So yesterday I quoted some random Spearheader who described women (well, white women in particular) as “complete parasitical whores roaming the landscape spreading VD like Johnny Appleseed and fucking men over.”
One reader wondered if Mr. Appleseed really went about spreading VD. So I did a little research, and it turns out that it is exceedingly unlikely that Mr. Appleseed – who actually was a real person — spread anything other than the magic of apples. And his Swedenborgian beliefs.
Why? Because Mr. Appleseed – real name John Chapman – was what these days we might call a Man Going His Own Way. Seems he didn’t have much truck with the ladies, according to one contemporary account quoted in his Wikipedia entry:
On one occasion Miss PRICE’s mother asked Johnny if he would not be a happier man, if he were settled in a home of his own, and had a family to love him. He opened his eyes very wide–they were remarkably keen, penetrating grey eyes, almost black–and replied that all women were not what they professed to be; that some of them were deceivers; and a man might not marry the amiable woman that he thought he was getting, after all.
So what led poor Mr. Appleseed to these dire thoughts about women? Apparently the underage girl he hoped to some day get with was more into dudes who weren’t him:
Now we had always heard that Johnny had loved once upon a time, and that his lady love had proven false to him. Then he said one time he saw a poor, friendless little girl, who had no one to care for her, and sent her to school, and meant to bring her up to suit himself, and when she was old enough he intended to marry her. He clothed her and watched over her; but when she was fifteen years old, he called to see her once unexpectedly, and found her sitting beside a young man, with her hand in his, listening to his silly twaddle.
That ungrateful little strumpet!
I peeped over at Johnny while he was telling this, and, young as I was, I saw his eyes grow dark as violets, and the pupils enlarge, and his voice rise up in denunciation, while his nostrils dilated and his thin lips worked with emotion. How angry he grew! He thought the girl was basely ungrateful. After that time she was no protegé of his.
But Appleseed, despite giving up on women in the real world, held out hope for the afterlife – explaining to others that he expected to have two spirit wives all his own after he died. Which I guess is the 19th century equivalent of the MGTOWers today who fantasize about the sexy robot ladies who will eventually, it is hoped, make actual human females – with their troubling “thoughts” and “needs” and “desires” of their own – obsolete.
Mr. Appleseed’s quest to remain alone was probably also helped by the fact that – if the illustration I found on Wikipedia is any indication – he looked a bit like Dale Gribble from King of the Hill. Only much, much sloppier, with long hair. Oh, and instead of wearing a baseball cap, he wore “a tin utensil which answered both as a cap and a mush pot.”
So, yeah, a creepy weirdo who hates women — definitely an MGTOWer all the way.
Oh, except that he actually did something with his life — you know, helping spread apple trees to a big portion of the midwest — instead of spending all his time going on about how all women are whores.
You prolly WOULD HAVE BEEN in the 80s, but your Libertarian knowledge seems … 30 years out of date xD – BUT AMI! DIDN’T YOU SEE ALL HIS NAMES! AND HE MENTIONED THE TOP GOOGLE SITE! AND HE WAS THE FIRST TO MENTION RODERICK LONG! MY HERO THE FEMINIST! EVEN THOUGH HE DIDN’T KNOW HE WAS A FEMINIST! HE SAID HIS NAME FIRST! He not only knows the ladies I mentioned, he MET them and SUPPORTED them and…
Plus his out-and-proud racism (NO! WHITE CIVIL RIIIIIGHTS!) would have landed him in errrrr, dude, can you stand over THERE, please ground even back then.
Given that Meller’s age seems to be increasing faster than Bob McCown’s, he probably knew the first woman too. AND HE DIDN’T KILL HER. How dare you call him a woman hater xD
I’m female, ANDDDDDDD non-white! No wonder Meller is wary around me xD
Meller – Do you really think the vast majority of libertarians would consider you anything but a sad racist crank? The “points” have already been awarded to you in that I’m even talking to you at all.
@Zhinxy Meller IS the vast majority of libertarians xD
Ami – But of course! Let us all struggle harder to have him stamp our libertarianism with approval, everybody!
Indeed she is. I heart her much. Do you like the manga, the anime, or the OVA?
