>
 |
| A “Wacky Package by Tom Bunk. |
We have spoken here before about the imminent threat to civilization posed by misogynistic douchebags “going Galt,” shrugging like Atlas and depriving society of their hard work and staggering genius. Indeed, in the comments of this very blog, one of our own resident MGTOWers, Cold, explained how he was sticking it to The Man — er, The Woman — by not paying taxes on some of his earnings, thus becoming what economists call a “free rider”on government services, and what the rest of us taxpayers call a “tax cheat.”
He’s not the only manosphere dude who has concluded that the best way to screw over all those evil wimminz who are leeching off the government tit is to, er, leech off the government tit themselves. The guy calling himself AfOR — a prolific commenter and one-time contributor to the False Rape Society blog — explained his similar strategy in a comment on angry-dude megasite The Spearhead:
The wimminz are always directly dependent upon “no questions asked” money, usually from the public purse, and even those in industry only get away with it because the way is lead by the public purse.
Starve them of cash and you starve them of oxygen, they will literally die of starvation, and raise blue murder screaming to their last breath.
The only way to starve them of cash is to starve the State of cash, fuck the State, it can’t be fixed any other way and is now the enemy.
So how does one go about starving the state (metaphorically) and hopefully some actual women (literally)? With some slackery and/or tax fraud!
The only way to starve the State of cash is either live off welfare or work self employed and keep two sets of books, run the black / cash economy for what you can, and good accounting for what you can’t where everything is a deductible expense.
If you pay into the State, you are paying into the wimminz defence fund.
Since AfOR only rarely gets to see his kids, he figures it doesn’t matter if his brand of slacktivism destroys the economy — and possibly leads to them getting killed.
I couldn’t have less contact with my kids if we had had TOTAL economic meltdown and they had died in the ensuing chaos, so frankly speaking total economic meltdown holds nothing very scary for me, I have a set of skills that will always be in demand (a brain, two hands and a mechanical aptitude)
Nope! He’s footloose and fancy free!
Freed from needing to cater to the ex bitch and freed (prevented by force of Law actually) from any obligation towards my kids I can go live in my fucking car, it provides 12 VDC to power my laptop and charge my smartphone, and I can tether my smartphone to my laptop and get internet access anywhere I can get a phone signal.
In siding with the wimminz the State has made me the very thing it fears the most, the worker who can go anywhere on a whim, the worker who can work in the black (cash) economy, the worker who is very hard to track and profile … the worker who has no interest in taking on a debt burden or otherwise “boosting” the economy, the worker who can’t be bribed to vote appropriately because he doesn’t have a McMansion, corporate job, mortgage, etc etc. …
I guess Ayn Rand would be … proud?
—
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.
>I'vehad enough of lving with or being in any kind of relationship with a woman that goes any deeper than some recreational sex or conversation over a cup of joe.Happy to live the second half of my life in that fashion.And yet it's alway the women I know who are the first to assure me that I will change my mind. That i will meet someone…and the more I protest the more strident that statements become. It's like they have something personal at stake. And that is the problem. Nobody owns me.You sound like a sensible sort of guy John Killion… just be aware that the social disapproval you experience for choosing not to be in a relationship is coming not from "women" but from the culture at large, which is teaching all of us that being in a relationship is just What One Does, and that only freaks and weirdos and losers decide to go it alone. Although women may be the ones most likely to express it to you, women are also the ones most likely to experience its harshest manifestations. Those particular women may indeed have something personally invested in the question of "is it best to be in a relationship or not" because they themselves have been judged harshly for not being in a relationship, or suppressed their unhappiness with their current partner out of fear of being judged for being single, etc. Who knows. Either way, judging people for being single is not a feminist value. Nor is judging people for being married. It's all about making choices and having those choices respected. Feminism 101.
>No, women don't see children as a way to profit.(Alex P)I agree that they might not start off with that thought but in some situations they clearly see the benefit it could be for them. Its hard to explain certain things from a male perspective in regards to child custody. Unless you have lived it. I think it would be best if both sides would stop for a minute and ask "why is that person making such claims". You might then find that they may have some legitimacy to their statements.
