their backs on their natural role as breeders and homemakers (somebody's gotta make the babies and look after them or humanity dies) and became worker drones laboring for the state.
I've concluded that women are rebelling against nature itself. Their antagonism towards patriarchy is how that rebellion is expressing itself. And I have sympathy for women too. No one in their right mind would choose to be born weaker, less intelligent, less creative, plus have to endure things like periods and giving birth (I'm speaking statistically, not about any one individual).
Another cheap 'gotcha' thought-stopper. You can find an example of just about anything. Statistically, by far the safest place for a daughter is with her biological father. It's not close. Step-fathers are far more likely to engage in this sort of behavior.
@ karalan when any person acts like a coward they are in the wrong, cowardice tries to inflict hurt. As to the rest of your comment about women - shocking, to say the least.
I can only give you this: if men were smaller, with less upper body strength, had periods,carried babies and were automatically assigned the role to raise them - just imagine the whining and moaning we would have had to endure if you're already whining like you are, statistically speaking of course, not on an individual level...
As I said, I have great sympathy for women. As do most men. But you're missing the point. No-fault divorce weaponized the family, children and love itself, with the primary burden being dumped on men while retaining the privileges for women. Family courts have stripped half the population of constitutional rights. This needs to change. And any ideology, including feminism, which sets half the population at odds with the other half is not in the 'best interests' of our children.
"Now, we live in a system in which paying the bare minimum bills requires two people to work full time plus farm out child care (which eats a quarter or better of their salary), and good union jobs have been eliminated."
In speaking this way, you illustrate the very sorts of criticisms the author is making against the writer of the NYT piece.
You seem unable to grasp that the above is an effect of feminism and egalitarianism when it comes to roles.
Double the labor pool, then be surprised when wages plunge.
Do you think contemporary history is the only history? Women have always worked, and in modern times (ie - since recorded history began) have worked in wage and wage slavery positions. The notion of women staying home with the young’ uns while men worked in the factories is a fiction. There was a “middle class” and an upper class of women who were able to afford this luxury, for an incredibly brief period of time. My grandmother worked as the cook in a logging camp (for a fucking miserable wage), my mother always worked - in shit paid jobs, while pretending it was some sort of volunteer labor in order to not appear to be ‘working class’ - while we kids learned to clean the house and start the dinners.
Yes, wages plunged when women got shit tired of making bullshit wages, and the Reagan / Clinton administrations destroyed the unions and shipped the manual labor to 3rd world nations.
We ALL got fucked by this. And yeah, the PMC’s of women sold all their sisters out - because low wage women are still working the shitty jobs they always worked for the shit wages they always worked, but this idea that ‘women’ are supplanting men because of anything the womens did is bullshit. It’s neoliberalism, my friend - and capitalism - and most women have had absolutely no power in this.
You are biting the wrong people. LOOK UP. We have a common enemy, and it is not other working people, whether those people have penisis or vaginas.
Red herring. Ofc women in various ways have always worked. Cottage industries, part time employment, nurses, teachers, secretaries. But we're talking about their being considered interchangeable with men in every facet of the workforce. Yes, that is new, and yes, you are adopting this whole idea of economic interchangeability as a panacea. This is why you started your entire case with credit cards. Economic independence equals autonomy and an escape from the patriarchy.
I think at some level you know you are doing this, and you probably sense at some level just what nonsense it is. But this Marxist frame allows you to evade the real issue.
With the decline of industrialization, women ARE interchangeable with every facet of the workforce. Men, on the other hand, have not adapted to this interchangeability: to whit - you cannot give birth from a magic opening to new workers.
That you believe that the women you meet in a restaurant or bar or in some online dating app made this happen is simply ridiculous and totally pathetic.
Why would a woman want/need credit? Why not make life affordable without falling prey to the real abuser - the credit giver that creates money out of thin air?
The abusive marrige story is so lame, since even at the time of our mothers/grandmothers, women would abuse their husbands in ways that a little beating of the women seems like a nice, loving correction compared to how women even back then could destroy and damge men. There never was a time that all families were loving, there were arranged marriages, not always to the benefit of the husband.
We are not wise at 20 or even 30, we are making mistakes, we are all imperfect in all ways possible and instead of embracing that and help each other, we are on that blame game and do not look at what makes us complete and compatible.
A real life situation in the US. Someone's husband removed his wife's name from their joint account, since he was primary holder, she couldn't even get her own salary which was direct deposited to this account. Indeed, why a woman needs to have an account/credit card, right? There are many ways to abuse a wife, not just physical.
