At first glance, Alcuin’s blog would seem to be some sort of parody. The blog’s slogan – “Promoting the Intellectual Renaissance of Western Patriarchy” – seems so over-the-top pretentious that even the smuggest of would-be intellectuals wouldn’t be able to post it with a straight face.
But if Alcuin is a troll, he’s a dedicated one, and one (at least based on my less-than-exhaustive survey of his blog) who never seems to break character. So I’m assuming he’s real. Which makes him a pompous ass with a lot of irritating ideas he’s somehow convinced himself are new and interesting. Take (please!) his recent post “Back Where They Belong.” And yes, “they” mean who you think, and “where they belong” means where you think.
Men should run the government, business, education, and religion. Women should stay at home. Young unmarried women can briefly work as kindergarten and elementary teachers, but there are no reasons why men can’t usually do this as well.
I’m not sure if Alcuin understands that women actually hold most of the jobs that currently exist, and that removing virtually all of them from the workplace would cause the economy to implode like, well, Alcuin, if you suddenly removed all of his idiocy. Also, how many kindergarten teachers do we really need?
As long as women run things, men will continue to be sidelined and slandered because feminism is a zero-sum movement.
Women … run things?
There can be no peace between the sexes until women are back where they belong. The sexes are meant to complement each other rather than compete and put one another down.
Yes, and the best way to show how the sexes “are meant to complement each other rather than … put one another down” is for one of the sexes to, er, put the other down by sending them back into the home.
Women have no business being lawyers, judges, educators, doctors, bureaucrats, writers, or religious leaders. Their attempted leadership in these areas, an illegitimate coup d’etat, is destroying our society.
I agree. Lady Pope is doing a terrible job of dealing with all those abuse cases!
Sadly, they prefer to enjoy their present situation, and let society rot, than go back where they belong and participate in building things again. Much like enjoying the concert on the sinking Titanic – though in this case, don’t expect chivalrous men to jump into the cold water so the ladies can have space on the lifeboats.
A little Titanic humor always enlivens a dull rant, eh?
Knock knock!
Who’s there!
An iceberg!
Damn, I guess we shouldn’t have kept going in zero visibility in a part of the ocean where icebergs had been recently sighted, in our ship that doesn’t have enough lifeboats for everyone!
I crack myself up sometimes. Back to Alcuin:
Feminism is a hate movement that brings out the worst in women.
Unlike the Men’s Rights movement, a hate movement that brings out the best in men!
It hates women because it hates femininity and motherhood, the chief characteristics of what it means to be a genuine woman. It brings out the worst in women by turning them into men, or trying to masculate them.
Damn you, feminism! Don’t go masculating those ladies! First they want to wear pants, and the next thing you know they’re growing ironic mustaches and using Axe Detailers instead of loofahs and subscribing to Bass Fishing Monthly.
It hates men because it blames everything on men, and regards masculinity in men to be evil. It emasculates men at the same time. Gays and, much more secondarily, manginas, are somewhat acceptable to the gynocracy, especially when the furniture needs moving or some bitch can’t pay her own bills.
Because when you need furniture moved, or some money, you call … the gays? Is this some new gay stereotype I’m not aware of? I mean, manginas, sure, manginas are furniture-movers and money-to-bitches conduits extraordinaire. That’s how they get access to pussy, after all.
But what’s the incentive for the gays? They don’t need pussy; they’d, presumably, prefer to spend their money on tiny dogs and gym memberships than on some bitch’s bills; and while gays may have strong opinions about where the furniture should go, are they really interested in carrying it there themselves?
Women generally use men, and feminism continues this grand tradition. A man’s value is defined according to his use to women. Deeper than that, feminism regards men in the same way that the Nazis regarded Jews – men are Untermensch and cannot be granted the same rights and privileges that women are.
And … now we’ve got Nazis.
Feminism aims to bring men down, as it is a zero-sum movement. It doesn’t simply aim to improve the lot of women through, for instance, education, but seeks to exclude men from education.
It does? Last I heard, colleges were actually lowering their standards in order to enroll more guys.
Thus the current propaganda about campus rape, and the attempt to make it easier to accuse a university male of rape in the USA. Thanks, government. You are, once again, the handmaiden of misandry.
And handmaidens are bad. Not like Shieldmaidens.
Feminist hate will never be satisfied, so men can’t keep avoiding the issue. We must avoid feminism as much as we can, and educate each other about it and about alternatives.
Generally it is advisable to actually know something about something before trying to “educating” other people about it.
This intellectual Renaissance of Western Patriarchy business is a lot trickier than you might think.
It is just as nervewracking to us whether you nag men in the bedroom or the boardroom; the sum total of human unhappiness increases all the same!
Dear DKM,
Please speak for yourself, because you certainly don’t speak for all men. I’ve worked with, and for, many fine and competent women. I’d much, much rather work with them than with the likes of you.
This man thinks you’re an asshole.
Curiouser and curiouser:
…And mere minutes later:
Your webbed feet are scrambling for purchase, Meller.
Coal does not really have much of a scent. Perhaps musty at worst. It also is a very useful thing to have for several reasons as it can light a home, heat it, be used to draw with, and many other things.
Diamonds, on the hand, while equally scentless, do have industrial use but are not as easy to use as a lump of coal.
