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.
Brandon: I don’t need to provide references, cite examples, etc,,, of lauralot’s man-hating ways.
Yes, yes, you do. You asserted it, you have to defend it.
And yes, you are a dictionary. You said slut, you said promiscuous. I asked for your definition so that we’d be on the same page. You, the man who is now saying to use the “standard definition” earlier said you wouldn’t provide any definition (not even the useless, weaseling cop-out, of, “look it up”, because, “every man has a different one.”
Well, I asked (not demanded, asked, politely) for yours. I was respectful enough to say that whatever definition you provided would be accepted. You didn’t have the courtesy to read what I said, and got all pissy when I pointed out what you were doing.
That lack of simple ability to understand plain English, combined with your overdeveloped sense of entitlement, and your inability to consider the differential effects of treatment to a child as compared to an adult (ignoring completely your comprehension of the hierarchy of needs; even accepting that you probably aren’t aware of the specific names for Maslow’s basic three level list of crude needs), is why I said it.
Because it’s all about Brandon. Being a parent means (for several years) life being all about them, and the incorporation of more abstract things like respect, and the best way to phrases things, and separating wants from needs.
But you, in your 30s have yet to figure out that distinction, putting notions of politesse before things like the emotional needs of your children. That, you careless lout, is pathetic.
It puts the lie to your “exploding feminist brains” with the brilliance of your reason, and the stunning rhetoric. When presented with the chance to be magnanimous, in pursuit of putting the people you avow to be your enemies on the back foot, and set yourself up as a decent human being; knowing that all you had to do was say you’d put buying your five year old kid a birthday cake if his mother (with whom you weren’t supposed to be on the outs with, but jointly sharing the rearing of your beloved child, whom you were going to give “50 percent of your time” and look to the needs of) said she needed to to do it.
Nope, The Almighty Brandon comes first, even before a child who is too young to know why Daddy chose to disappoint.
You are a “wretch, concenter’d all in self” and that is why you are a menace to children.
Can you take someone to court for custody for being “rude?” I don’t think you can.
Lovely relationship model right here.
Just because you’re legal age and no one can prevent you from being an asshole doesn’t mean you need to exercise that right. After all, you don’t seem nearly as keen on women being demanding to you, even though you’re just as capable of saying “fuck off.”
@Brandon: Oh, I see.
Hey everyone! Brandon eats babies, pushes old people in wheelchairs over into wet cement, and kidnaps college girls and keeps them locked up in his basement! I don’t have to prove it; everyone would just bitch and moan over the evidence anyway. Besides, it’s my opinion and that’s my right.
Jules: I’m sure you can…
Well as Dr. Venkman AKA Brandon once said “you did not say the magic word.”
@Elizabeth: I would do my best not to punish the child since it isn’t their fault their mother is a rude, entitled pain in the ass.
However, I would be as passive-aggressive as I could be towards her if she was ordering me around. She would find out real quick that being a cunt to me isn’t going to get her what she wants.
I have always realized it…you just assumed the worst. Petulant baby? What if I told you to go to the store and get me a six pack. Would that come off as rude? Yes it would. However if I said “Elizabeth, could you please go to the store and get me a six pack?”
Do you see the difference? Oh sorry…see the difference!!!
Brandon needs his own book of larnin’, on etiquette. We can call it “How to Lose Friends and Alienate People.”
@Pecunium: I am not writing a thesis, I am stating an opinion. If this was Wikipedia you would be right…it isn’t. It’s the comment section on a parody website. Hardly academic.
Also, I defined it earlier. I clearly pointed out that some men see a woman sleeping with more than 1 man is a slut while other men don’t care. I also said that I was in the middle of that spectrum.
So I did answer your question, you just chose to ignore it.
@Jules: No, put not adequately providing for a child even after receiving child support is grounds for a custody hearing.
@Lauralot: Nice…go ahead and think that all you want. I could care less. Also it is wrong.