>*points immediately to the building housing the admin portion of the courts she works for as the "Guess again! Stand on a street corner and point to a single building or accomplishment by a feminist."* There you go Mr. Not A Happy Camper Craig.A feminist designed and helped create that building. Oh I know, it was a government building and they do not count.Maya Ying Lin counts-she was the winning designer of the Vietnam Memorial.There you go.
>@John KilianI'm glad you're mature enough not to take out your frustration with your ex on your kids. I'm sorry that you've had such bad experiences with relationships, and find yourself disillusioned with women in general.Please don't take this the wrong way, but I think seeing a therapist would do you good. Not because you don't want to be in a relationship, but because you sound like you're really hurting inside. If people don't address their own pain, a lot of times they end up hurting others.
>What have women contributed to civilisation? well, first of all, 52% of the people who make up civilization…not to mention numerous inventions and developments made throughout the ages, in spite of living in cultures that denied them access to education etc.Also? weaving, sewing, pottery, agriculture(aka the bedrock of modern civilization) -these are all (according to current anthropological theory) female inventions.
>@amnesiaI appreciate the concern. But Therapy is for wusses–I'm kidding. Put down the shears.I know where my pain is. I have a lot of experience in recognizing it. I come from a home where the rod was not spared by either my irish father or my italian mother. And yet I have never strcuk my children. Therapy –in my experience is all about recognizing that the large stripey thing in the cage with you is called a "tiger" –but it doesn't blunt the claws or pull the fangs.
>…ib4:http://www.women-inventors.com/
>A target rich environment indeed.Craig::: yes those were good days – the days that built the civilization you stand upon and contribute nothing too. Civilization can survive and thrive if women have to be nice to their husbands or be kicked out rather than being the vicious self centered harpies they have become. :::Good old days. Yes, women should have to be "nice to their husbands" no matter what calumny they indulge in. It is the height of self interest to wish to be treated with respect and dignity – oh, and to have equal access to the privilege of dissolving a relationship that doesn't work for them anymore rather than be thrown into penury at the whim of an asshole who is completely supported by civil law.Gah – there's no arguing with such ignorance. I can't even bring myself to address the other blatant nonsense in that post.
>Fair enough, John K. It sounds like you've been through the ringer. Relationships aren't for everyone. I wish you well whatever life choices you make.
>Tit for Tat:I don't know that anyone here would argue that the family court system is perfect. In fact, I've heard as many women complain about it as men. I'll admit, though, that my understanding of the system is not deep enough to adequately evaluate whether it favors one gender over another, or the degree to which any favoritism is justified. The sense I have is that going to court is a good way to exact revenge on your ex, whoever that may be, and that the kids are usually the ones who suffer the most in the process. In my town, we have a program called Kids Turn, which is designed to help parents to understand divorce from a child's perspective. Kids attend a group based on their age, and each parent is assigned to a separate group of other parents. At the end of the six week program, the kids publish a newsletter for the parents in which they describe (anonymously) their experiences of the divorce. I've led one of the parent groups, and let me tell you, there wasn't a dry eye in the house when the parents read that newsletter. I just wish more parents could have that perspective and not choose to put their kids through Hell just to get back at their exs. That goes for men and women.
>CaptainI think one of the problems with these kinds of discussions is that many times it involves people who have not had to experience it. I think many times the issues dont stem from ex's trying to get even but more just from selfish individuals who want what they want, people be damned. I think many times both sides are as affected financially from divorce. From my experience though, the system favoured my daughters mother. The only way for me to circumvent that was out of my reach economically. So she got to have the deciding vote, which she used with impunity.I have waited 10yrs for my daughter to be old enough to see which homes afford her the most balanced approach to life and school and parenting. Seems Dad was not so bad afterall. The cost for that inequity was loss of time with my child, financial hardship and hours upon hours of travel weekly. Worth it for sure but I can fully understand why some men, who do not have my kind of support system, would be royally pissed off. The I totally disagree with many of the ways they express their viewpoints. How's that old saying go."walk a mile in another person's shoes," It seems to me both the feminists and MRA's missed that class.
