Well, here’s a new twist. We all know, from reading the endless tirades on the subject scattered all over the manosphere, that women are evil, selfish and ungrateful creatures whose primary goal in life is to leech off of men and make them miserable.
In a recent post titled Playing Career Woman, manosphere blogger Dalrock takes on some of the most evil and selfish ladies of the whole lot of them: upper middle class ladies who insist on going to college and getting jobs, then later leave the workforce to raise their children.
You might think that these ladies would deserve some props from traditional-minded manosphere dudes for supporting themselves instead of leeching off of men during their twenties, then settling into a more traditional housewifely role once they have children.
Oh, but you don’t realize just how evil and disruptive and oppressive their phony careers are to the men of the world. After all, these aren’t women who need to work to support themselves. No, according to Dalrock, these are “women who use their education and career as a way to check off the box to prove their feminist credentials before settling down into an entirely traditional role.”
According to Escoffier, a commenter on Dalrock’s site whom he quotes with approval, in the good old pre-feminist days:
Women who pursued careers (apart from traditional female roles such as teaching … ) were considered at best sort of harmlessly odd … but we know that family life is superior and more important.
Then came feminism:
Now it’s “You MUST do this for own sake, not to do it is to not realize your potential.” …
The way the [upper middle class] has “solved” this problem is to send girls to college, let them launch their careers–whether in soggy girly stuff like PR or crunchy stuff like business and law–and then they marry late (~30), have kids a few years later and drop out of working at least until the kids are grown.
This answers a couple of needs, not least the need for two incomes to accumulate assets so that the couple can eventually buy into a UMC school district.
Oh, but these women aren’t really earning money because they need it to, you know, pay bills and shit:
[T]he real importance of this solution is to her psyche. Getting the education and career are a way of telegraphing “I am a complete person, not some drone like June Cleaver. I am just as smart and capable as any man. In my altruistic concern for my children, I choose not to use my talent in the marketplace but to devote myself to them.” In other words, she needs that education and early career to mark her as better than a mere housewife, even though she will eventually choose to become a housewife.
According to Dalrock, such women are far more evil than the feminist women who get jobs and stick with them. (Emphasis added.)
Men and women who work hard to support themselves understand that they are in it for the duration. There is a determined realism to them. … These aren’t the women we are talking about. The women Escoffier described see having a career as a badge of status to be collected on their way to their ultimate goal of stay at home housewife. They aren’t really career women, they are playing career woman much the way that Marie Antoinette played peasant and Zoolander’s character played coal miner.
In the comments, someone calling himself Carnivore explains just how unfair this all is to the poor innocent working men of the world:
When men get a degree or go through a vocational program and then land a job, they’ve normally got 40+ years to contribute to increasing the wealth of society. Women “playing” career damage society:
1. They displace men for positions in college or vocational school.
2. Upon landing a job, they displace other men for the job position.
3. The increase in the labor pool drives down wages (supply & demand).
4. While in the labor pool, women are less effective and less productive than men.
5. Because they are in the labor pool and cannot compete with men, women support labor laws to enforce “equality” which burden businesses and can cause men to get fired due to some infringement or just to meet quotas.
6. When they leave the labor pool after becoming bored, there is now a hole than can be difficult to fill because the men who would normally fill it have been displaced for all the reasons above.
Carnivore places part of the blame on the feminism-infected parents who taught these women the wrong things:
Women do NOT know what they want. They have to be guided. Most parents have so bought into feminism that they don’t see any other way. It’s a riot – or sad – talking to parents when they go into all the detail about choosing a college, going on campus visits, making sure she gets into the best school, etc., etc. You would think these parents would spend their time and energy on prepping their daughters for the most important life decision – choosing a man for marriage, how to make a husband happy and how to raise healthy children.
The commenter called Ray takes it one step further:
i was in the workplaces during feminism 1.0, and it had nothing to do with fairness, equity, egalitarianism, or any other positive attribute
in fact, it was a slaughter, resulting in the vast disenfranchisement and destruction of millions of american men — there were dozens of ways men could be hassled, RIFd, and forced from employment, and they were (all to chants of Equality and Empowerment)
this resulted in the massive unemployment of the very men needed to create, invent, and revitalize the culture. and to be fathers to sons . …
no female should be employed, or educated, if it means a qualified male must be excluded
Women, stop leeching off men by paying your own way!
NOTE: This post contains SARCASM.
Also, Brandon is transforming Ashley into an unmarriageable slut, but that’s OK as long as Brandon’s getting some.
