Women oppress men by “playing” at having a career
Silly woman! You probably don't even know how to work that computer.
Well, here’s a new twist. We all know, from reading the endless tirades on the subject scattered all over the manosphere, that women are evil, selfish and ungrateful creatures whose primary goal in life is to leech off of men and make them miserable.
In a recent post titled Playing Career Woman, manosphere blogger Dalrock takes on some of the most evil and selfish ladies of the whole lot of them: upper middle class ladies who insist on going to college and getting jobs, then later leave the workforce to raise their children.
You might think that these ladies would deserve some props from traditional-minded manosphere dudes for supporting themselves instead of leeching off of men during their twenties, then settling into a more traditional housewifely role once they have children.
Oh, but you don’t realize just how evil and disruptive and oppressive their phony careers are to the men of the world. After all, these aren’t women who need to work to support themselves. No, according to Dalrock, these are “women who use their education and career as a way to check off the box to prove their feminist credentials before settling down into an entirely traditional role.”
According to Escoffier, a commenter on Dalrock’s site whom he quotes with approval, in the good old pre-feminist days:
Women who pursued careers (apart from traditional female roles such as teaching … ) were considered at best sort of harmlessly odd … but we know that family life is superior and more important.
Then came feminism:
Now it’s “You MUST do this for own sake, not to do it is to not realize your potential.” …
The way the [upper middle class] has “solved” this problem is to send girls to college, let them launch their careers–whether in soggy girly stuff like PR or crunchy stuff like business and law–and then they marry late (~30), have kids a few years later and drop out of working at least until the kids are grown.
This answers a couple of needs, not least the need for two incomes to accumulate assets so that the couple can eventually buy into a UMC school district.
Oh, but these women aren’t really earning money because they need it to, you know, pay bills and shit:
[T]he real importance of this solution is to her psyche. Getting the education and career are a way of telegraphing “I am a complete person, not some drone like June Cleaver. I am just as smart and capable as any man. In my altruistic concern for my children, I choose not to use my talent in the marketplace but to devote myself to them.” In other words, she needs that education and early career to mark her as better than a mere housewife, even though she will eventually choose to become a housewife.
According to Dalrock, such women are far more evil than the feminist women who get jobs and stick with them. (Emphasis added.)
Men and women who work hard to support themselves understand that they are in it for the duration. There is a determined realism to them. … These aren’t the women we are talking about. The women Escoffier described see having a career as a badge of status to be collected on their way to their ultimate goal of stay at home housewife. They aren’t really career women, they are playing career woman much the way that Marie Antoinette played peasant and Zoolander’s character played coal miner.
In the comments, someone calling himself Carnivore explains just how unfair this all is to the poor innocent working men of the world:
When men get a degree or go through a vocational program and then land a job, they’ve normally got 40+ years to contribute to increasing the wealth of society. Women “playing” career damage society:
1. They displace men for positions in college or vocational school.
2. Upon landing a job, they displace other men for the job position.
3. The increase in the labor pool drives down wages (supply & demand).
4. While in the labor pool, women are less effective and less productive than men.
5. Because they are in the labor pool and cannot compete with men, women support labor laws to enforce “equality” which burden businesses and can cause men to get fired due to some infringement or just to meet quotas.
6. When they leave the labor pool after becoming bored, there is now a hole than can be difficult to fill because the men who would normally fill it have been displaced for all the reasons above.
Carnivore places part of the blame on the feminism-infected parents who taught these women the wrong things:
Women do NOT know what they want. They have to be guided. Most parents have so bought into feminism that they don’t see any other way. It’s a riot – or sad – talking to parents when they go into all the detail about choosing a college, going on campus visits, making sure she gets into the best school, etc., etc. You would think these parents would spend their time and energy on prepping their daughters for the most important life decision – choosing a man for marriage, how to make a husband happy and how to raise healthy children.
The commenter called Ray takes it one step further:
i was in the workplaces during feminism 1.0, and it had nothing to do with fairness, equity, egalitarianism, or any other positive attribute
in fact, it was a slaughter, resulting in the vast disenfranchisement and destruction of millions of american men — there were dozens of ways men could be hassled, RIFd, and forced from employment, and they were (all to chants of Equality and Empowerment)
this resulted in the massive unemployment of the very men needed to create, invent, and revitalize the culture. and to be fathers to sons . …
no female should be employed, or educated, if it means a qualified male must be excluded
Women, stop leeching off men by paying your own way!