Well, I must confess that so far I’ve only seen the first episode of the OVA.* It was pretty great, but I can’t really give an overall opinion at this point. The anime is the first thing I saw, and I loved it at the time, but it’s nowhere near as good as the manga, I think. The best thing it has going for it the soundtrack and voice actors.
The manga just has a lot more going for it, really. Better story, more compelling characters (and character development), an actual explanation of what the hell’s going on, and so on.
*This set to change soon! DVDs have been requested from Netflix!
(obligatory – Well, of course libertarianism has huge issues with white privelege and institutional racism, and I’m the first to say it. But the point is, Meller still GOES WAY TOO FAR, even for the most douchey “the Bell Curve guys were PERSECUTED, you’re the one being racist by noticing race,” libertarian dood, and he has to know this.)
DRACULA – I LOVE THE OVAS AND HEARTILY ENDORSE THEM
the same voice actors are carried over to them, too, and the music is FABULOUS!
, Meller still GOES WAY TOO FAR, even for the most douchey “the Bell Curve guys were PERSECUTED, you’re the one being racist by noticing race,” libertarian dood that isn’t an open white pride or some of the weirder MRA or Conspiracist groups where Meller likes to hang, I meant to add.
Which brings me back to the question of whether meller does the majority of his polticking in that vein, and I now assume the answer is a definite yes.
The fact that he still likes to pronounce on other people’s libertarianism is just gravy. As much of a fringe lunatic as he is, and how much I’d like to ignore his kind, I haven’t denied his libertarianism, just refused to declare it SUPREME! and LEARNED! –
A kick in the teeth indeed!
“! I don’t want to neglect anybody, but Zhinxi, I just don’t have the time (or probably the room) to mention everyone, When I mention one, I necessarily neglect others, and naturally, i will refer most to those people and organizatoins with whom I am most familiar.”
Okee dokee, so when you said THIS –
“Why the INCREDIBLE scarcity of women? The only ones who would make this list are Wendy McElroy (whom you mentioned) Rose Wilder Lane, Ayn Rand, (maybe Emma Goldman), Suzanne LaFollette, Voltarine DeClayre, Isabel Patterson, Sharon Presley, Joan Kennedy Taylor and Zora Neale Thurston. Pretty slim pickings for a century or so, isn’t it? Maybe women are inborn collectivists and statists?”
You meant to add, “of course I can’t list everybody! Lots of great ladies in our movement! So many wonderful women!” Of course you did.
Just remember, he’s not retreating, he’s advancing backwards!d
And he’s doing it so politely! Can’t I give him points? More than “even talking to a racist, misogynistic crank who posts on stormfront and who questions my libertarian purity and talks down to me” points?
P.S. – I see manboobz as “place to chill out and discuss some things while laughing at misogyny on the internet” not “joining forces with statist feminists in intense, blood-bound political union?” So I guess that’s a large part of why i’ve “found myself in their company” at least as regards this site? Cause dude. Seriously. How important do you think this place is, and what’s at stake in the comments here?
Zhinxi, you are the first person, on ANY blog or website (or snail-mail, for that matter) whom I have encountered who has ever questioned, still less attacked, my libertarian sympathies, politics. or advocacy on any issue, feminist or otherwise. I was certainly not pronouncing on your libertarianism, or theirs. I simply hoped that you could get some interest going with other feminists in this area, that is all. I really apologise if I did anything to give the impression that I was “judging you” or “talking down” to you. As far as race, nationality, and the differences in social behavior that such inborn differences produce, I would prefer to see it as a matter of honest disagreement regarding applications of liberty, and let it go at that! I am not calling you a “crank”, a “communist”, or any number of names that suggest themselves for radical egalitarians in the nature/nurture controversy!
I was not unique in my observation regarding the scarcity of women libertarians. Your friend Joan K. Taylor asked that same question decades ago, in the essay that YOU cited for me to read! For what it is worth, i still stand by my assessment that women–as a sex–are collectivists and statists.
Carol Moore attempted, about twenty years ago, to start the ball rolling, with her attempts to link patriarchy with statism, but nobody significant (in ALF or elsewhere) ever really followed it up! No feminists, or libertarians, tried to extend the arguments she made, even to discuss war and militarism, which were certainly timely issues then, as now!
I couldn’t help but notice the rejection letter from the country’s premier feminist tabloid to CM’s effort! I suppose that was my fault too!