Good lord, Angelina, I found out that my wife is going to divorce me after I went to the bank and wanted to draw some money from our joint account.
The saldo was 1,97 from more than 50k. That was in 1987 in Europe - so nothing new under the sun.
I have had last contact with my son when he was 14 years old, he turns 38 next year.
Obviously I have to be Satans little brother but I missed to beat some sense into her back then, I assume.
And there are many ways to abuse a husband, usually not physical because women are smart, they know that he would put her to the ground.
That mindset though that men abuse women because of some real cases in that matter doesn't justify women to treat men like shit.
And because of some women who drove their men into economic misery or suicide or fuck his brother or best friend whilst he was serving in the army does not make us men hate all women.
I am sorry to tell you but women should be happy that they can live in a patriarchal society, it's what makes women safe because no one wants their daughters safe as much as fathers, that's what patriarch means, btw.
And to finish my rant; it's totally irrelevant for a man that you have your own money or some degree on the wall.
All men want is a woman with a happy nature, warm caring personality and looking beautiful. We do not need or want another friend, man or obese nagging witch. Peace at home, respect for our efforts and a clean house with a delicious meal plus regular sex will do. ;-)
I wish you a wonderful new year and the love of a man that you really want.
Sorry, Frank about that - to drain joint accounts and deprive a man of his son, it's horrible, on any continent and at all times.
I'm fine with a patriarchal society, as far as men are men, and women can be women, but not the kind where men get free passes for just being a man. What exactly a woman gets in our current society where she is an equal earner (or more) to a man, and on top, to carry, birth, raise a child, house cooking/cleaning, or and yeah, look beautiful, and God forbid to forget having a sunny personality, and provide regular sex-) I don't know about your math skills, but in my books, the scales are tipped not in a woman's favor:-)
We are not talking about the extremes; sleeping with a man's brother/ best friend, causing economic misery, suicide, but something so mundane that many men won't even blink/think twice something like to GPS his wife's phone, to keep track of his "property" or violate a woman's expressed boundaries, which a man wouldn't dare to do to a man. Just saying :-)
Happy New Year, and may all your wishes come true!
If women were kept "in chains" (they were actually not; it's just called division of labor) since the dawn of Homo Sapiens, mustn't there have been some reason for that?
If a person begins with, and argues from, some strong conception of "rights," this sort of basic question is entirely invisible to them. Genetic questions, questions about nature -- not real.
Average IQ is around 100… what do people expect? And looking around, observing, the number of stupid people can’t be underestimated either. we are looking at a very complex society today, maybe ‘engineered’, becoming more complex in the future only reverted by a massive event. Ofc technology is one factor, but I feel is that the population, me included, is being propagandized from birth to make us follow the narratives of the ones in power or divide us so we never challenge the ones in power. And as long as they give us food and play we are never going to the streets and fight
ALL the men I know who refuse to have anything to do with women have a lot of experience of going out with women and being verbally, physically, mentally and financially abused by them and often by the court systems that back up such abuse of men by women.
You can't blame younger men from learning from the experiences of these older men who are able to pass their experiences on in ways that were not possible even a decade or so ago. The problem is women refusing to fulfill their traditional roles not young men refusing to fulfill their traditional roles.
In The Napoleonic times, some of his strategists proposed an approach to discredit the cultures and costumes of other countries. In a few generations, you can mold them into unguided masses.
In military terms, they call it "defeat in details".
Never has it been so easy to influence cultures, costumes, social norms, and morality as in our "modern" days. With the aid of modern communication promoting unheard-of trends that have no roots in our past. Today anything is possible. The youth have no measure of comparing right or wrong. Deconstruct societies? Controlled demolition? " Defeat in detail"? What are we doing? Will we let this rotten any further? Isn't it up to all of us? Is it too late for us? Is it only some new beginning that could save us from ourselves?
Well, now that this 'manosphere' (gawd, I need to get out more, I have never heard that word before) has been dissected by you, I have two questions:
1) do left-wing men belong into this 'manosphere' ore are only 'right-wing' men the inhabitants?
2) since you've been focussing so hard on 'right-wing' phenomena like 'trad sphere' and wifejak - will you now take a hard look at the 'womansphere', probably a.k.a. feminism, and it's pernicious influence in social media as well as education, business and politics?
Finally, if it's biology which makes females crave 'trad men', is it not also biology which makes males crave 'trad' wives? Or are the laydees above such coarse biological influence?
(I'm a granny, btw so am familiar with the historical experiences of women since the end of WWII ...)
