Categories
evil women life before feminism MGTOW misogyny pedophiles oh sorry ephebophiles sexy robot ladies

Johnny Appleseed: A Man Going His Own Way?

How do you like them apples?

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.

1K Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Fatman
Fatman
13 years ago

David K. Meller, you said, “Things can only get worse with feminists and modern women in the coming centuries, and even the most reluctant men will have to undertake action–to preserve their sanity, not to mention sexual relief–to develop something better.”

Then you said, “Of course feminists could make a “husbandbot”, but why should they? They already have a large number of suitably trained, well “programmed”, egalitarian renegade-males, who faithfully parrot the feminist lines as well as any feminist itself!”

These two statements see to be at odds, why would things be worse for feminists if those individuals that prefer the company robots to the company of feminist women were to remove themselves from the human dating pool? Feminists tend to want to be in relationships with feminists, of which you have stated there are already many. You are not a feminist, so why would you, and non feminists like you, choosing to be in relationships with robots cause things to get worse for feminists?

This is the part of the hypothetical that I do not understand.

KathleenB
KathleenB
13 years ago

Fatman: If you’re gonna wait for Meller to catch the clue bus, you might want to bring a book. And some camping gear.

Wetherby
Wetherby
13 years ago

I recommend War and Peace.

Molly Ren
13 years ago

“Hie thee to the boudoir and make thyself fluffy, David…”

XD

*hands Shaenon an Internet*

KathleenB
KathleenB
13 years ago

Or an omnibus of the Middle Earth books. Maybe the uncut version of The Stand?

CassandraSays
CassandraSays
13 years ago

I vote for The Stand. Not enough paranoia in War and Peace.

Or maybe an unabridged edition of Brothers Karamazov, since Slavey enjoys thinking about both men and women being miserable.

Spearhafoc
13 years ago

Careful, Shaenon, or NWOslave will be forced to regender your misandrist rant.

Fatman
Fatman
13 years ago

KathleenB, I just figure I can try and help him to develop a less misery inducing outlook on life, by pointing him toward the realization that his happiness need not be tied to the misery of others. I have no illusions about the likelihood of success, but it does not take much effort to try.

I think it is helpful to remember that on a macro level these MRAs are not our enemies, but our wounded comrades. They have be lied to, tricked into viewing human interaction as adversarial. They view women as a hostile species, and this view hurts not only the women with whom they interact, but it leaves them hurt as well. So I try to help them to cast off the harmful assumptions that they cling to, with the goal of improving life for all of us.

Now, I recognize the value of mocking them, and I appreciate the impulse to lash out at them. Both of those responses are necessary. I just think that dispassionately engaging their arguments might help as well. Since you all are much better at the first two than I am, I stick to the third option.

Wetherby, CassandraSays and,KathleenB, I think Tolstoy would not put me in the right frame of mind for a discussion with David K. Meller. I think I would go for some Gogol, ‘The Overcoat’ or ‘The Diary of a Madman’ come to mind.

Fatman
Fatman
13 years ago

I know that there are grammar sticklers here, I apologize to them for the misplaced comma in my preceding post. It should read, “Wetherby, CassandraSays, and KathleenB…”

heroicman
heroicman
13 years ago

David commented “On several occasions dudes on one of the MGTOW forums have talked semi-semi-seriously about getting together and buying some land and starting their own little MGTOW commune-thing.

I think they should do it, but on a little island, and only if it’s part of a VH1 reality show:

All Women Are Whores Island

No actually David, MGTOW is a whole variety. Some MGTOW are gender separatists as you wrote. These men just are calling for some type of gender separatist MGTOW is about men”doing their own thing” not conforming to societal norms.

MGTOW can include men who are married, have girlfriends, are gay, bisexual, transgendered. MGTOW is a concept. MGTOW is a way of life. MGTOW is deep.
It is not just men believing that the genders shoud be separated for the good of society.
MGTOW included men who are married, in relationships but have deviated from societal norms in that regards. For example. an MGTOW relationship would be the wife as breadwinner, husband as homemaker.