Beth: They burn really brightly. If you’ve never seen the blue-white flame of diamonds, you really ought to.
C’mon, posterformerlyknownasElizabeth,
We KNOW why you LOVE diamonds, and the reason has nothing to do with “industrial uses” still less with “burning with a bright blue flame”.
‘A kiss on the hand may be so continental, but diamonds are a girls best friend…” Greed, thy name is woman!
Marilyn Monroe still speaks to the modern woman today, doesn’t she?
PEACE AND FREEDOM!!
David K. Meller
Men nag too (esp DKM), they just don’t call it nagging. 😉
Well no, given that she’s long-dead, didn’t write that song, and was being paid to perform it as part of her job. But hey, keep throwing straw-women at us, they burn the most easily.
And stop with the freedom bullshit because you’re clearly advocating for women to be uneducated slaves.
“Marilyn Monroe still speaks to the modern woman today, doesn’t she?”
Yes! In fact just last night I summoned her on my ouija board.
Meller: PosterformerlyknownasElizabeth was saying she likes coal better than diamonds.
Someone was overpaid for what literacy you obtained.
I do think that coal is more useful then diamonds even if diamonds make a pretty light. For the main reason of easier to find and use for the average person.
And if I was to purchase jewelry, I would get emeralds on silver, not diamonds. Diamonds lack…zest for me.
I would dump anyone who bought me a diamond. Blood diamonds are evil, and anyone who is unaware of my views on the matter and yet claims to know me well enough to buy me jewelry deserves to be dumped.
Diamonds (the bog-standard white ones) are boring, and hideously overpriced.
The one’s I like (such as the Pumpkin Diamond at the Smithsonian) are all too expensive too, but that’s because they are rare.
But diamonds, as usually meant are a bigger racket than gold/silver/platinum as investments.
I would dump anyone who bought me a diamond. Blood diamonds are evil…
This. Although DKM uses conflict in Africa as an example for why black people are inferior, so he almost certainly doesn’t care.
The best kind of diamonds are the kind made out of dead pets. Duh.
>>I would dump anyone who bought me a diamond.
I would check if they’re synthetic first but otherwise agreed. Though technically I think *I’M* supposed to be giving diamonds, since, you know, penis and all. Everyone knows about how our neolithic ancestors hunted the mammoth then went over and got a ring at DeBeers for their woman.
” Everyone knows about how our neolithic ancestors hunted the mammoth then went over and got a ring at DeBeers for their woman.”
LOL!
“I would dump anyone who bought me a diamond. Blood diamonds are evil…”
What about pearls, are they ethical? I like my pearls like I like my men – BLACK!
Fourthed. Although I think we’re getting away from the real point, which is that feminists are dark, dull, numerous, and utilitarian, and diamonds are women who hate themselves, to the point where they would willingly be in David K. Meller’s company. And be tranquil and soft and not vomiting in their mouth all the time.
Was going to say, what about pink Argyle diamonds. Then I remembered: Rio Tinto. Promise I’ll never buy diamonds (says the pensioner, lol).
I would be less than enthralled by diamonds, partly because of blood diamonds, but mostly because even the “honest” ones are massively overvalued. There are so many fascinating and underexploited colored stones out there.
I would be so much more impressed with a really beautiful corundum, beryl, or spinel.
I’m curious how this is about women’s “greed,” though, considering that it’s generally considered gauche to sell your engagement ring and still go through with the marriage. Do you think someone would get married just to get divorced and then sell the ring? That seems… convoluted, to say the least.
Holly, our greed is for shinies. We want shiny expensive prezzies because we are silly girls and only care about things that glitter, possibly because we have the intelligence level of a magpie.
Hey! I resemble that remark!
You’re POLLUTING the issue with FACTS!!
My distaste for rings in general is more practical than ethical. As someone that has enough trouble keeping track of a cell phone or keys on a day to day basis, such a tiny thing as an engagement ring could easily be lost any time I took it off. To negate the chance of losing it, I’d have to keep it in a jewelery box and never wear it, making it little more than useless clutter in my room.
Useless clutter in a room, costs way more than it’s worth, sounds like DKM, doesn’t it?
We KNOW why you LOVE diamonds, and the reason has nothing to do with “industrial uses” still less with “burning with a bright blue flame”.
You never elaborated DKM xD What IS the reason? 😀
I do love my diamond ring, but mostly because of it’s history and legacy. My maternal great-grandmother went to college on scholarship in the ’20s and all of the other girls were getting diamonds and furs as gifts and she wasn’t, so when my mom went to college in the ’60s, she started sending her diamonds and furs. Mom was running on the way to a basketball game (she was playing, but women only played at half-time back then) and tripped over a speed bump and crushed the ring that TuMama had sent her. When she got married, she used the big diamond to make her engagement ring. My paternal grandmother donated four trapezoid diamonds from something she’d inherited, and went up and had it made at Tiffany’s in in New York. When we got engaged all my husband had to do was have it re-sized.
I love my diamonds because of the story behind them. I refused to let my husband buy me anything.
And I’m noticing that my ring really needs to be cleaned – it’s much prettier then! Kaleidoscope-like! I disapprove of blood diamonds also, and don’t know if mine are, but like my furs (yes, inherited them also) people are already dead, should I just throw them out?
I find it a difficult question.