However, I would be as passive-aggressive as I could be towards her if she was ordering me around.
Everyone is passive-aggressive now and then. Some people seem to be pathologically passive-aggressive.
But that’s the first time I’ve ever heard someone proudly announce their intent to be passive-aggressive in a hypothetical situation that they aren’t even going to have to really face.
Oh, you’d like to claim it’s wrong, Brandon. But I took a leaf from your book and I have the whole thing on tape:
That’s totally you; don’t even try to deny it. I don’t have to prove it; I’m not writing a thesis and this isn’t Wikipedia.
Yea, but you’d be a dick.
That seems to be the pattern of the conversations with you at this site. People say something and you reply with “Yea, but what if I don’t care about being a giant asshole?”
No, put not adequately providing for a child even after receiving child support is grounds for a custody hearing.
If the child lacks something because the mother asked the father to get it and the father refused, I highly doubt the courts are going to see that as grounds to award more custody to the father. (Since you didn’t reply before, I’ll assume you lost custody in the first place because you slapped the mother around for not talking the way you like.)
Not really, because if you said “you need to go to the store and get me a six pack” I would probably go “why?”
If my roommate said the same thing I would still ask “why?” If he said “because I am unable to go myself for whatever reason (all the way up to I am lazy)” I would say “okay” and do so. If he said “cuz I am a MAN” I would just laugh and say no.
And if this turned into a constant thing? Then I would address it and point to an example of his doing this while requesting the behavior to please stop. If it continued, then I would start to say “no, I asked you to not do this.”
That is the difference between a childish person such as yourself and the rest of humanity.
*cues Brandon saying THAT IS TOTALLY WHAT I MEANT even though that is not at all what he meant*
@Shora: Constantly being demanding has a negative rate of return. Hence, you would get far more if you were only demanding on a few things instead of being demanding about everything.
I don’t really care about a lot of things. However, the things that I do care about (and how people treat me is at the top of that list), I will be demanding if someone over steps their bounds with me.
@Katz: I have never laid an unwanted hand on a woman…ever. But you can think whatever you want.
I am seriously tempted to ask this of a family court judge I know…I am sure the answer would be illuminating.
Brandon’s entire life is like a chapter out of some unpublished Foucault treatise, control, punishment etc etc etc.
We get it Brandon. Everything in Brandonland is better. Good for you.
@Elizabeth: If the child was receiving child support, was living with the mother and she was having a hard time caring for the child, I would say that is grounds to have a custody hearing
And yet, the original comment was not the mother is always saying “you NEED to get Billy XYZ” it was a one time thing.
A one time thing where your response was to completely refuse at all to do the thing regardless of how childish it made you look. I suppose it is progress to see that you actually would not outright refuse to do it if it involved your kid.
Fucking hell. That video is in response to this:
“I don’t really care about a lot of things.”
Brandon: See yea, here’s what I was talking about.
“I’m not constantly demanding, because that doesn’t get me what I want”
vs
“I’m not constantly demanding, because then I would be an asshole.”
But, like, if there is ever any point when you have a list of choices, and one of those choices is to be an asshole with little or no personal consequence, you just go straight to being an asshole. Even if not being an asshole might help someone out, even if there is another equally good choice that doesn’t involve being an asshole, it seems from what you say here that all things being equal, you will choose to be an asshole.
And for the life of my I just cannot figure out why.
@Elizabeth: Of course it is sweetie. I would just say fuck off and hang up on the first sign of rudeness. It’s not like I would try and correct it by saying “I would appreciate if you asked me instead of ordered me”.
I even mentioned it earlier in the thread when man-hating Lauralot wrote some fake dialog between me and my hypothetical child’s mother.
But no, you are right…I would just throw a tantrum instead of politely asking her not to do something.
So I get to be Man-Hating Lauralot from now on?
Awesome! Do you want to be Baby-Eating Brandon, Elderly-Abusing Brandon, or Kidnapping-Women Brandon?