MGTOW is a way of life. It is in direct opposition to the PUA movement. The MGTOW male often views the PUA as a sycohant wasting his money on seminars. The MGTOW male has a radical mindset of living his life as a man and not needing women’s approval in any area.
An MGTOW man is truly and independent, isolated male who chodses to live a life devoid of traditional gender roles as a man relates to w woman. An MGTOW man is one who is on his own which can include having a female significant other or not. Often it is the latter.

Syzygy
Syzygy
13 years ago

Meller, “Men ARE, as a rule, more intelligent than women, and it bothers some of us to be called “stupid” by members of the fair sex!”

Would it be o.k. if I called you stupid if you had an IQ of 80 and I 130? Or do masculists possess a hive mind (which means that even the most stupid of them is equipped with the IQ of the most intelligent)?

Myoo
Myoo
13 years ago

@Fatman
That belief in basic human goodness is such a burden sometimes, isn’t it? “No, you’re wrong, how can you be so WRONG… huff, huff, huff… no, calm down, I bet there’s a decent human being somewhere in there who just lost his way. If I could just calmly point his flaws and… no, dammit, now he’s being a racist,”
I feel your pain.

Ray Percival
13 years ago

Oh sweet semen sucking savior. Why does Brandon have to be in IT? I hate it when there are IT nutjobs on the internets…

NWOslave
NWOslave
13 years ago

@Rutee Katreya
“Columbus was fine enslaving Indians”

Citation needed. And preferably one with validity. Somewheres around the late 1400s, early 1500s verifying his enslaving should do. Unlike feminist revision I find actual accounts to be a tish more relaible. And since you’re on about slavers, let’s go to the source, Isabella, who sat at the table with Ferdinand and the pope as they divided up the new world. Now she was a piece of work, she would’ve sent every European man to a watery grave if it meant more exotic jewels, perfumes and silks with which she could adorn herself. Of that we have documentation.
——————
@Holly Pervocracy
“In the 19th century, “I have no time for the wicked ways of women” was a lot more socially acceptable than “women just don’t seem to do it for me.”

This doesn’t excuse the misogyny (there were lots of “confirmed bachelors” who didn’t go on about lying bitches), but it does put it in a slightly different context.”

Yet we’re supposed to excuse the misandric lashing feminists dole out to “white men” on the feminist altar. Ever casually toss out the phrase “white men” when referring to something you consider bad or wrong? Well yes you have. Kinda makes you a vile racist/sexist, doesn’t it?
———————
@Improbable Joe
“Now, to drag this back to the whole Man Going His Own Way business… I wonder if these guys can cook and clean and iron and the whole nine yards of “women’s work” stuff, since they are so very independent. Or do they dress in sweatpants and eat Spaghetti-Os and live in filth.”

Yea, ya never see women walking about in sweats, and every women is clean, tidy and cooks 7 course meals every night. Don’t feminists consider cleaning and cooking beneath them? Why that’s slavery! Why should a woman do anything for a man?
———————-
@Spearhafoc
“Careful, Shaenon, or NWOslave will be forced to regender your misandrist rant.”

Don’t have to. When a womans foul tongue wags incessantly with vile hatred there’s always an excuse. Besides, manboobz bread and butter is hatred, so it’s expected.
———————–
Anyhoo, back to the johny appleseed article. It seems old johny saved a young girl from poverty/possible early death and was rewarded with betrayal. Shocking I tellz ya! Women are so very moral in the modern world, you can tell by this.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2056869/Family-law-Fathers-grandparents-denied-right-children-divorce.html

Ahh fatherhood, it’s practcally a crime to be a father in a wowans world. It seems in the UK, father is now synonymous with ATM. The best part is, after any man being completely denied even the slightest contact with his child, women can say men aren’t living up to their duties as a parent. Ain’t that sweet! Deny a man fatherhood then call him a bad parent! As always, the vilest, most misandric laws always seem to proliferate like a feminist plague in the modern world. Why it almost sounds like State endorsed slavery.