Thanks, Vivian. I was thinking this chat had been subsumed by the manosphere! Good to have your input. Perhaps spending your time in the granosphere gives you a broader perspective than many of the online interwebs silos?
Indeed, granosphere (it's not exclusively male or female) does provide us with truly broad perspectives. It's been like that for generations upon generations, as Ecclesiastes observed millennia ago: "There's nothing new under the sun" ...
Exactly! Having children is an expansive experience in so many ways. I always found it unnatural how our system tries to pry parents and children apart at an early age. Hopefully one day I'll enter the granosphere too.
Indeed, it is unnatural but has a long tradition. Both Aristotle and Ignatius of Loyola, founder of the Jesuit order, said 'give me a child unit it's 7 and I'll give you the man'. Members of the granosphere are and always have been a corrective to this. Perhaps that's why the current Zeitgeist is so keen to blame the generation born between the end of WWII and 1965 for everything that is happening now.
Still, provided nothing horrendous happens, you'll surely enter the granosphere - it's inevitable ...
Wifejack is not new. There was a previous attempt a few months ago to astroturf Wifejack, and last week was the second attempt.
I doubt it will stick, as it is IMHO completely inauthentic and artificial. I strongly suspect it to be some kind of weird psyop.
Todays young women are absolutely brainwashed to be entitled, toxic narcissists. My three daughters have unrealistic expectations, while my son has withdrawn into his online world. If I had to do it all over again, I would move to the Alaskan bush, cut off all television and technology except for VHS cassettes of Little House on the Prairie, and homeschool them on nothing but the classics. Alas, it wasn't until we caught a glimpse of what they were teaching our kids over covid-zoom-school that we began to realize how toxic the programming driving a wedge between the genders had become. I worry for my son....
Remind him often... until they fix the family courts, do not marry, do not cohabit, do not have kids.
While I understand the sentiment, men have zero leverage to change this system. Deliberately ending your bloodline is not a wise "protest" against "the system." So no, I will not brainwash and fearmonger my son into evolutionary death. I will simply encourage him to choose wisely and avoid women who show signs of instability or narcissism.
There's roughly a 50% chance he'll regret it bitterly for the rest of his life. That's a fact, not fear-mongering. Young men are not exactly renowned for their wisdom, either. But I certainly wish him and you the best of luck.
Refusing to marry, cohabit or have kids is the only leverage men have.
With dudes like you on our side who needs enemies?
Thanks for the ad hominem. You ought to try communicating without those - it makes discussions considerably more interesting.
What is 'our' side? I don't know yours but can guess. My view is that men and women should be able to have relationships and kids without fear of punishment by the state. Men don't have that right now. That needs to change.
Thanks for the ad hominem. You ought to try communicating without those - it makes discussions considerably more interesting.
What is 'our' side? I don't know yours but can guess. My view is that men and women should be able to have relationships and kids without fear of punishment by the state. Men don't have that right now. That needs to change.
You couch abject surrender in terms of "reasonableness" full stop. You've already lost because you won't fight.
Most American women under 50 are crazier than fucking loons with very unrealistic expectations about men, the economy, and marriage. Get married to an American woman in this shitty economy and you are asking for hell.
The younger they are the more mentally ill they are. The urge for totalitarian control of all aspects of their surroundings and living of life is why so many who become so-called leaders are so often fascists is an amazing transformation of woman and pretending men are women helps them regress into tragic mental illness.
100 percent. My son, thank God, is smart enough to see this.
In the end, life will teach us all - I still remember being heartbroken, not able to understand the world anymore (I even hardly knew at that point) and survived finding the next forever Love until the one after her ;-)
Biology is a law of nature and you can break laws made by men but not by nature, that keeps me optimistic even amongst terribly naive, uneducated and sometimes even lost people I meet on my way through life.
Your kids will make it in the long run, we all want to be with others, we are social creatures and die when we are really alone.
So as long as they have you, they will prosper one way or the other.
Oh woe, woah to our sons, our male relations. Reminds me of a time, say 20 years ago…my dear friend told her middle school aged sons…never, correct, never as in absolute, find yourself in a situation, with the ladies, in which you could/would be compromised. The “kids” in middle school needed strong parental guidance as to keep their sons on the straight and narrow. Even back then, the boys were so suspect if the gals said…he did such and such. Old lady, approaching 7th decade, with a virtual kat❤️🐈⬛
Not to put too fine a point on it, feminism is fatal to humanity. Especially coupled with easily available birth control.
Either women accept that their most important role is to be good mothers, or we all die out.
There is no limitation to what women can and do contribute to society, but those contributions are increasingly drowned out by increasing mental illness and the need to hate men for everything that goes wrong in their lives.
