>
 |
| Atlas Tugged (Charles Atlas vs. the Rockettes.) |
I guess it shouldn’t really be surprising how widespread the Atlas Shrugged fantasy is in the weird world of the mansophere. The fantasy, that is, that if the truly important people in society get fed up and simply stop working, the whole society will collapse in a heap. There are two things that are inherently funny when Men Going Their Own Way start spouting off on this particular subject. One, of course, is the fact that this fantasy was originally articulated by an, er, woman — a small, stern, Russian-born intellectual dominatrix and husband-cuckolder who went by the made-up name of Ayn Rand. Two, is the fact that the MGTOWs honestly think that they are the world’s Atlases rather than a bunch of insignificant internet whiners.
Still, the would-be Atlases of the manosphere do sometimes manage to fluff up this tired old fantasy with some inventive new ideas of their own. Consider the recent advice given by dad_savage on the Antimisandry.com message boards. dad starts out with a fairly standard-issue articulation of the MGTOW Shrugs fantasy:
The Government calculates tax on a basis of expecting men to earn many times more than they need to simply live. Men only do this if there are incentives; the no.1 incentives are women and community respect; Feminism will take these away, and men will stop working hard to obtain them. Feminism, indeed all liberalism, will be starved of the revenue it must have. Women will no longer be subsidized to live fairy-tail lives benefiting from male largess whether directly through husbands, sugar daddies, Johns or indirectly through the state-as-husband. Women are financially, physically and emotionally dependant on men so all we need to do is cut them off.
Fairy-tail? I’m pretty sure fairies have wings, not tails. In any case, dad_savage contends that the jig will be up for the ladies sometimes in the next ten years. He hopes to speed up the process a little bit by offering some specific “tips for living a fun life and fighting feminism in the most effective way possible.” Here they are:
Get a Public Sector job, or do ‘Women’s Work’ – Try working as a Garbage Man, Mail Man, or some other Council or State position. … most Government employees are women so you’ll have a lot of chance to practise game, and antagonize them by refusing to be a mangina. … Working in the public sector or in a female-dominated industry ensures that your not feeding the beast, but in reality sucking its blood, and will benefit from sexist policies and tax-funnelling subsidies designed to improve the lot of the workers in these female-dominated areas.
Be Rich, Scrape By or Play Robin Hood – Either earn just enough money to enjoy the lifestyle you desire (and think about what it is you really need!) or be a somebody so that you can use clever accounting to maximize the amount of tax you dodge. …
He’s got some odder ideas as well:
Use cunning and intelligence to discern those forces truly destructive to feminism, and aid them. Islamic organizations for example do untold damage to feminist aspirations, Sharia courts in the UK are for example rebalancing some divorce-based iniquity, and Muslims can hide behind accusations of racism just as effectively as feminist’s can behind sexism.
 |
| MGTOW patron saint? |
And when you tire of demonstrating for the imposition of Sharia law, buy some porn and hire a hooker:
A thing need not be ‘activism based,’ to have an activist effect; pornography, prostitution and other forms of sexual proxy are powerful kinds of activism available to men as they make going your own way more accessible especially to young libidinous men.
This next big of advice is a tad, well, convoluted, but seems rock-solid otherwise:
Tell The Truth, And Let Reason Guide – An example, you let a woman off the train before you holding the door for her, and she doesn’t thank you. Annoyed you stomp past her, and exiting the station you’re looked over by a rough looking youth with an air of being up to no good, but he leaves you alone. You’re sure he’s a mugger, and will probably go after the woman who is coming along behind you. Now let’s say you chose to help, would you do it for the opportunity to redress her for her rudeness earlier? ‘You didn’t even thank me for holding the door open, but had I not been that kind of man I wouldn’t have come back to help, can you not understand why you should appreciate such sentiment?’ seems fair to me. On the flipside you could chose not to help (the choice is of course your own once you’ve weighed the pros and cons in a way that seems wise to you) or you could help if you like on the basis that she’s attractive, and demand her phone number as payment (I see nothing wrong with this) the point is don’t help just because.
So to sum up:
1) Get a job at the DMV or somewhere else in the public sector, and pester the women who are working there.
2) Either earn nothing or become a rich tax dodger.
3) Support Sharia law
4) Buy porn and hire hookers
5) If a woman is rude to you when you’re getting off a train, and then she gets mugged, rescue her just so you can tell her off afterwards, or maybe get her number. Or don’t rescue her.
I don’t know about you, but to me this sounds like a foolproof plan.
—
If you enjoyed this post, would you kindly* use the “Share This” or one of the other buttons below to share it on Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, or wherever else you want. I appreciate it.
*Yes, that was a Bioshock reference. Oddly appropriate given the subject matter.
>I haven't read the whole post yet – but something just struck me.The MGTOW boys are always complaining about hypergamy – if they consider themselves to be all Randian Altases then presumably all those women seeking alpha males would be all over them.