Response to:
“Billy needs school supplies by tomorrow.”
= “I would be as passive-aggressive as I could be towards her if she was ordering me around. She would find out real quick that being a cunt to me isn’t going to get her what she wants.”
(Seriously, these things aren’t even on the same planet. I’m sure that in real life, I’d find this pathological, but from the safe distance of an entire Internet, it’s just funny.)
Response to
“Hey everyone! Brandon eats babies, pushes old people in wheelchairs over into wet cement, and kidnaps college girls and keeps them locked up in his basement! I don’t have to prove it; everyone would just bitch and moan over the evidence anyway. Besides, it’s my opinion and that’s my right.”
= “Nice…go ahead and think that all you want. I could care less. Also it is wrong.”
IT WAS SARCASM.
Response to the thought that at some point, some woman might accuse you of rape.
=
VIDEOTAPE ALL THE SEX ACTS
Brandon, you couldn’t be funnier if you tried.
@Shora: You can’t figure out why because your assumption is inaccurate.
@Lauralot: All three will work just fine because all three are 1) incorrect and 2) absurd on its face.
Baby-Eating Brandon has the most attractive acronym.
Still, I’m not sure David will go for it; he doesn’t abide by the Do Unto Trolls as they would Do Unto You philosophy (and, really, neither do I).
@Voip: I know it was sarcasm, you just can’t see that I was being dismissive and indifferent about it.
Why do I see this as being:
Brandon: Judge, she demanded I obtain pens for the child. Obviously she is an unfit mother. Therefore I should get full custody and she should have to pay me child support.
Judge: Any response from the defendant?
Brandon’s Grateful to be rid of him Ex: Your honor, I asked him to get pens because it was his weekend with our son and Billy needed some pens to complete a school project. I was merely reminding the father of his duty to ensure that our child had the necessary tools to complete it. Brandon refused to get the pens until right before I picked our son and I had to request the teacher to give our son an extension. When I asked Brandon why he refused, he said it was because I was rude to him. Not sure what he is talking about.
Brandon: you said I NEED to buy our son pens-that was being incredibly rude!
Judge: You mean like you just were sir? Petition denied.
By the fifteenth time you pulled this stunt, she would be fully prepared to explain in detail to the court how stupid you are being. And since most family court judges get to know the parties really well, she probably would not need to even say that much.
I assure you, based on the answers you give here, it is not inaccurate. Maybe you’re really a chill, empathetic guy and just play an asshole on the internet?
Or do you really think you don’t present yourself as an asshole around here?
Those people loooove fathers like him.
FUN FACT: I almost didn’t go to college because my child support had my non-custodial dad down as contributing X amount of money and we had no idea until the last minute that he actually would. Meanwhile, my sister’s orthodonture was delayed because he dragged his ass on paying for it. I know exactly what you are.
Oh, it’s not something I intend to keep up, I just think it’s hilarious how much he doesn’t get the joke.
That and he keeps insisting we can do what we want as he doesn’t care, when every post here demonstrates otherwise.
**SORRY: My financial aid, not “my child support.”
@Katz: I eat baby….cows. So baby cow eating brandon is actually accurate. Feel free to use that one…I am giving it a GPLv2 license.
I called it correctly-“I totally meant that even though I have spent response after response saying the exact opposite.”
You said it once as part of a dialogue someone else made-every other time it was “ignore the request regardless of how petulant it shows me to be” or say “fuck off” and run away.
@Voip: It’s nice that you see your father as a walking wallet…only there to buy you and your sister shit.
This sure is a lot of effort for someone who gets the joke:
All three will work just fine because all three are 1) incorrect and 2) absurd on its face.
Sweetie, nobody who gets a joke feels the need to state ALSO IT IS WRONG, BEEP BOOP WHAT IS THIS THING CALLED LANGUAGE.
There’s a limit to how many posts you can spend defending yourself against a charge that you purportedly don’t care about.
@Katz: Still not caring. So knock yourselves out.
