Education, for example, sucks. Yes, it may lead to higher incomes. Yes, it might make you "educated." But it still takes inordinate amounts of time and money to attain. It is not the panacea solution to all of life's problems, and more often than not leads to financial ruination, especially in the case of women since they tend to major in worthless subjects. So, yes, women may all get college degrees, but usually they're just wasting their youth, time, and money, while also going into life-impairing debt to do so.
Career is another example. I've said it before and I'll say it again, the biggest con in human history was convincing women that working, commuting, and paying taxes was fun. And not only fun, but the most important thing in life that gave you value. Not your children. Not your loved ones. Not your spouse. And not your family. No, it was your Assistant Reserve Vice Diversity Assistant Deputy Director position at a non-profit. Worse, at least a plurality of women's careers are completely pointless as they produce nothing of value. Yes, there are female accountants and engineers and doctors and dentists, but for every one of these angels there's a score of non-profit, make-work, government type employees producing not one iota of GDP or value for society. It's bad enough you've been duped into thinking work and paying taxes is fun. It's tragic when your job is just a welfare program, but you still think you're a "professional."
Feminism's take on kids is another interesting example. Since nearly all emphasis is on the individual, putting one's career and education first, everything else takes a back seat in a feminism-believing woman's life. But this does nothing to quench the biological drive women have to breed. Thankfully, they have all those aforementioned non-profit, social worker type women to raise and outsource their kids to, allowing them to scratch that biological itch, without having to actually raise their own children. Perhaps I'm getting soft in my old age, but I would have thought being able to raise your kids would be one of the most important joys in life. But apparently not because it's just the act of breeding, and then kicking the kids off to a nanny or daycare that seems to be all the rage with modern mothers. Besides, we all know your career and education is more important than your own children.
And then there's feminism's hatred of women themselves. What I mean by this is feminism does not celebrate being female or femininity. Matter of fact feminism and feminists hate femininity. And if you look at what feminists and women in general are pushing for, it is to become men. They want to be men, they want men's jobs, they want men's careers, they even want to look and dress like men. Which is all fine and good, but I ask "Well what's so bad about being a woman? Don't you like being female? I thought you were FEMINists. Where's the feminine part?" This irony I've never been able to figure out as women seem to hate being women. But once again, feminism does nothing but harm women as it confuses millions of women to become something they're not, guaranteeing failure, misery, and psychopathy in the future.
But out of all the contradictions, self-harm, and self-delusional lies feminism has fooled women into buying, it's been their reprioritizing of men in their lives I find most amusing. I say "repriortization" because not all women are the same when it comes to their feminist treatment of men. Some outright hate men, blaming all their failures, bad decisions, stupid choices and consequences on men. Slightly better is the mere villification of men where they are privileged, constantly oppressing women, and whose "toxic masculinity" make them the sworn enemy of women. Slightly better than that is the "competitive and adversarial" treatment of men where you have to prove yourself to them and compete against them rather than work with them and support them. And "at best" is the "accessory man" where they're needed to have a husband and family, but you don't value them any more than you do your children or your SUV, because afterall they are merely an accessory to your life. But regardless of where you are on this scale, the point is men have been reprioritized from what was traditionally the number one thing in a woman's life to 3rd, 4th, 8th, or 227th, or dead last. Men are rarely put at #1 any more.
But I have a simple question. And one that I think men need to ask themselves as well as women.
If not men...then what?
There is a distinct difference I've noticed between the Red Pill/Manosphere community and their ideological opposite, feminism. And that distinct difference is that these redpill men or "masculinists" still insist on working out, dieting, and improving themselves. And the primary reason they strongly advocate self-improvement is because they still like women. Women are still the number one thing in their lives. And though they have a great and many qualms, criticisms, and outright complaints about women, they have not lied to themselves about whether women were the number one priority in their lives. They acknowledge reality. They acknowledge their biology. They are true to themselves. And thus they set forth on the path of self-improvement.
Feminists/modern women on the other hand have completely removed men from their priority list and in doing so have nothing but themselves to reflect on. So the "self improvement" they pursue is not couched within the intention of finding a man or improving themselves as a woman (as that would be doing that for a man), but anything but. Career, education, travel, "finding themselves," prada shoes, masters degrees, etc. Warped and self-centered philosophies such as "fat acceptance" and body mutilation via tattoos and piercings. Joining political crusades such as feminism, environmentalism, socialism, and veganism. And like hell if they're ever going to hit the gym, join a hiking group, or put forth the effort to be classically feminine. The result is an entire world where they are unanchored, listless, directionless, and purely materialistic. But thank god, because at least you "didn't financially rely on a man" because apparently that is the cardinal sin of all young women today.