Ami Angelwings, to put this as gently as I can, when you ask what I think of you, the answer is, I don’t!! You are a cute girl who gets her amusement hanging out on a blog with lots of ugly, noisy, bad-tempered, and all-too-revolting feminists, and by bouncing, giggling, and chirping girlytalk (along with a sexy picture beside your internet moniker) in sounding like a feminist while adopting a cute and fluffy internet persona. A waste of time, on your part, sweetie! You would look and sound feminine compared to the feminists on manboobz even if you stood in front of an overflowing garbage can in the middle of summer. Feel better now? Find a good man, get married, make him happy, and grow lots of children!
Zhinxi, your friend Roderick Long seems to have made some efforts in the direction attempted by Carol Moore, seeking links between patriarchy and statism, but as far as i know no feminists have taken his ball and run with it. You might be interested in knowing that there could be something to what they say, in my opinion, depending upon whether or not patriarchy (or statism) rests upon inborn responses of humans to the outside world, or is–as feminists posit–a form of acculturation or conditioning.(does this mean that I am giving them more of a hearing than your feminist friends?) As far as his being pro-feminist goes, I knew about it long before I learned about manboobz. but I didn’t think that it would be helpful to mention it to you (or anyone here) so I discussed his interest in stateless societies instead (where I largely agree with him) instead of his feminism (where I largely don’t).
Also, not my fault!
My Libertarian knowledge “years out of date”? Let’s have a look-see, shall we:
We are on the verge of a worldwide crisis (probably in Europe, but it could start anywhere) which will almost certainly dwarf 2008, in both scope and severity, the US government is far more indebted with debt that is unserviceable, uncollectable, and can never be repaid–even if Europe, Japan and China were all perfectly sound economically, and Lord knows, they are NOT!!–every day, I wonder if the bank’s will still be open tomorrow morning, and I have seven billion other people for company, Day by day,I am waiting for our Maniac-in-Chief (with his Masters in Tel Aviv) to order a tactical nuclear strike on Iran with dreadful ramifications (try another OPEC oil embargo, especially when the dollar becomes valueless, for years this time) for starters; along with sundry terrorist massacres of American citizens in countries from Indonesia to Turkey, and from France to Egypt (lots of VERY angry Muslims in all of those places, and regardless of your new age”smile, hold hands, and sing ‘We shall Overcome’ together” approach, that most Americans are white won’t help matters one bit! I don’t know who a large number of nonwhites in the (former) USA will side with, but take a good guess, will you? Our good neighbor to the South, thanx in large part to the USA sponsored and organized “war-on-drugs” is falling apart at the seams! There are millions of people on the border, and quite a few of us, mostly retirees, in Mexico itself, about to be put to the tender mercies of gangs who make Al-Qaida look like girl scouts by comparison! The only people who demand drug legalization, which would effectively defund, and eventually disarm, these gangs (and their CIA sponsors and profiteers) are (my) libertarians–and some paleoconservatives like Fred Reed! You–and your sister feminists–may think that race doesn’t matter, but it does and it will! Sounds pretty up to date to me.
Had enough? oh, but Zhinxi sweetums, I haven’t even gotten started yet! Have you visited any government offices lately, from your State’s DMV to your Board of Education, from your branch of the Post office to a land-use or zoning board, municipal court, or welfare office? Nobody but women and, occasionally, nonwhite men! That is the what passes for the “middle class” of our American economy nowadays, along with the sundry lawyers, “teachers”, “therapists”, and their ancillary “health”, education (publik skoolz), and welfare service providers. They are all government paid, all government hired and promoted, and they produce nothing, sell nothing, and consume everything!
Millions and millions of these people are going to discover their true worth to the productive process soon enough, all of the affirmative action and quotas notwithstanding, when they are–pick one–not paid at all since the government ran out of money and “laid off”, or (more likely) are paid millions of $$$$ in Bernanke-scrip that won’t buy anything (after the rioting and looting, there won’t be much to buy anyhow) but it is
(shhhhhh!) “racist” to mention this isn’t it? Oh, but keep smiling, after all, my libertarian knowledge is not up to date!