>I am amazed at the idea that some men would choose to structure their life according to the philosophy of 'Women Suck.' I mean, choosing a career based solely on being able to keep (largely imaginary) women away from your stuff? Heavens forfend that a single woman gain even a tiny benefit from just one of your tax dollars! And feminism teaches women to find a man to take care of them? Since when? I rather thought feminism was all about teaching women to be able to take care of themselves, without having to rely on someone else. The 'Sharia law' comment, about reducing the supposed iniquity in divorce is also telling. Apparently, the only way to avoid iniquity is to put the woman at a disadvantage. I wonder if these guys know that it was just revealed Ayn Rand was on Social Security and Medicare at the end of her life?
>This is one of the most entertaining blogs on the internet.The best part is that these guys hate feminists, but sound a lot more like the way-out-there feminists who formed "female only" communities than they probably realize.
>MRA's hoping for the government's collapse? What morons! Don't they know anything? No way America will collapse! We can afford any and everything that the feminists want or laws they want to enact! Crazy MRA's. Collapse? Sheeeit! No way.14,161,942,928,660 national debt.What collapse?California: $53.7 billion shortfall or 58 percent of its budget What the hell do MRA's know?Camden NJ may have to cut it's police force by 40%.Nope. No chance of this country collapsing. Crazy MRA's. Everything is as smooth as a feminist's leg.Random Brother
>@randomRiiiiight, because feminists are … somehow responsible for the national debt, and California's debt, and New York's debt.Because feminists invented SIPs and credit default swaps.Because feminists were running the SEC and the Fed during the housing bubble.Because Madoff and other people in the financial industry who defrauded investors out of billions of dollars were taking orders from … feminists.Because everyone who bought a mortgage they couldn't afford, and defaulted on it, was a feminist.Because government spending is controlled by … feminists. And the majority of it goes for feminist programs such as … the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.Riiiiiight.
>Don't forget the 23% of our national budget that goes into defense. I hear the Department of Defense is LOUSY with feminists!
>Sexist men spend half their time complaining about women wanting them to hold doors, and the other half complaining about women not wanting them to hold doors. This guy kind of gets in both attitudes at the same time: he's going to hold doors for women *just so he can get pissy at the ones who don't like it.* You can't win for losing sometimes.Here's how it works, guys, though I don't expect you to understand it: When you perform an unasked-for favor, like holding a door for a stranger, you're doing it out of the goodness of your heart. You're not doing it for a reward. If you're going to get angry and stomp around pouting when you don't get whatever reward you wanted, please JUST DON'T DO THE FAVOR IN THE FIRST PLACE. You'll be happier, the other person will be happier, we'll all be better off.Is it annoying when people don't appreciate favors? Absolutely. I've often held doors for elderly people or parents with strollers, only to have them brush past me like I don't exist. But, you know, big deal. I didn't hold the door so they'd fall to their knees praising my princely largesse. I did it because maybe they needed help, and it was a polite thing to do.This is why women avoid you. Because you only treat them like human beings if you think you can get something out of them, and when you don't get it you sulk and pout and throw tantrums. Nobody likes being manipulated like that.(Cue a half-dozen MRAs: "But WOMEN manipulate people! That's like WOMEN's main thing! I saw it in a 'Lockhorns' cartoon so it's true! I should get to do it because WOMEN did it first, blah blah blah…")Comically, I have seen many Objectivists and Libertarians threaten to get low-paying jobs so they won't have to pay taxes. I wish they meant it. Garbage collectors do useful work.
>I guess everything is nice and smooth then since my legs are extremely soft. 🙂
>shaenon, just wanted to point out that you can be a feminist and a libertarian too (I'm not I'm a green party member, however my bf who is also a feminist is staunchly libertarian and it frustrates him when people try telling him that he is less than of one or the other because of that stance.
>carswell– No, no, no. Women are all over "alphas", which are (depending on the misogynist, the argument and the phase of the moon) either thuggish, aloof assholes or rich dudes. This is what was attractive to cavewomen, apparently.The MGTOW are betas, who apparently hold up society. It is the contention of the MGTOWs that for their invaluable contributions as IT guys and corporate drones, they should be rewarded with pussy, and if they aren't they shall take their balls and go home and see how well you can run a civilization with nothing but aloof alpha assholes and rich guys.
>"earn just enough money to enjoy the lifestyle you desire (and think about what it is you really need!)"This is MGTOW? I thought this was just being raised Scottish.