NOTE: This post contains SARCASM.
Posted on November 27, 2011, in $MONEY$, antifeminism, evil women, I'm totally being sarcastic, life before feminism, misogyny, oppressed men, patriarchy, reactionary bullshit. Bookmark the permalink. 1,774 Comments.
I love how you won’t answer the question Brandon. What happens if Ashley needs more from you than you intended. She’s got a terrible, god forbid, disease?
All of the expectations we have were talked about and agreed upon together. So, despite what you think, she does have a say in the matter. I don’t just tell her what rules she has to follow.
Why do I suspect that this conversation went “If you don’t agree with me on X, I’m leaving?” (Also, requisite: Pillows can’t disagree.)
Also also, hey, the protagonist of Shame is a sex addict named Brandon.
Also, what the hell did you expect from a site that has the words ‘mocking’ and ‘misogyny’ in it’s title? No matter how many time you reveal the Real Truth about Men and Women ™, no one here is going to realize feminism is wrong, repent of their sins and bow down to you as lord and master. It just ain’t gonna happen. Yet you keep coming back, same delusional fantasy and all. What’s the definition of insanity again? Something about doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results?
@hellkell: While I think the way I live is good and I would like to see more men adopt it. I don’t have the authority to actually boss them around.
Me: I want you to do XYZ!
Random dude: Ya, ok buddy!
Me: NOW!!!
Random dude: whatever!
Me: Oh well, I guess I better have to talk to him and explain the reasons why my lifestyle is better instead of being a dick and yelling at him.
Do you see the difference yet?
What’s the definition of insanity again? Something about doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results?
OK, pet peeve: I hate this idiom. Maybe it’s because I work with computers, where the first thing you always do is repeat it and see if you can replicate the problem.
But “talking to people who think you’re an idiot and expecting to change their minds certainly qualifies as…well, stupidity and futility, at least.
That’s some bullshit right there Brandon. I’m sure you get all fluffed up snoot-poodle likeyou do here and bloviate the poor fucker to death. A true hit at parties.
Yet you believe you have the authority to come here and tell us we’re doin’ it wrong.
You mean a slut named Brandon, right Katz? As I understand it, they’re exactly the same.
“I do not hate married people-I just want prevent them from even getting married in the first place. It SO is not the same thing at ALL (even though I know it is.)”
Brandon: @hellkell: And when did I say women did not have those traits. I just didn’t speak for women. Why? Because I don’t have a vagina.
Unless you think they are being a “slut, or “promiscuous” (whatever you mean by that). Then they have bad judgement and are seeking external validation, and you know it: the same way you can tell which of two jobs you don’t know how to do it the “easier”.
And yet that is not what you are saying at all. If you were, then it would be completely unobjectionable.
What you are saying is that you are selfish, greedy, uncaring and you expect others to be loving, kind and affectionate towards you for not other reason then BRANDON.
Meller: We MRAs are sort of under siege here! On Spearhead, we argue with each other all of the time! On manboobz, it has to be “bros before ‘hos”!
It’s more that you hate women more than you value your movement being coherent, much less correct. You will notice that feminists call each other when they see what they think is bullshit.
It might be why feminism is doing better than the MRAs.
“@Lauralot: I don’t want to be king of feminism. I would rather be king of the playboy bunnies…much better subjects.”
Right, I’m sure your turnaround from “feminism has valid ideas and I’ve adopted some of their philosophy” to “all feminists are man-hating dictator harpies” had nothing to do with us telling you that you don’t get to dictate what feminists should focus on.
@DKM
“We MRAs are sort of under siege here! On Spearhead, we argue with each other all of the time! On manboobz, it has to be “bros before ‘hos”!
Listen-any beseiged group will evolve some sort of solidarity arrangements to protect itself and its members. I don’t find you feminists too eager to criticize each other’s posts here either!”
This isn’t a serious site about contemporary feminist issues. It does not aspire to “pierce the shield of ignorance.” It mocks things that other people have said. That’s why it doesn’t spend much time criticizing feminists. It’s not because MRA’s are better or more right.