I think female resentment of men is actually innate and inevitable, so everyone should stop catering to that resentment. It does not matter what men do. A large fraction of women will resent men anyway.
A real man inspires feminist resentment for being stronger and more aggressive than women are, and more successful because of those strengths. That is the true origin of the so-called "pay gap".
A weak man inspires contempt and loathing in women.
Might as well be a real man.
Is this why women try to out do men in how fascist or back stabbing they can be? The pay gap has been a myth for the last 40+ years yet it remains a talking point for angry women everywhere..
And a strong man inspires hatred?
I agree, I prefer to be a real man.
There are lots of limitations what women can and should do to society, in my opinion.
I personally don't want to see women on oil riggs, crouching trough a sewer to remove obstacles, lifting or carrying heavy weights in the moving business for a living etc.
Men are disposible and women are precious, thats why at every catastrophic event and at sea we say, women and children first, men then handle the situation or die.
Mental illness is a nice excuse for people that refuse to function as an adult or are unwilling to accept that life comes with challenges. Plus the pharmaindustry can't have enough 'mental illnesses' to hike up their profits.
I don't know why people worry themselves to death about how many men some pornstar sleeps with. I mean what else do you expect, she is a pornstar that is her job. I see no need to criticize her or make comments on entire the society as some seem to do. If you disagree just ignore these folks and that would be the best thing for your cause.
But her mother and sister are her manager and agent, respectively. She cries about her self induced trauma. If it was old school LA valley porn, I would understand the actual joke, but to give interviews saying how traumatic it was beggars belief
No kidding. The need for constant attention and sympathy for a life not well lived seems to drive the unstable world of the not so gentle sex..
"manosphere". This is a ridiculous, misanthropic term. Part of an identity vocab that should be utterly rejected. If this word ever came out of a real person's mouth, I'd reject that person out of hand as a fool or worse. Here's the funny thing. I've never heard the term uttered by a human being in person. Like most of this jargon, it's just a psyop whose currency is vastly overstated on the Internet and only fools those who haven't "touched grass" in awhile, as you say.
On this topic, I again suggest Michel Houelebec. He's done a good job of presenting artistically the cultural shift from the 60s to present in the sexual arena. It's difficult to understand how we got here unless you see the historical, cultural movement and he presents this in a highly entertaining way. Elemental Particles is a good place to start. He also presents the psychological consequences, particularly for men, of this alienation, very well.
His view: The sexual revolution which was supposed to free us and make us all happier and healthier has produced the exact opposite result: extreme alienation.. In the US, it's worse than that. The cooptation of the women's movement by the Dems and it's conversion into an "identity" that lauds women who are permanently hostile to men with the title "strong woman". This is contrasted to those women, presumably "weak" in the dem cosmology, with healthy relationships with their father, husband, sons, which are still the majority of women world wide. Culturally, female disdain and mistreatment of men is highly encouraged and rewarded in our society, which naturally alienates and separates the sexes into rival camps. And it works. Just notice how they can mobilize all the "strong women" when they need to.
So from the free love left, we've come to the metoo (the most Victorian, anti sex, anti democratic psyop possible) Dems currently promoting a sex strike by women as punishment for the reelection of Trump. No shit.
It's the same game as to race. In the end, these are just myriad ways the Dems use to keep the working class at each other's throats, scared of one another, unable to interact with one another. Healthy happy sexual relationships have even become threatening to them and must be undermined. They are very desperate. I don't expect it to last much longer.
I'm not saying Republicans don't manipulate the working class. They just dont have the cultural power of the Dems. They don't run Hollywood, the unions or the schools. They lost the culture war decades ago. For the most part, they approach the problem of class conflict in a traditional, nationalist way. They encourage the idea that rich or poor we're all Americans and then put up a billionaire Capitalist who is said to represent the best interests of the working class. Of course, they do divide the workers against themselves, but it's again on more traditional nationalist lines. Billionaires and war mongers drain the public coffers, but it's the guy picking the lettuce who is the scapegoat.
Yes, it works. There is scores of women believing society makes life harder for them than it does for men (LOL), as well as their individual life being tough "because they are women" (LOL).
America is so fucked up that it will take economic depression, social collapse, and decades for it to be sane and mostly productive again.
And some intentional genetic cleansing.
Where would you start with that?
All fall down, ashes to ashes. A very interesting spin. ❤️🐈⬛
History demands it.