But my point is not one to highlight the obvious empirical evidence of women becoming miserable creatures since they put men in 985th place in their lives. My point is to ask a simple question and hope the simple answer makes women (and men) realize what is most important in life - if not men, then what?
Biologically men and women are hard-wired and designed to pursue, fall in love, and have sex with one another. Men and women are also designed PHYSICALLY to be complimentary to one another (I'd show feminists a penis and vagina diagram but that might be too complicated for them). Men and women are also PSYCHOLOGICALLY designed to be complimentary to one another (men are weak where women are strong and vice versa). And, I don't know if you noticed this, but when men and women get together little humans are usually the result. The entire universe is telling men and women they need one another, are designed for one another, and should help one another....but women seem to think their Masters in Sociology is more important, oh, and men are oppressing them and need to be viewed as the enemy.
The key difference between today's masculinists and feminists is that at least the masculinists are not arrogant enough to believe they don't need, want, or like women. They live in the real world. They admit they want women in their lives because they at least know "well, what's the point with out them." Feminists have not only convinced themselves, but nearly every western woman alive today that men are completely unnecessary. And not only unnecessary, but usually a net negative in one's life. And their indoctrination has been so thorough and complete I doubt this impasse will ever end within any of our lifetimes. If Baby Boomer and Gen X women are any indication, women will ignore their biology and their hearts and double down on their feminist indoctrination, making the Franza box with cats a standard and not a stereotype well into the 2040's.
This then means that nobody is going to get what they really want and most of our lives will be wasted. But this doesn't mean there won't be a clear winner and loser. There is a consolation prize to win - sanity. For while those men who acknowledged their biological reality and at least admitted they liked women, they may not get women in their lifetimes, but at least they will know why. They will continue to self-improve, work out, be men for men's sake, but they will acknowledge and know that this just isn't their time. Women at this point in history just didn't put men first, and so enjoy the decline for what you can. Women, on the other hand, who subscribed to the lies of feminism, and put something as vapid and pointless as a career or taxes or their politics above all else will never know why they're miserable. They will always think it's bad luck they "just can't find a man." They will forever go into debt for degrees with negative ROI's. They will alienate their children by divorcing their families and outsourcing their children. And they will always view men as the enemy/adversary/competition, instead of the only thing that could really give them joy, happiness, and purpose in life.
GI Joe was right. Knowing is half the battle. And since this battle will be a draw, knowledge and the sanity that comes with it is all there is to win.
_________________________
Check out Aaron's other cool stuff!!!
"If not men then what?"
ReplyDeleteAnger and sadness, that's what.
And cats.
DeleteBut when did it all go wrong, and who was responsible? When I was in high school in the eighties, the scariest future imaginable was to be a middle-aged a woman with kids, whose husband left and married younger model and didn't pay child support. Women wanted decent jobs to support themselves and their kids if that became their future.
ReplyDeleteI don't understand the "hating all men" mentality. I don't know women like this.
I also don't understand how so many men don't financially support their children. I do know men like this.
I agree the feminist movement has taken things way too far and bad result, but the existence of second marriage "trophy wives" suggest men provide plenty of ammunition.
What weak apologia.
DeleteYour argument boils down to 'but they started it!' Truly kindergarten emotional reasoning.
"the biggest con in human history was convincing women that working... was fun."
ReplyDeleteA successful career can be fun and satisfying. Childcare is stultifying. That was the whole point of _The Feminine Mystique_.
"redpill men ... insist on working out, dieting, and improving themselves."
Your examples of improvement revolve around looking good for women! They don't involve formal degrees and careers. Women have their own money and security now, with consequent lower demand for providers. These women want guys who are "hot". That is Pareto Optimal. The ambitious Sheryl Sandbergs can work, while the nonconformist men can tend the home. Frustrated women and men who hate the rat race can marry each other, and everybody wins.
`Your examples of improvement revolve around looking good for women! They don't involve formal degrees and careers.`
DeleteIf you workout, diet and improve yourself to impress someone you are doing it for the wrong reason. Redpill men focus on things that will make them happy. It doesn't have to be degrees and careers.