We’re still talking about the MRM, right?
Oh ye of little sight XD
KathleenB-November 28, 2011@ 3:39pm
Holy Smokes!
I made a tiny little mistake, confusing one poster here with another. I’ll even grant that it was a careless mistake, which could have been prevented had I read lauralot’s and brandon’s posts on this page more carefully.
Why are you acting as if I had just publically nominated you for Imperial Wizard of the KKK? There was NOTHING that I said or did here that was that terrible. ! I never even speculated about your possible female trouble or your cupcakes! Get hold of yourself.
If this is representative of your posts today, I think that you are going over the edge…
DKM is wrong about the lack of criticism for other feminist’s posts around here though.
“If this is representative of your posts today, I think that you are going over the edge…”
This guy’s got to be a parody, right? There’s no way this statement was made without irony.
Why are you acting as if I had just publically nominated you for Imperial Wizard of the KKK? There was NOTHING that I said or did here that was that terrible. ! I never even speculated about your possible female trouble or your cupcakes! Get hold of yourself.
Yet you managed to work the “female trouble” dig in there, didn’t you?
Why don’t you get hold of yourself and play with your dolls? Go have some you time, just wash up after.
Meller: Seriously, what the hell are you talking about?
Meller: Touchy, aren’t we? Are you due for another xanax soon? It is your ‘time of the month’ or did your souffle collapse?
KathleenB, et al…
I wasn’t the person who posted the unbelievably hostile and angry post to any of you ref. 3:39pm! All of my posts were friendly, even to feminists!
“KathleenB, et al…
I wasn’t the person who posted the unbelievably hostile and angry post to any of you ref. 3:39pm! All of my posts were friendly, even to feminists!”
Yeah, no.
Meller: You constantly tell me and other women that if we don’t shape up before the menfolk revolt against the gynocracy, we’ll push one over the edge and you really can’t blame a man for killing a feminist, she was asking for it! You tell us that the only thing we’re good for is sexual slavery. You think shit like that is friendly? Hells, I’d hate to see what you do when you’re being unfriendly!
“All of my posts were friendly, even to feminists!”
Are you on drugs? No, dude. Just… no.
I’m not sure Meller grasps that saying something in a nice tone of voice doesn’t make your words nice!
You are correct that NWOslave and I have our differences regarding feminists and what to do with them. There is no reason for us to quarrel with each other, becuase he and his posts take nothing away from me, and mine take nothing away from him.
He seems to be resentful, if I understand him correctly, for example, that modern women don’t find him engaging and sexually attractive, I, on the other hand, (no offense intended) regard feminists and modern women as sexually attractive and physically alluring as a dead fish or stale, three day old leftovers! While both of us resent over-educated, opinionated, pushy, aggressive, and otherwise high-powered women, our reactions to them are quite different, and maybe even opposite. There is nothing to really “fight about” there, even if we didn’t share a “common adversary”.
You’ve never made unfriendly posts, eh?
KathleenB, hellkell, lauralot, et al…
I have indeed posted material like that at other times, often when provoked, but today my posts were all as nice as Christmas morning! I started out trying to be friendly, even to feminists like yourselves, and thought that i was getting somewhere. I am not bringing up some of the objectionable or offensive things some of you may have said in the past, why do it with me?
“I have indeed posted material like that at other times, often when provoked, but today my posts were all as nice as Christmas morning!”
Again, no.
You are both actively fighting for a world where the other one would be miserable.
We’re still talking about the MRM, right?
Point. They are both lazily wanking over a world where the other one would be miserable.
I was expecting you more to take issue with Brandon hating on the concepts that you believe in-like marriage (to a suitably “fluffy” woman.)
Goddamn, you talk like an abuser. “I only hit you when you make me!”
Spare us, Mellertoad.
My mom found out that her grandfather died on Christmas morning-so uh yeah. Christmas morning is not always nice for people.
Sigh! Where have all the good trolls gone?
Things were different on this site a year ago, ah tell you whut.
PFKAE–November 28,2011 A4:51
Sorry about your mother, and her grandfather. But for most people, Christmas morning is a nice experience.