I see some, as I am of elder years. I sense more, especially reading comments. Like a puzzle. The pieces falling into place. I am interested in the split of humanity from a spiritual perspective as well. Given I have had no formal religious training or indoctrination? I appreciate the work of our pal, Simple, he keeps me on the edge of my seat, in a good way. Thank you for you comments and civil type engagement. Old lady with a virtual kat❤️🐈⬛
I understand. I'm old, too. Old man with a Russian wife and a virtual wolf-dog.
Sounds like a life lived well, Saint J!
I've been fortunate.
Goodness me. Surely any human has the ability to see that we have more similarities than differences, whether we are men or women.
The similarity is what we work with to get things done, and the differences make it special.
Nowadays, as rightly pointed out in this article, the internet provides a platform for these cowards (women and men as well as the ones that think they are something else🤮) to conveniently sit and blame everything and everyone for their shortcomings. Typical victim mentality brought on by a fragmented society, fragmented community that exhalts the individual.
Weirdly enough, we are social animals that need other animals to help us with the things we aren't good at. There are a multitude of roles to fulfill in a functioning community/society, and some people are just better at some things. But if you find yourself alone, lashing out at everyone around you, you are going to have to fulfill all those roles by yourself and you are bound to fail.
Cowards, the whole lot of them- whiney little ingrates that just can't look past their own selfish individuality.
Oh well, they will either have to learn to live together or die alone behind their keyboards and screens.
Life isn't fair, it's tough, and the best way to deal with it is to keep quiet and DO things, meaningful stuff, like helping others and being kind.
OK boomer.
There we go! Wrong label. I prefer human, just call me a human.
I'm a boomer. Fuck you shit head. YOU are part of the problem.
Is that you renter?
Is that you old man shitting the bed while your 80 IQ Nigerian nurse streams it to the internet?
No, son I’m shitting on plate and you are eating it like a dog. Don’t forget to send your rent check, boy.
I would say that the differences are what get things done, at least that is how it works for cats.
Meow, loudly❤️🐈⬛
More about gender differences in cats, not about meowing.
Toms roam, fight and fornicate, defend and expand territory.
Queens are responsible for the instruction and correction of the young.
Meow, he he. Anyway, if your kitty photo was a grey kitty, I would say …you are my X, using a different screen name. His online name, or part of it is also…Finster. Have a Tom cat day? Thanks for sharing❤️🐈⬛
The photo is a selfie.
"it's an unsuitable image to present to the unmarried because it appears to confirm what they fear about women without any redemptive context."
What men should truly fear about women is more basic: being trapped into a fatherhood that consists solely of a lifetime of child support checks; being dragged into 'family' court and stripped of kids and assets, plus a lifetime of child support AND alimony, being falsely accused of sexually assaulting your own children; the list goes on.
Yeah, this article seems to assume that every unmarried male has no experience with women outside of the internet. We don't 'fear about women' due to ignorance, we have a pretty good idea about what women are like from personal experience and observation.
I think it's a good piece, but you're right. "Manosphere" is an effect, not a cause. Men will always analyze. And many will over-analyze. But in a healthy culture, that analytical ability doesn't get turned to something as generally fruitless as "figuring out" women... this is because, in a healthy society, women aren't allowed to be a chief problem. It's really that simple.
They are beautiful in all their contradictions. But they were not, and cannot be, in any public position of power. The ancients understood this; we've forgotten, to our detriment.
Incidentally, as to your exchange above, there's a good case to be made that the insouciance-to-incomprehension of the boomers on women issues is a product of demographics: women among that age cohort outnumbered men. This relieves pressure on everyone.
Yep. Garbage Wifejak cultist piece.
lmfao 50%+ of marriages end in divorce, courts will destroy men at any chance, and this article wants to claim "These kids just never knew a woman"
Boomer trash.
Literally every piece of statistical and anecdotal evidence is against this dreck.
IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH GENERATIONS YOU STUPID SACK OF SHIT.
Boomer trash? Seems like you have an issue here with adults. Are you a renter perchance?
america aims to demasculate our men, and succeeeds. wildly. we should stop cutting off the sex of young boys, which is shameful...
america gives nothing but aggressive arrogance, which lead to this futile war against Russia, where literally the worst thing that
can possibly happen is that america would win, think about it...
Race guilt, feminism, sodomy, Zionism.
Trump can have a smashingly successful presidency, and we'd still be decades away from wiping these villainies from our national soul.
It's now who we are.
The article and the linked Kurtz article seem to assume that those who checked out of dating did so due to a lack of experience with women. Those with little experience with women are the most likely to idealize and place them on pedestals. It is personal and observed relationships with women that lead to a negative opinion of them.