>@ JoeWhere did I say any of that? Show me, where? Stop projecting. The point is that the U.S. is in the financial shit house and the question is what gets cut? Many of the "laws" and services feminists have come to expect will likely be cut. Barring some sort of financial miracle it would seem unstoppable. The reach of government, if you will, will be lessened and that is good for men as it will lessen government overreach and intrusive feminists policies, IMHO.If I'm wrong about this, kindly show me how.Random Brother
>Joe, I don't think you understand the gravity of the situation. Camden NJ wouldn't even need all those police if it weren't completely overrun with evil feminist gangs. Here is a picture of one of these gangs in action:http://www.shoplesnouvelles.com/stylenotes/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/pink-ladies-grease-1009.jpg
>@ DavidAh, David. All wisecracks, no wisdom.Random Brother
>shaenon, the other odd thing about the whole holding doors scenario of dad savage is that … subway doors open by themselves, when the conductor hits a button, and are generally kept open until everyone who is getting off has gotten off. (And then, until those getting on have gotten on, which generally happens second, after everyone has gotten off, except when really rude people try to get on before everyone has gotten off.) There is literally no chance of his imaginary scenario ever taking place. Once in a while people will block doors from closing so stragglers can get ON a train, but that's different and generally has zilch to do with gender.
>"Because you only treat them like human beings if you think you can get something out of them, and when you don't get it you sulk and pout and throw tantrums."Isn't that what some of these men accuse all women of doing to all men?
>richard, we're in the shitter now because of the bursting of the housing bubble and other assorted financial flim-flammery. Feminism has nothing to do with it. The resulting recession has caused tax revenues to plummet, hence the deficits and the cuts. The deficits have been exacerbated by the enormous costs of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq; the financial bailout was badly handled but prevented an even worse collapse; the stimulus package was also necessary to stave off an even worse recession, which would have caused tax revenues to plummet even further. I actually write about this shit for a living and have discussed these issues with some of the leading economists of our time. http://money.cnn.com/2010/11/24/pf/rajan_housing_bubble.moneymag/index.htmhttp://money.cnn.com/2010/04/19/magazines/moneymag/joseph_stiglitz_economy.moneymag/index.htm?postversion=2010051113
>@ DavidI have no beef with you about how we got into this mess, especially the unnecessary wars bit, however the question remains what gets cut? Who has the pull to keep their programs? If it's feminsts vs something that generally benefits men, I know the men will get screwed. However, if its feminist vs the military industrial complex, well, I don't think even feminists can pull that off.In the end I suspect that no money/limited money = no/limited VAWA enforcement, child support enforcement, restraining order enforcement, feminst programs, etc.Random Brother
>Random Brother, a lot of those "feminist" programs benefit children, half of whom are going to be men someday. Child support, for example, which helps feed and clothe and care for children of both sexes.As much as some men seem to think child support is a ticket to luxury, the average amount of child support received per year is $4300. That's small enough — how much lower do you think it would be if it weren't enforced?
>richard, the only specific example you gave in your first comment of the effects of budget cuts was Camden NJ cutting police. Police protection isn't a "feminist program" that only or even primarily benefits women. In fact, given that men are more likely to be the victim of violent crimes, it arguably is more valuable for men. Not sure how this would be, as you suggested "good for men."
>I held a subway door open for a woman once. Not only did she not thank me, but everyone on the train started yelling at me and this warning light above my head was being all "doink doink doink."Why is being a man in America so hard? 🙁
>Actually the bit that seems to escape supporters of the Atlas shrugged theory is that in the past when huge number of men have been taken out of the labour market (eg WW1 WW2)(and soldiers pay is absolutely crap) women have stepped up to the plate in whatever roles where needed and society kept functioning very well thanks very much. Now that many graduates of traditional occupations are almost gender equal – eg engineering etc – which doesn't translate into actual jobs for women despite the quals, I doubt there would be much of a ripple at all. Working in the heavy engineering sector for the last 15 years in my experience, guys with views similar to those posted above, are the most likely to be screaming 'over my dead body' if they think a woman might get a job on a par with or in the same profession as them and are the ones most likely to sabotage.
>As someone who has now been working in government for five years-having more men working for government in places like the MVD would be a great thing to have happen.
>As the father of two young children, I would be very, very sorry if programs like Paid Family Leave (in CA) were to get cut. In my experience, programs that are perceived as primarily benefiting women really do benefit everyone.I'm sure our MRA friends would agree if they took a minute to consider the matter.(Doesn't hold breath.)
>David– Yes, there are many hilarious details to this fantasy of karmic justice. My favorite is how, after railing about how much he hates this imaginary woman and wants her to get beaten and robbed for being such an imaginary bitch to him, he imagines he would also like to take her on a date. WHY DO YOU WANT TO DATE A WOMAN WHO TREATS YOU LIKE SHIT EVEN IF SHE IS IMAGINARY OH CHRIST YOU PEOPLE ARE BEYOND ASSISTANCE.I have a friend who has a similarly extraterrestrial approach to the opposite sex. He's not a misogynist like these guys, but his notions of what women want and how he can provide it are so peculiar that I don't even know where to begin offering advice. It's like trying to explain how to launch a satellite into translunar orbit to a guy who thinks the earth is flat. You end up spending eight hours reassuring him that this won't knock a hole in the celestial sphere where the stars are painted, and by then you just want to go home and put on Netflix.And then later he throws a rock into the air and it whacks him on the head and he comes complaining to you because *you said it would stay up.*Just not worth it.