Of course the idiots and criminals who knowingly worked so hard to bring about this bloody mess for the rest of us won’t cope with their consequences by stepping down, acknowledging that they don’t know what to do, and allowing people with better judgement to prevail. Not on your life! To a jerk, GOP and Dumbercrat alike, they will call for greater power for themselves, ensconced in the sewer on the Patomac, and probably inflict Marshall law on us, and put FEMA in charge; the Feds have spent billions since 9/11/2001 on concentration camps for so-called domestic terrorists, and that is one expenditure they will NOT let go to waste! I don’t know about you, but my knowledge of libertarian feminism is the last thing on my mind, facing that prospect!
Oh, but MY libertarianism is SO ’80s; heck, make that 1880s, out of date, so what do I know?
I have barely scraped the surface of what can go wrong, such as what happens if the bankruptcy occurs all of a sudden, troops ARE unilaterally withdrawn from overseas, and a lot–read MILLIONS– of very angry, very bitter, very well armed veterans find a ruined country with no jobs, no medical care, and no veterans’ benefits waiting for them? I don’t know either, but I would start thinking about it, if I were you. Still, keep smiling!
There were (and are) a LOT of names, some libertarian, some less so, who shared a formative role in my understanding of politics, economics, sociology, etc. I would mention them, and discuss their works, but I don’t want to be seen as just ‘name dropping’. Suffice it to say, they may not be yours, but they were (and in many cases, are, helpful all the same.
I didn’t mention this before, but I figure, what the heck, I obviously have nothing to lose with you (or Ami Angelwings) at this point! How do I know that what you did with libertarian females isn’t exactly what other manboobzers did with women in the sciences a few months ago? They were trying to prove the existence of female genius, and started talking about Ada Lovelace, Gracie Hopper, et al, by scrolling through a google list of computer sciences,
That list that covered a century of time showed a measly few 60-70 names of women top scientists on it, if that many. Women achievers would be outnumbered 100: by men!
Even if a complete list of woman libertarians (both anarchist and minarchist) were written from the time of say, the American Revolution onward, I bet that it would be outnumbered by males 20:1 or more. Women ARE probably collectivist and statist! Have fun trying to inform mainstream feminists about stateless societies. You would probably go further, Zhinxi, discussing French impressionist XIX century art with an audience of people who were blind from birth! Howeve, the fact that you could not communicate with me when I was predisposed to like you–and your politics, feminism notwithstanding–certainly bodes poorly when you consider the posts your average manboobzers, and (wo)manboobzers, express their disagreement with each other. Have fun!
Far from seeking to give a libertarian “stamp of approval”, I said repeatedly that I welcomed your efforts to approach others where MY approach would be inadaquate or couterproductive. Save sniping at least for my antifeminist posts, where your angry disagreement is justified, rather than my libertarian ones, where it is not.
I’ll … um… respond later, but I will note that since you called me “Sweetums… Your name is now “Winky Sugarbottoms Meller.,
As in, Meller – what do you think of THAT, Winky Sugarbottoms.
Zhinxi, you are the first person, on ANY blog or website (or snail-mail, for that matter) whom I have encountered who has ever questioned, still less attacked, my libertarian sympathies, politics. or advocacy on any issue, feminist or otherwise.
Seriously now? Huh,. That’s fascinating, Winky Sugarbottoms. If I offered to host a discussion of feminist, libertarian, and civil rights issues, just you and me, on my blog, and then asked other libertarians I know what they thought of your positions, and mine, would you agree to it? It’s not a trap.
Also, do not ever call me sweety, sweetums, or any other presumptious diminutive again, and you can stop being Winky Sugarbottoms, Winky Sugarbottoms, sir.
We would not have to worry about moderation issues, and you could respond right away. Again, real offer, what do you think? We’ll make our points, have our discussion, and ask libertarians, left right and center, what they think.
Winky Sugarbottoms is a liar, because people here have challenged the libertarian nature of his before.
Conveniently (as with his fantasies of killing women who don’t agree with him, or reveling in their painful death, or the problem of things which are fluffy, and scratchy) he has blocked it out.
I’ll see how this goes, and I will take a look at your blog, read, or reread, some of your libertarian/feminist material, and get back on that! It sounds attractive, but it requires a LOT more thought, and knowing you (or at least knowing your internet persona) a lot better!