Any man that gets married is utterly retarded. With the possible exception of marrying a woman with a lot more money than him (which carries its own costs), it is a foolish risk for little gain. I know a few men who love marriage, a few men who hate marriage. Almost all in the middle seem to regard it as another job, nothing but responsibilities and duties, but instead of getting a paycheck you do the paying. That's ignoring divorce, which has it's own set of horrors. Like how even men who get equal custody somehow end up having to pay child support, or losing 1/2 your retirement fund including what you earned before marriage.
Hoeflation is real.
Not all, but generalizations had to be made for the sake of time and purpose. The most vocal often fall in that category, but of course there's plenty who do have experience. After all, I don't think the movement would have survived if it was *only* the ones living in abstractions, for the movement to work there had to be concrete foundations.
But this is meant to only address a small slice of the conversation and not all of it writ large.
Do you even pay attention to who is coming down against the Wifejak astroturf program?
Touch grass, they're not (like Fuentes) mostly men with 0 experience of women, like Tate a lot of them have a TON of experience.
You should seek professional help.
Simpliticus outdid himself again with this gem of an article. rate 5 stars and 2 happy faces.
You should plan and think and ponder over second-tier decisions, like buying a car. The most important life decisions like choosing a partner? Instinct, chance, luck....Over thinking won't help, it will probably spoil things....
The attraction between a lasting male/female relationship has to do with "chemistry", not arrangements.
I just love having women blamed for the depredations of late-stage capitalism. It’s Adam and Eve all over again… Eve getting poor Adam kicked out of the garden (a sin used forever after to justify keeping women in chains.)
Men are subject to the same pressures and are not falling for it as women are in their droves ........ until they hit that wall. So yes it is right to blame women. Now women don't have the "chains" of a loving family they have their cats that "love" their human tin opener. Good swap, well played.
Oh fuckonouttahere. My mother couldn't have a credit card in her own name. sign for a mortgage or even control her own fertility. Let's talk about those 'chains' of a loving family: when my mother was a young woman, there was no escape from an abusive marriage. When a husband beat his wife, she was enjoined to be a better wife. As she was unable to get credit in her name, and as a woman was closed out of most professions (as well as out of higher education) - those chains were damn near inescapable. Not all families were loving.
Now, we live in a system in which paying the bare minimum bills requires two people to work full time plus farm out child care (which eats a quarter or better of their salary), and good union jobs have been eliminated.
Women didn't fucking do that. They availed themselves of a more levelled out playing field where you can't really argue that men deserve more money because they have bigger muscles.
(And PS: I am in a really loving marriage, with a husband who is proud of my accomplishments. The difference between the two of you is that he actually likes women.)
Well put S.L.
"When a husband beat his wife..."
That's the conversation-stopper right there. No one ever asks why he hit her or who hit first (statistically it's the female, because she's relying on his chivalry not to hit back). Lots of research out there, have a look.
A lot of women abuse their spouses in non-violent ways. My own mom was one of those. They are never called out for it. Woman good, man bad.
"Women didn't fucking do that."
Well actually yes they did. When women decided that they need a man like a fish needs a bicycle, they turned their backs on their natural role as breeders and homemakers (somebody's gotta make the babies and look after them or humanity dies) and became worker drones laboring for the state.
I've concluded that women are rebelling against nature itself. Their antagonism towards patriarchy is how that rebellion is expressing itself. And I have sympathy for women too. No one in their right mind would choose to be born weaker, less intelligent, less creative, plus have to endure things like periods and giving birth (I'm speaking statistically, not about any one individual).
Would you prefer "when a father rapes his daughter?" Because I can fucking go there.
Another cheap 'gotcha' thought-stopper. You can find an example of just about anything. Statistically, by far the safest place for a daughter is with her biological father. It's not close. Step-fathers are far more likely to engage in this sort of behavior.
And when we decided to turn our backs as "breeders," What the FUCK IS WRONG WITH YOU????
Females are not breeders? Men can have babies too? Is not the TFR below replacement in every western democrazy? (that's not a typo)
@ karalan when any person acts like a coward they are in the wrong, cowardice tries to inflict hurt. As to the rest of your comment about women - shocking, to say the least.
I can only give you this: if men were smaller, with less upper body strength, had periods,carried babies and were automatically assigned the role to raise them - just imagine the whining and moaning we would have had to endure if you're already whining like you are, statistically speaking of course, not on an individual level...