QUoted for the LULZ: Brandon said marriage requires selflessness, acceptance and love. Something that I find extremely difficult to find in most women today.
First off Brandon only people like me in my fifties get to yammer on about the way the younger generation is going to hell in a handbasket, that my generation was blah blah blah blah (I hate that kinda talk, but it’s silly to hear from someone your age).
And second, it’s hilarious that YOU are saying you cannot find “selfnessness, acceptance and love” from women today–as if YOU are a shining example of any of those characteristics.
Don’t you ever get bored with the huge leaps of overgeneralized nonsense you spout?
Thank you DKM.
@Lauralot: I wouldn’t say all feminists are man hating harpies…just most of them.
@ithiliana: I am not saying the past was any better, but people back then had different values and morals. That isn’t a criticism, it is a fact.
First off, I pretty much tolerate and accept everyone. I might not want to live as they do or I might find their lifestyle odd or strange. But as long as they aren’t breaking the law, it is not my place to tell them they are wrong. However, I will advocate why I think I am right.
I love many people, mainly my friends and family. My love of people tends to lose strength the further removed you are from me. My mother = love her to death. Random dude in China = don’t really give a shit.
Quite frankly people should be more selfish. Being selfish doesn’t mean you don’t care about others. It means you make yourself a priority. You think of yourself first, then others. No one will care about you more than you, so you might want to start caring about what you want because other people wont.
Lastly, what I am looking for in a girlfriend/wife/lover/etc… might not be what she is looking for in a boyfriend/husband/lover/etc… I have known ultra feminine girls that are as sweet as could be and they are dating the most selfish asshole around. Why? Because she didn’t find niceness and caring to be attractive in a man.
In the end we get the relationships we deserve.
You’ve still not addressed how you’d handle a crisis situation where someone needed (demanded) more of you than you originally expected to give. Would you still offer that niceness and kindness? Do you see why we wonder this given your statements? You make it sound like, “my way or the highway” which seems inherently selfish.
Most of the people posting here are feminists. What proportion could you honestly and accurately describe as “man hating harpies”?
@Jules: Needed and demanded are two completely different things. I am much more forgiving when a child is involved, however, if an adult demanded I do something for them, I probably wouldn’t simply on principle.
If my child’s mother said “Billy needs XYZ for school” I wouldn’t have any problems going to the store, buying that stuff and dropping it off. If she said “You NEED to buy Billy XYZ”, I would probably tell her to fuck off as long as what was demanded wasn’t life threatening.
Medical issues are always of utmost concern.
@Brandon: but people back then had different values and morals. That isn’t a criticism, it is a fact..
So people in the past (whatever that means) had the same morals: they were different/better than today’s morals.
Uh-huh. Fact. Right. Yeah.
Which past?
The one in which my pregnant sixteen year old grandmother married my grandfather six months before my father was born (big sekrit in the family, but I realized it when their 50th anniversary was held…six months before my father’s 50th birthday).
The various ones in which infanticide, chattel slavery, and various systematic oppressions of the vast majority of human beings were considered normal?
The past in which whole white towns got together to lynch black people and send postcards to their friends’n’families?
The past isn’t all evil, but neither is today–and making this sort of claim is only showing that you are vastly underinformed about the past (ever read the statistics on women’s deaths due to attempted self-applied abortions during the period in the US when abortion was illegal), and also have no understanding about the meaning of the word “fact.”
Brandon’s children will only get school supplies from him if their mom asks the RIGHT way. That’s not petty at all.
Brandon is looking at an increasingly lonely and embittered old age.
And that’s a fact.
A bit offtopic.
Katz,
I’m in IT and I love that idiom. Because it’s not what you’re talking about allow me to try and explain.
“Hmmm. Pasting this configuration into the switch caused all network access to go down. I think I’ll paste the configuration into it a couple of more times to see if it works.”
Is insane. As opposed to.
“Hmmmm. Pasting this configuration into the switch caused all netowrk access to go down.” Then you peruse the configuration for a while. “Oh. I think it was the fact that it changed the IP before the paste finished that did it. I’ll try that on a test switch while looking at it from the console to see if this is correct.”
Is what you’re talking about and very much not insane. But you also weren’t expecting a different result.