>Therapy –in my experience is all about recognizing that the large stripey thing in the cage with you is called a "tiger" –but it doesn't blunt the claws or pull the fangs.Well, your mileage will always vary with things like therapy, but in my experience, if we're going to run with your analogy, therapy was more like recognizing that you have a right as a person to kindly ask the tiger to get its claws out of your gut.Or something. I had a good therapist. I've heard horror stories, so I regard myself as lucky.
>"walk a mile in another person's shoes," It seems to me both the feminists and MRA's missed that class.Bullshit. Every oppressed group in history has been told that they should see things from their oppressors point of view, and have some sympathy for their oppressors, and try to be patient with their oppressors. People like Martin Luther King said "fuck that" and got results.For the past century women – the oppressed – have been told that they're not giving due consideration to their oppressors. Damn right, because there's no reason they should. Their oppressors already have plenty going for them. I'm fucking sick of hearing men whine about how our lives are hard too. Of course they are; nobody said they weren't. Your life is hard because you're human. Deal with it. Womens' lives are harder because they're female humans. Once we eliminate that distinction I'll have all the sympathy in the world for my fellow men, on par with my sympathy for my fellow women of course.Until then, suck it up.
>TripLmao, who shit in your cornflakes??
>Yeah women's lives are so much harder that they commit suicide 1/4th as often as men, live many years longer than men, spend 65% of the disposable income worldwide(higher in the Anglosphere), and are about 90% less likely to be incarcerated. Since when does a supposedly oppressed group get incarcerated at only 1/10th the rate of their supposed oppressors?
>Triplanetary: white knight extraordinaire.
>Cold said… Triplanetary: white knight extraordinaire.*Yawn.* Same old bullshit: the only reason men are feminists is to score points with women. Never changes, never stops being wrong.
>Tit for Tat:Sorry to hear you had to go through that.
>I was obviously talking about Triplanetary specifically, not all male feminists. Seems to me that a significant minority of them, if not the majority ARE just looking to score points with women, but that's anecdotal. The one thing that almost all male feminists have in common is that they will get the opposite of what they are hoping to get, whatever that may be.
>thus becoming what economists call a "free rider"on government services, and what the rest of us taxpayers call a "tax cheat."This. Just as conservatism is the search for a moral justification for selfishness, so libertarianism is the search for a moral justification for freeloading."Moochers" indeed.
>Since when does oppression solely involve being incarcerated?"Single men are the biggest spenders. According to Bundle.com, single men spend 18% more than single women. They also carry slightly more credit card debt.Men are just as likely as women to make impulse buys, but for some reason the stereotype sticks to women. Sure, they do spend a lot of money as managers of the household, which is why so much advertising targets them.According to Elizabeth Duke, a member of the Board of Governors of the U.S. Federal Reserve, "Women account for 80% of all consumer purchasing decisions, making 93% of food purchases and 65% of auto purchases." And they're also more likely to be budget-conscious than men and more likely to take advantage of things like sales and coupons."Family shopping accounts for the difference there-women tend to be the shoppers for martial couples.women suffer from depression at a much higher rate than men, they would seem to be at higher risk for suicide. Men are less likely to make an effort to get treatment then women are. So their rates tend to be higher. Not so fast on that incarceration thing:Increasing arrests for property and public order offenses are partly responsible for women’s incarceration rate outpacing that of men.
>That's funny, Cold. I've been a feminist most of my adult life and I've pretty much gotten what I've wanted–not everything, but I've no reason to complain (though I do anyway). I've said it before, and I'll say it again: feminism works for me. Like most people, I've got plenty of problems, but feminism is most assuredly not one of them.
>Cold said: "The one thing that almost all male feminists have in common is that they will get the opposite of what they are hoping to get, whatever that may be."What's the opposite of ice cream? Because whatever that is, I'd like to know so I can start hoping for it.
>Also, Cold, I'm just going to put this here:"Feminism boosts sexual satisfaction for both men and women, a new study suggests. "http://www.livescience.com/1964-feminists-fun.html
>Dave, I think the opposite of Ben and Jerry's would be frozen skim milk, lousy with BGH, interspersed with hunks of dog shit and sweetened with Splenda–made by a couple of Glenn Beck fans.Of course, now that they're owned by Unilever all bets are off.