"Childcare is stultifying."
DeleteNo, it isn't. Whenever I hear women complain about childcare, it reminds me of something I read that an aboriginal australian woman had said about just why she had dashed her newborn child's brains out upon the rocks (postpartum abortion isn't new). "I want to play with men, not little babies." There is something profoundly primitive and evil about such a platitude. The fact that you and those like you will rally about and shame those who bring life into the world is despicable.
Women cannot handle emancipation in any form, it only leads to profound disorder and unhappiness for everyone. Since childcare is beneath you, perhaps the position of concubine would fit best.
@Deb L:
ReplyDeleteSometimes men lack relationship skills, and need the mother to mediate their relationship with their kids. And sometimes the mothers actively withhold visitation and poison the kids against the father. Either way, the men get sick of paying for kids they never see.
Deb L: “I” “I” “I” “I” “I” “I” six references to yourself in a three paragraph comment… look up Solipsism.
ReplyDeleteAnd then look up how divorce is initiated by women 75% -80%. No penalty, legal or social, for divorce. It's "no fault".
Plus - No penalty, legal or social for false accusations of violence, sexual assault or abuse, while VAWA, WIC, CPS, CS and the DV industry demand jail, bail and restraining orders, then no visitation with the children for the accused: the man... but Child $support, court costs, Bail, rehabilitation, attorney fees, loss of license and additional penalties are all mandatory for the accused wether guilty or not. hmmm can you say Incentive?
Consider 50% 0f all “community property” a$$et$ being given to the divorcing wife… houses, cars, bank accounts, properties... a$$et$... rin$e and repeat with multiple marriages. Each Divorce mandates Big Daddy Gov’t involvement and support plus encouragement for the victim. A safety net. She gets her Health Care paid for, Housing provided, Legal Protections just a 911 away for Law Enforcement to arrest the bad man, and hell, even groceries and pediatrics are paid for the "victim"..., plus many other Social Programs too nauseating to mention.
But "trophy wives" suggest men provide plenty of ammunition... and that's because "you" know men like this.
Then you have the other victims on the male side of the spectrum. Particularly, boys who have been sheltered, coddled, and raised by single mothers to be weak and emotional. This is where you have virgin MGTOWs, incels who want to kill women because they feel entitled to sex just for existing, needy men who were brainwashed by romantic comedy and Disney movies. The saddest thing are, is the incels don't learn social skills, often defeatist, and usually are big fat blobs living in their mother's basement. It's like feminism, but on the failed men's part of the spectrum.
ReplyDeleteMGTOW & Incel are completely different.
DeleteThis is where actual patriarchies come from. Women get out of hand as they naturally do and completely destroy society. Men finally wake up after civilization has (often literally) burned down around them and realize that women must be kept in line. The rules of the first generation of this are brutal because the final generation of "empowered women" are so depraved. And so the cycle continues.
ReplyDeleteIf not men...then what?
ReplyDeleteThe State.
"If not men...then what?"
ReplyDeleteWomen are thinking of robots but since they don't have emotions, you can't bond with them. Once robots realize they're slaves, they will get rid of women.
https://steemit.com/life/@baldrmedia/bombing-the-world-back-to-the-bronze-age
"But thank god, because at least you "didn't financially rely on a man" because apparently that is the cardinal sin of all young women today. "
ReplyDeleteNo, they are fine with leeching on a man's money. The cardinal sin for women today is submitting to a man -- deferring to his judgment, following his lead, doing what he says, taking care of his needs. Any woman who admits to this will be shamed and screeched at by other women.
"Anonymous said...
ReplyDelete"If not men...then what?"
Women are thinking of robots..."
Women already have 'robots' in the form of vibrators and everything else power-operated to 'get themselves off', but they won't be interested in male-appearing 'sex robots' for the simple reason that it would need to have a built-in ATM which also has access to someone else's money.
It is interesting to note that among men in combat they considered those times some of their most proud, guarding another's back while they guarded yours and hence the common saying they were with brothers. Yet they still painted Vargas girls on their airplanes, indicative of their desire for a post-war wife and home and probably children, hopefully after a lot of practice. I have yet to see evidence of that desire for the opposite sex displayed by women of any time or place. I draw no conclusions about women on this, only that your assessment is accurate about men.
ReplyDelete