As I said, I have great sympathy for women. As do most men. But you're missing the point. No-fault divorce weaponized the family, children and love itself, with the primary burden being dumped on men while retaining the privileges for women. Family courts have stripped half the population of constitutional rights. This needs to change. And any ideology, including feminism, which sets half the population at odds with the other half is not in the 'best interests' of our children.
"Now, we live in a system in which paying the bare minimum bills requires two people to work full time plus farm out child care (which eats a quarter or better of their salary), and good union jobs have been eliminated."
In speaking this way, you illustrate the very sorts of criticisms the author is making against the writer of the NYT piece.
You seem unable to grasp that the above is an effect of feminism and egalitarianism when it comes to roles.
Double the labor pool, then be surprised when wages plunge.
Do you think contemporary history is the only history? Women have always worked, and in modern times (ie - since recorded history began) have worked in wage and wage slavery positions. The notion of women staying home with the young’ uns while men worked in the factories is a fiction. There was a “middle class” and an upper class of women who were able to afford this luxury, for an incredibly brief period of time. My grandmother worked as the cook in a logging camp (for a fucking miserable wage), my mother always worked - in shit paid jobs, while pretending it was some sort of volunteer labor in order to not appear to be ‘working class’ - while we kids learned to clean the house and start the dinners.
Yes, wages plunged when women got shit tired of making bullshit wages, and the Reagan / Clinton administrations destroyed the unions and shipped the manual labor to 3rd world nations.
We ALL got fucked by this. And yeah, the PMC’s of women sold all their sisters out - because low wage women are still working the shitty jobs they always worked for the shit wages they always worked, but this idea that ‘women’ are supplanting men because of anything the womens did is bullshit. It’s neoliberalism, my friend - and capitalism - and most women have had absolutely no power in this.
You are biting the wrong people. LOOK UP. We have a common enemy, and it is not other working people, whether those people have penisis or vaginas.
Red herring. Ofc women in various ways have always worked. Cottage industries, part time employment, nurses, teachers, secretaries. But we're talking about their being considered interchangeable with men in every facet of the workforce. Yes, that is new, and yes, you are adopting this whole idea of economic interchangeability as a panacea. This is why you started your entire case with credit cards. Economic independence equals autonomy and an escape from the patriarchy.
I think at some level you know you are doing this, and you probably sense at some level just what nonsense it is. But this Marxist frame allows you to evade the real issue.
With the decline of industrialization, women ARE interchangeable with every facet of the workforce. Men, on the other hand, have not adapted to this interchangeability: to whit - you cannot give birth from a magic opening to new workers.
That you believe that the women you meet in a restaurant or bar or in some online dating app made this happen is simply ridiculous and totally pathetic.
Why would a woman want/need credit? Why not make life affordable without falling prey to the real abuser - the credit giver that creates money out of thin air?
The abusive marrige story is so lame, since even at the time of our mothers/grandmothers, women would abuse their husbands in ways that a little beating of the women seems like a nice, loving correction compared to how women even back then could destroy and damge men. There never was a time that all families were loving, there were arranged marriages, not always to the benefit of the husband.
We are not wise at 20 or even 30, we are making mistakes, we are all imperfect in all ways possible and instead of embracing that and help each other, we are on that blame game and do not look at what makes us complete and compatible.
A real life situation in the US. Someone's husband removed his wife's name from their joint account, since he was primary holder, she couldn't even get her own salary which was direct deposited to this account. Indeed, why a woman needs to have an account/credit card, right? There are many ways to abuse a wife, not just physical.
Good lord, Angelina, I found out that my wife is going to divorce me after I went to the bank and wanted to draw some money from our joint account.
The saldo was 1,97 from more than 50k. That was in 1987 in Europe - so nothing new under the sun.
I have had last contact with my son when he was 14 years old, he turns 38 next year.
Obviously I have to be Satans little brother but I missed to beat some sense into her back then, I assume.
And there are many ways to abuse a husband, usually not physical because women are smart, they know that he would put her to the ground.
That mindset though that men abuse women because of some real cases in that matter doesn't justify women to treat men like shit.
And because of some women who drove their men into economic misery or suicide or fuck his brother or best friend whilst he was serving in the army does not make us men hate all women.
I am sorry to tell you but women should be happy that they can live in a patriarchal society, it's what makes women safe because no one wants their daughters safe as much as fathers, that's what patriarch means, btw.
And to finish my rant; it's totally irrelevant for a man that you have your own money or some degree on the wall.
All men want is a woman with a happy nature, warm caring personality and looking beautiful. We do not need or want another friend, man or obese nagging witch. Peace at home, respect for our efforts and a clean house with a delicious meal plus regular sex will do. ;-)
I wish you a wonderful new year and the love of a man that you really want.