Not a trap? Why then are you doing this? Who will the libertarians be? Will they be real libertarians i.e. people who are genuinely opposed to coercive intervention in all forms, and desire a better, non-coercive way of doing things, or egalitarians (like most feminists are), who support freedom for themselves–and not for others? Feminists and civil rightsers? How would they differ from what we see here on manboobz?
I even have to ask this question, when it is obvious to me that you think that I am no libertarian at all, why would you want me on your blog as a spokesman for something that you (however mistakenly) believe that I know nothing about, and get my information from a google list off the internet?
Not a trap? Get back to me on this in a couple of weeks,will you?
This sounds interesting, but I really would appreciate knowing more about what you have in mind, especially since the only purpose of your correspondence with me in some two weeks or so has been just to make me look bad and provide a target for you–and other non-libetarian feminists to attack! I wouldn’t–and don’t–care, where feminists are concerned, but other libertarians, that’s a different story altogether!
Of course the possibility exists that you have been simply caught up in the prevailing manboobz atmosphere and attacking (with the rest of the collective hive) the nearest “sexist” in sight.
This should not be important, and I wouldn’t mention it at all, except I wonder, would I query about two of the names on your list of whom I was ignorant of their libertarian work (Kevin Carson and Radley Balko) if I was trying to impress you (and other manboobzers) by name dropping? I make an effort to know about libertarians, anarchists, white advocates, paleo-conservatives, and Constitutionalists, and various alternative energy and alternative medicine websites and blogs, but I can’t be everywhere at once, and given my feeling and attitudes about feminism, your libertarian feminism is not going to be on top of my list. I already mentioned that on previous posts.
At least I COULD run a list of libertarian feminists ex tempore, and give a general idea of what they said, and why they said it, even if I am not–and never claimed to be–an expert on the topic of women, feminism, and liberty. How many mainstream feminists here do you suppose could or would even do that?
PS-sorry about the ‘sweetums’. DKM
Pecunium, what you know about libertarianism, any kind of private property society, free market law, real economics (NOT the Keynesian pishposh you–and too many other manboobzers–clutter up these pages with) non-interventionist foreign policy, re-legalizing “drugs” and getting government out of medicine, and for all anybody knows, even feminist libertarianism, could fit comfortably on a postage stamp, with lots of room to spare, whether I am a “liar” or not.
I have replied too many times why your nonsense about “slavery” for women, violence toward women, and still worse, mass killing of women, no longer applies, if it really ever did!
I wouldn’t even be surprised if most of the feminists on manboobz were getting a little tired of you dragging the same old stuff forward for no reason except to see yourself in print!
Go back to sleep!
Kee-rist on the Concorde, Mr. Sugarbottoms, your sexism is absurd at this point, but your racism is truly vile.
For a person who claims not to think about me you apparently think about me a lot XD
Also you avoided answering the question,… again xD
Find a good man, get married, make him happy, and grow lots of children!
Grow them? o_O From where? o_O
What’s a good man? o: What are the qualities of a good man I should look for? XD
As far as his being pro-feminist goes, I knew about it long before I learned about manboobz. but I didn’t think that it would be helpful to mention it to you
Except you didn’t xD I guess this is the same as Ron Marz “knowing” all along that Hal Jordan wasn’t evil but just possessed by Parallax xD Nice save Meller xD
I’m amused that Meller is confounded by Zhinxy being a) a libertarian and b) more knowledgeable about it and confounded by me being attractive to him and femmey xD It’s much easier for him to hit ppl he can better disassociate his feelings from xD
I want to know moar now btw xD I’ve never been psychoanalyzed by an MRA before :3 So I’m here b/c… I have fun here and all the angry feminists make me feel better? o_O
I thought I was an angry feminist? Now I’m.. not
am I just confused? Do I actually believe in feminism Meller? o:
And why are me and Zhinxy best friends? o:
Meller: What you know about me is postage stamp material. What I know about things you can’t know.
That, sugarbottom, is the core of your problem; you pretend you know all. You don’t. You don’t know where I’ve been, what I’ve done, what I’ve read, who I know.
As to the issue of your hatreds… have you retracted them? No. When pressed you say, “if this goes on… the result is inevitable.”
So you do believe it. You’ve said so, you say you didn’t mean it, but, when the cards are turned over, you are still betting on it.