@Wetherby: Who knows…also I don’t care. Most of my dealings with feminists IRL are pretty much the same narrative over and over.
Feminist pouts about some stupid bullshit that he/she has no business putting their nose into.
I ignore them
feminist persists
I make fun of them
feminist tries to make fun of me
I laugh at them
feminist head explodes*
*hyperbole
Meller: I understand that you are ill-mannered, and bothered by seeing your dreams crushed by fate, and progress. I can even forgive your narrow-minded desire to kill any woman who doesn’t meet your standards.
Which, you will have to admit, was a perfectly nice thing to say, as all of it is, by the meditations of your heart, and the words of your mouth, true.
It was nice, even to aging bigots and sexists.
“Feminist pouts about some stupid bullshit that he/she has no business putting their nose into.”
Oh, the fucking irony.
Brandon isn’t controlling at all about language. I love how you’ll cut off your nose to spite your face.
@Lauralot: No…she can buy them if she wishes. However, for someone asking someone else for a favor and being rude is something that needs to be corrected. “Billy” isn’t going to die if he doesn’t get a Trapper Keeper.
Also, I most likely would buy them for him on the sly next time I saw him. I am just not going to reward disrespectful people with favors.
So in your world, it’s impossible that the kid might need supplies for a project the next day and his mom may not have the money at the moment. I see.
Well, I know – the answer is a pretty emphatic “none”. Even if there’ve been one or two (and I honestly can’t recall seeing any), they’re statistically insignificant.
As a man, I have not been given even the tiniest hint that the commenters here regard me as worthy of hatred just because I’m a man. And believe me, I’d pick up on that kind of vibe.
Please link to a conversation involving your good self that unambiguously follows this structure. I’m particularly keen to see an example of the “stupid bullshit that he/she has no business putting their nose into”.
@Lauralot: And you have no concept that maybe if someone is asking another person for a favor…they might actually be grateful and not rude about it.
By doing what she wanted, I am enabling her bad behavior that is directed at me. I refuse to be her enabler.
What you don’t seem to get, Brandon, is that regardless of what HER behavior is, you’re still denying your child something s/he needs out of spite.
Thank god you don’t want to be a parent. Your kids would spend their lives in therapy.
@Wetherby: Ya and if I went to a clan rally they wouldn’t say they “hate blacks”…they just want to “reform” them.
Someone is ignoring the fact that Billy may have forgotten to tell you he or she needs XYZ when you are taking care of him or her so Mom tells you “You NEED to buy Billy XYZ.”
But since she was not oh so polite about it, you will refuse to get Billy’s XYZ out of spite. What are you, three?
Is this utterly meaningless non sequitur your entire answer to my post?
It’s perfectly clear to me that the overwhelming majority (if not all) of the women here – yes, feminist women – have plenty of close male friends. The people they dislike, they dislike because they’ve been saying obnoxious things, not because they’re male.
And even people like MRAL get a lot of sympathy and understanding round these parts. You get considerably less, admittedly, but you have to admit that’s hardly surprising given your attitude. I mean, if you seriously think that most people here are “man-haters”, it’s hardly surprising that you’re having difficulty fitting in.
Also, based on your comments, if you have a child you accept full responsibility. If that is the case, even if Mom was rude in her telling you that you NEED to get Billy XYZ, you still have to get the child XYZ because that is what being a parent means.
Again, what are you? Three?
A conversation between Brandon and his Baby Mama:
Her: Hey, I’m really swamped getting things set up for Billy’s birthday party, so I need you to run by the store and pick up the cake. I’ve already paid for it, just-
Brandon: NEED me to pick up? Well, too bad, you selfish bitch. Guess Billy’s just not going to have a cake this year, because you’re so ungrateful and spoiled.
And then the kid cries and wonders why his daddy doesn’t love him.
@Laura: If I had kids, I would want to deny them lots of stuff. Most of American society is devoid of anything positive and insightful. I would have to work very hard to keep him from becoming a shallow dimwit.
Also, if denying my child this one relatively minor thing i rewarded by having the child’s mother not treat me like shit…then I win.
And what is wrong with this hypothetical mother in this scenario? If she really cared about the child, she wouldn’t be throwing around her bitter hatred of the child’s father around to get him a few school supplies.