Maybe Johny was on to something after all. If ya raise a woman to be loyal and loving you won’t have to live in hell, as a modern day womans wage slave.

Keep up the fine hatred. I can tell things are gonna be juuuuuuust fine.

hellkell
hellkell
13 years ago

NWO, I like to cook, and I’m a feminist. Is your tiny mind blown?

PosterformerlyknownasElizabeth
PosterformerlyknownasElizabeth
13 years ago

So your belief is that if a little kid is raised by someone, they are obligated to have sex with that person when they grow up?

Or is it just unrelated people? Yuck.

Comrade Svilova
Comrade Svilova
13 years ago

NWO, I like to cook, and I’m a feminist. Is your tiny mind blown?

I’m a feminist and I love to cook meals for my partner.

She makes amazing gf pancakes though, so she handles breakfast and I take dinner.

Ah, the magic of equal partnerships!!

hellkell
hellkell
13 years ago

Of course he does. This is a guy who wants a slave, so why not raise one up?

CassandraSays
CassandraSays
13 years ago

New entry for the Book of Larnin.

If you bring up a child, they are morally required to have sex with you. This used to be in the Constitution until feminists passed Title IX, which removed it. Now fathers/stepfathers are not allowed to demand sex from their children, which is proof of misandry.

KathleenB
KathleenB
13 years ago

NWO: Isabella was a woman who captured power (real, temporal power) by playing the political game better than the men around her. Her marriage contract with Ferdinand designated her the sole queen of Castile – they reigned pretty much as co-equals. In Castile, she reformed government, reduced crime, and brought the budget under control. She a hell of a lady. And yes, she did wear perfume and jewels. So did men! In fact, men often wore garments that looked an awful lot like dresses! The horror! And tights! And lace and gaudy-ass trim and furs and jewels!

KathleenB
KathleenB
13 years ago

That should read that Isabella and Ferdinand reigned Spain as co-equals. I has a smart.

Flib
Flib
13 years ago

Tinker, T., & Freeland, M. (2008). Thief, Slave Trader, Murderer: Christopher Columbus and Caribbean Population Decline. Wicazo Sa Review, 23(1), 25-50.

What is that Slavey? Still failing basic measures of history? This comes as no surprise, considering your utter failures in math too. Sorry, where is your citation? Other then the false information you continually pull from your ass.

I find it hilarious because you never manage to back up anything you say with fact. So, you don’t get to play the citation needed game. You never engaged with honesty to begin with.

NWOslave
NWOslave
13 years ago

@KathleenB

Woman who reigns over a monarchy that enslaved American Indians = good reformist, and apparently good at everything else as well. A real humanitarian!
Man who does the same equals oppressor and slaver. Gotcha.

Funny, no matter the situation, that always seems to be the case.

Keep on hatin!

ithiliana
13 years ago

NWO: Columbus wrote in his log that the Arawaks would make fine servants, and that he and fifty men could subjugate them and make them do whatever the Europeans wanted:

http://www.historyisaweapon.com/defcon1/zinncol1.html

Trying to put together an army of resistance, the Arawaks faced Spaniards who had armor, muskets, swords, horses. When the Spaniards took prisoners they hanged them or burned them to death. Among the Arawaks, mass suicides began, with cassava poison. Infants were killed to save them from the Spaniards. In two years, through murder, mutilation, or suicide, half of the 250,000 Indians on Haiti were dead.

When it became clear that there was no gold left, the Indians were taken as slave labor on huge estates, known later as encomiendas. They were worked at a ferocious pace, and died by the thousands. By the year 1515, there were perhaps fifty thousand Indians left. By 1550, there were five hundred. A report of the year 1650 shows none of the original Arawaks or their descendants left on the island.

They wanted gold and slaves, and it wasn’t just Isabella though she was there.

None of the feminists I know claim that every woman is perfect (or every feminist). We’re a mixed bunch, just like men.

Sharculese
13 years ago

History

To gauge the veracity of a text, subtract the year the events it described happened by the year it was published. no other factors are relevant. when in doubt, an early 20th century encyclopedia britannica is always acceptable.