Not really, I also saw him as an unmedicated manic-depressive who may or may not have been trying to kill me at one point.
Anyway, considering that at the time my mother couldn’t afford food, someone had to see to it that my sister’s overbite was corrected.
Your true face is showing more and more, baby doll. We must be getting to you.
“@Voip: It’s nice that you see your father as a walking wallet…only there to buy you and your sister shit.”
Yea, like, on what planet is this not an asshole thing to say?
This isn’t about buying her a Barbie Dream House or a car or some shoes. This is about GOING TO FUCKING COLLEGE. How is it unreasonable to expect a father to contribute financially to his daughters schooling? My father is an always has been allergic to giving my mother money and we have and still do suffer for it. Do you think that this is in any way reasonable?
Lauralot, that gif made my night :D
And he’s dumb, too.
Maybe more of that “college” we hear so much about might have helped.
It’s totally OK to deny your children higher education to prove you’re not a walking wallet. That’s a mistake they won’t make again!
So if he eats veal, I can call him Baby-Animal-Torturing Brandon, right? Not like he cares (or that he’ll come back to tell us 20 times how much he doesn’t care)!
/sarcasm
I once had to talk to a family court judge about a case in the court I work at…she was finishing up a three year stint and I mentioned one of the parties named and she said, and I quote, “I am so glad I never have to deal with them after this date again.”
That was a bizarre family though-this guy had a kid with one woman, another with her cousin, and married a totally different woman.
Anyways, I have an early class tomorrow so gtg. I’m getting a PhD now.
@Voip: So if he was a prick…then why would you have any expectations that he would help you? Seems like you helped cause your own grief by putting faith in a faith-less man.
You aren’t really getting to me. I am just finishing up watching a movie, then I am off to bed. I am actually getting quite bored of this back and forth.
This is the first time I’ve ever heard someone boast about being passive-aggressive. What a bizarre thing to witness.
Looks like I won.
God…you people are humorless. If you get any drier you will turn to ash.
Wowzers, you mean that the fault wasn’t with the massive jerk who didn’t care whether or not I got a decent education, but with me for being related to him? We didn’t “put our faith in him,” the state put him down for paying a certain amount based on his income.
I hope he has a bunkbed so he can be quite literally above it all.
@Voip: I will go get you your trophy.
You’re the one who doesn’t know of the Earth custom called, “Sar–a–cas–m,” we’re just trying to help a brother out.
Yes, clearly this is the fault of the person dependent on her father for attaining higher education.
Clearly
Went to college despite dysfunctional family background, no money. Graduated near the top of my class. Went to grad school. Share this accomplishment with my father, who has since gotten his shit together and is OK to hang out with, when not psychotic.
My upcoming doctorate will do quite nicely, thanks.
Obviously it is your fault, you are female. /sarcasm
I tended to view my father as a walking wallet, he was never there for me for any other reason then money. But I know now that he is not really capable of showing his affections any other way. Pretty sad really. :(
@Voip: It’s like feminists can’t read. One explanation before I go to bed…let’s hope you can comprehend it.
You aren’t at fault for having a shitty father. You aren’t at fault for having faith in him. You are at fault for constantly giving him that faith over and over again all the while he doesn’t follow through. You should have just come to the conclusion that you can’t depend on him and write him off. You would have probably saved yourself a lot of emotional wear and tear.
Sorry, the above comment was supposed to have this:
in the blockquote.
Also, brandon, we’re not humorless. We just don’t think you’re funny.
Like little Billy would have to do for you?
@Shora: Funny…I think the same about you.
This was the second sentence in the quote to which you are referring.
Perhaps you missed it?
If I say “If you don’t pay the money you are obligated to, I don’t get to go to school/fix my teeth/eat” Is not having faith in someone, it’s being dependent on an unreliable person to do what they are supposed to. if she had a choice I’m sure she would have chosen to not have to rely on someone unreliable to go to college.