By your logic, I can act like a complete and utter asshole to people and get offended when they don’t give me what I want. Like I can walk into my bosses office and say “Hey dickhead…give me a raise!”
The notion that how you say something is just as (if not more) important as what you are saying seems to be beyond your grasp.
If Brandon tells his partner to “fuck off” because he doesn’t like the wording of a particular request – wording that may well be a by-product of panic, fear, exhaustion or any of a number of entirely normal emotions that arise when dealing with kids and their problems (not that he’d understand any of that, because women who stay at home apparently “don’t work”) – how the hell is he going to respond when his kids ask him for something without saying “please”?
Dear Brandon:
Parenting is not a contest. No one “wins” by being a bitch to the other parent. Your child, though, loses every time.
I can see the conversation between Brandon and his five year old son or daughter:
Billy: “I wanted cake.”
Brandon: “Your mother did not ask me in the right way. Since she was rude, you are the one to pay for it. It will make sense when you are older and just as asinine as I am.”
Billy, lower lip trembling: “But I wanted cake. I hate you!”
Saying “I need you to buy this” is not “throwing around bitter hatred.”.
Brandon, when you first started commenting here, you mentioned that you slept with many different women, and that if Ashley (“Ashley”) didn’t like it, she was welcome to leave. You can’t even follow the “rules” you set for your girlfriend (“girlfriend”), and here you are blathering on about your priggish distinction between “sluts” and respectable women?
(Speaking of priggish, I find it hilarious that out-and-proud atheist — excuse me, agnostic — Brandon, videotape-all-sexual-encounters Brandon, “I want to go to Thailand ‘for the beaches'” Brandon, is, when it comes to the actions of others, as puritanical as an old maid at a Baptist luncheon social. Fuuuuck, man, I belong to a religion that makes women cover their heads at church and I don’t have the stick up my ass that you do about whether or not women screw.)
Brandon, you are a slut. You do the same thing you hate in a woman.
You desire the source of your validation outside yourself, too — not only do you (shock! horror!) enjoy sex, which is supposed to be one of the criteria for slutdom, but you have expressed a desire to travel and to make money. These are desiderata that come from outside your ego. You are exactly what you claim to disapprove of, it’s just different when it’s you. Why?
@lauralot: I reworked it for you to actually show what I would actually say:
A conversation between Brandon and his Baby Mama:
Her: Hey, I’m really swamped getting things set up for Billy’s birthday party, so I need you to run by the store and pick up the cake. I’ve already paid for it, just-
Brandon: Ok, but next time I would appreciate it if you asked me and not ordered me. Ok?
Her admittedly poor choice of father for her child. One who is so petty and spiteful that he would deny his own child’s needs just to “teach” the mother a so called lesson.
Could you pull that stunt with a child who is say, 16? I suppose so but a five year old has no idea why Daddy is telling him or her that because Mom was supposedly rude, she or he now has to suffer.
More Brandon LULZ: I would have to work very hard to keep him from becoming a shallow dimwit.
Wow.
Just.
Wow.
And yet you just said you wouldn’t get things for your child if the mother ordered you.
Hear that? Those goalposts are movin’ again.
Or, alternatively, sit them on your knee and solemnly warn them not to do what you did.
Because you are a shallow dimwit, Brandon. I know you may not think you are, but trust me: it’s a minority opinion.
You win what?
I’m genuinely curious: how long did the longest relationship you’ve had actually last? Because if I’d pulled stunts like that in any of my longer-term ones, they’d have told me to fuck off. And in a rather more permanent, relationship-cancelling way.
Sorry, where has this “bitter hatred” come from? We’re talking about a hypothetical scenario involving you, remember – is that really how you see yourself?
Are you married to your boss? Is he or she your best friend?
My wife is more than welcome to insult me, and I give as good as I get. Most of the time it’s just friendly banter, and on the rare occasions when it isn’t, we invariably kiss and make up very soon afterwards.
But if I’d treated my last boss the same way, he’d not only have fired me but probably sued me for sexual harassment into the bargain.
The notion that you can talk about things being beyond people’s grasp with a straight face is the funniest thing I’ve read all evening.