You keep failing to appreciate that I’ve read the libertarians (and the utilitarians, and the pragmatists, and the moral absolutists [who vary only in what they assume to be moral]). I’ve read them and come to different conclusions.
I am a social libertarian (swing your fist all you like, don’t hit anyone), and a moderately socialist when it comes to fiscal policy.
I’ve been where there is no state, no rule but the gun, the gang and the threat of them. He who has the most, gets what he wants. When all is said and done, that’s what “pure” libertarianism devolves to. If I am my own sovereign, as is everyone else, I can’t enforce any deal I might enter into.
But you, you can’t even be consistent in that. You aren’t a social libertarian. You are a gender-supremacist authoritarian, and a racial separatist.
So, at best, you are a l’aissez faire libertarian, and that doesn’t work. We did that in the past (we used GOLD), and it failed. It led to boom and bust business cycles, and trusts, and cartels, and the company store and the wage slave.
That, when all is said and done, is what you want to see return. You don’t think so, but that’s because you don’t analyze. You dream of the day you pay no taxes, failing to see that you will get no service, and the business (in their search for profit) will provide neither roads, nor fire, nor police. They didn’t before, and they won’t now.
They won’t pay a decent wage, because they won’t have to. Try to get one, and the reincarnation of Pinkerton will bust your skull, and there won’t be anyone to help you.
But cackle in your wizened glee. Tell yourself I am just ignorant and deluded. Convince yourself I’ve not come to my positions from experience and study.
Amuse yourself, with your vain dreams of the Libertarian Paradise of Fluffy Women. I’ll be over here, enjoying the real world.
My knowledge of libertarianism is literally postage stamp-sized (“more federal laws are generally bad”, printed in size 12) but even I am a little dubious that Meller is the bestest most consistent libertarian evah, if only because he seems to get off on imagining extravagantly complex and highly-regulated ways of legally controlling women in their social and romantic lives, in their reproductive choices, in their access to employment, in their education levels, and even in the exercise of their right to free speech. Unless DKM has a magic mind-control wand lying around I don’t know about, that kind of complicated legal hierarchy is gonna need some laws, right?
Not a trap? Why then are you doing this? Who will the libertarians be? Will they be real libertarians i.e. people who are genuinely opposed to coercive intervention in all forms, and desire a better, non-coercive way of doing things, or egalitarians (like most feminists are), who support freedom for themselves–and not for others? Feminists and civil rightsers? How would they differ from what we see here on manboobz?
– This was my plan – I don’t really have a blog at the moment with anything political on it besides links among the doctor who pictures and a few commentary pieces. Which you can see by clicking my name and going to my tumblr. I used to have a somewhat popular comics blog, where I occasionally touched on feminism or libertarianism, but that was mostly a joke place. Most of my activism has been face to face, with libertarians, conservatives, anarchists, etc. Or conducted via email. So all we know of each other is what we know of each other here, and we bring to this what we have.
I do think you’re a real libertarian. I just also think you represent the “lunatic fringe” of our movement. And I think that most libertarians would agree.
(You can change the order of who goes first any time)
We will chat on the following topics – What you think the role of women is in society. What you think about racial issues in our society. What you think the proper libertarian response to the issues of women in society is. What you think the proper libertarian response to racial issues in society is.
What you think about immigration. What you think the proper libertarian response to immigration is.
You don’t have to be an expert on any of those things. Neither do I. Anything I have said, or you have said, anywhere on the internet, at any time, and I’m sure you’ll find some doozies for me, too, can be brought in to this. We just talk.
Only you and I will be allowed to comment on the main posts. There will be seperate threads to comment for others – One for anybody, one only for people who identify as libertarians.
At the end, I will ask whether you are, indeed, somebody who represents our movement.
You can ask the same about me.
Again, the libertarians will weigh in.
I’m very busy this month, and probably the next, so you do have quite some time to think it over. But do.
. We can post the discussions and ask people to weigh in on libertarian websites. We can contact any libertarians we want and ask them what they think.
At stake is whether or not your opinions on women, race, immigration, and your libertarianism is indeed something we see no need to criticise as a broad section of libertarianism, as many as will agree to come and watch us talk.
I and my opinions are just as much up for criticism.