Sorry, Frank about that - to drain joint accounts and deprive a man of his son, it's horrible, on any continent and at all times.
I'm fine with a patriarchal society, as far as men are men, and women can be women, but not the kind where men get free passes for just being a man. What exactly a woman gets in our current society where she is an equal earner (or more) to a man, and on top, to carry, birth, raise a child, house cooking/cleaning, or and yeah, look beautiful, and God forbid to forget having a sunny personality, and provide regular sex-) I don't know about your math skills, but in my books, the scales are tipped not in a woman's favor:-)
We are not talking about the extremes; sleeping with a man's brother/ best friend, causing economic misery, suicide, but something so mundane that many men won't even blink/think twice something like to GPS his wife's phone, to keep track of his "property" or violate a woman's expressed boundaries, which a man wouldn't dare to do to a man. Just saying :-)
Happy New Year, and may all your wishes come true!
If women were kept "in chains" (they were actually not; it's just called division of labor) since the dawn of Homo Sapiens, mustn't there have been some reason for that?
If a person begins with, and argues from, some strong conception of "rights," this sort of basic question is entirely invisible to them. Genetic questions, questions about nature -- not real.
They start in the ether, and stay there.
I didn’t say from the dawn of Homo sapiens.
Average IQ is around 100… what do people expect? And looking around, observing, the number of stupid people can’t be underestimated either. we are looking at a very complex society today, maybe ‘engineered’, becoming more complex in the future only reverted by a massive event. Ofc technology is one factor, but I feel is that the population, me included, is being propagandized from birth to make us follow the narratives of the ones in power or divide us so we never challenge the ones in power. And as long as they give us food and play we are never going to the streets and fight
ALL the men I know who refuse to have anything to do with women have a lot of experience of going out with women and being verbally, physically, mentally and financially abused by them and often by the court systems that back up such abuse of men by women.
You can't blame younger men from learning from the experiences of these older men who are able to pass their experiences on in ways that were not possible even a decade or so ago. The problem is women refusing to fulfill their traditional roles not young men refusing to fulfill their traditional roles.
In The Napoleonic times, some of his strategists proposed an approach to discredit the cultures and costumes of other countries. In a few generations, you can mold them into unguided masses.
In military terms, they call it "defeat in details".
Never has it been so easy to influence cultures, costumes, social norms, and morality as in our "modern" days. With the aid of modern communication promoting unheard-of trends that have no roots in our past. Today anything is possible. The youth have no measure of comparing right or wrong. Deconstruct societies? Controlled demolition? " Defeat in detail"? What are we doing? Will we let this rotten any further? Isn't it up to all of us? Is it too late for us? Is it only some new beginning that could save us from ourselves?
Well, now that this 'manosphere' (gawd, I need to get out more, I have never heard that word before) has been dissected by you, I have two questions:
1) do left-wing men belong into this 'manosphere' ore are only 'right-wing' men the inhabitants?
2) since you've been focussing so hard on 'right-wing' phenomena like 'trad sphere' and wifejak - will you now take a hard look at the 'womansphere', probably a.k.a. feminism, and it's pernicious influence in social media as well as education, business and politics?
Finally, if it's biology which makes females crave 'trad men', is it not also biology which makes males crave 'trad' wives? Or are the laydees above such coarse biological influence?
(I'm a granny, btw so am familiar with the historical experiences of women since the end of WWII ...)
Thanks, Vivian. I was thinking this chat had been subsumed by the manosphere! Good to have your input. Perhaps spending your time in the granosphere gives you a broader perspective than many of the online interwebs silos?
Thanks, abcdefg!
Indeed, granosphere (it's not exclusively male or female) does provide us with truly broad perspectives. It's been like that for generations upon generations, as Ecclesiastes observed millennia ago: "There's nothing new under the sun" ...
Exactly! Having children is an expansive experience in so many ways. I always found it unnatural how our system tries to pry parents and children apart at an early age. Hopefully one day I'll enter the granosphere too.
Indeed, it is unnatural but has a long tradition. Both Aristotle and Ignatius of Loyola, founder of the Jesuit order, said 'give me a child unit it's 7 and I'll give you the man'. Members of the granosphere are and always have been a corrective to this. Perhaps that's why the current Zeitgeist is so keen to blame the generation born between the end of WWII and 1965 for everything that is happening now.
Still, provided nothing horrendous happens, you'll surely enter the granosphere - it's inevitable ...
Love this granny! I too, am an elder. Appreciate your prose. Old lady with a virtual kat❤️🐈⬛