Who can tell the difference between NWO/DKM/Brandon in this sentence: A polite and respectful woman…always at the top of the marriage/dating list!
Nope, me neither.
Brandon: I care about my partner’s sluttiness.
This sluttiness you won’t define. It’s sort of like NWO and clothes. You have this deal-breaker, but you won’t define it.
Brandon: @random: And what makes good parents? One parent treating the other one like shit? That must be really good for the child’s psyche. And in my opinion the child’s psyche is far more important than a Trapper Keeper and a few pens.
What I see is that you want to treat the mother like shit. You think that’s better than her not using the formula you like to express the situation.
That’s controlling, and abusive.
Brandon: @hellkell: No I get it. You want me to say “I am a slut and it is wrong to demand that my partner isn’t one”
But I don’t think it is wrong…so I am not going to say it.
So you don’t Believe in equality. Got it.
We also see that you are a hypocrite. You keep telling us that you hold everyone to the same standard. You don’t. You have the “Brandon Standard”, and the “Rest of the world standard”.
Brandon:
Feminism is totally cool with switching the genders, and giving people of all genders choices.
Polliwog:
And a perhap greater number who are neutral on it; the claim that most women are turned off by men who won’t support their lying-on-the-couch-eating-bonbons lifestyle is almost certainly false.
Brandon:
I demand that you refrain from cutting your balls off with a straight razor. I demand it!
Brandon, I NEED you to not PayPal me $50. I demand you don’t do such a thing! I won’t let you PayPal me $50!
$100 is completely unacceptable.
@ Hershele, given that there were nearly 1,000 comments over on the “How do I make my boner go away?” thread, I’m surprised one of our regular trollish posters didn’t suggest a bilateral orchidectomy could be a permanent and satisfactory solution to the MGTOW guy’s woes, instead of the masturbation-and-prostitution strategy – except that feminists are not actually in favour of men mutilating themselves, and the supposition that all feminists want to “emasculate” men (aside perhaps for a selected breeding stock?) is simply unevidenced and wrong.
You guys are mean. In the best possible way.
He implied he’s completely OK with that, here:
Brandon, I thought you were a Libertarian. How would the market work, as a system, if every person in it held the people he or she did business with to standards he or she was unwilling to meet? Forget that, how would the world work if everyone believed the same thing that you do?
VoiP – Brandon has declared allegiance with the tribe of loonies? Huh. Honestly wouldn’t have thought. But not surprised. We do breed the trolliest trolls…
Brandon assumes he would not live with his wife and child?
Brandon:
I know plenty of women who date with and sleep with unemployed men. And vice versa. That’s because in my world, people are attracted to other people as people, not as an incidental by-product of a bulging wallet.
Yes, what with you being such a globally renowned expert in child rearing.
No, mutual support. Which occasionally – sometimes often – involves one person doing something they don’t especially want to do, because it’s necessary to make sure that things run smoothly. Ten minutes ago, I didn’t particularly want to go out to fetch something from the car in the freezing cold wearing only a dressing gown, but it needed doing.
Please cite a single post by Lauralot that confirms that she’s “man hating”. Posts being rude about you don’t count: you need something more generalized.
But to end on an upbeat note, thanks for the laughs. Seriously, your attempt to lecture us about marriage and child-rearing, two immensely complex and nuanced subjects that demand personal experience in order to discuss them without coming across as a deluded fool, is one of the funniest things I’ve read in ages.
My definition of an expert is “someone who knows how much he/she doesn’t know”. But you don’t have the faintest clue how much you don’t know, and the fact that this is so glaringly obvious to everyone else is what makes your posts so irresistibly hilarious.
VOIP: Also, Brandon is transforming Ashley into an unmarriageable slut, but that’s OK as long as Brandon’s getting some.
I know, poor Ashley will never be able to get married after slutting around with Brandon – no decent man wants a non virgin for a wife!
@Jill: There is still hope. Slutiness is more about reputation and appearances than anything real. So, if she is std and child free, if she dresses modestly and pretend she had never or almost never had sex, she could still get a good husband.
Wetherby: Yes, what with you being such a globally renowned expert in child rearing.
You forget, Brandon is an expert in everything. Psychology (he can lead a woman into admitting her feminism, every time.
Law (his father was a lawyer, he grew up hanging out with judges).
Marriage (a worthless institution, with no benefits to men)
Contracts (Anything can be replicated with contracts, and they are as easy as two people agreeing to something; then everyone else adheres to those wishes).
Economics (Gold is the best currency, it will solve the world’s: or at least the US’s, financial woes).
Defense Against False Accusations (one just secretly tapes anything one is worried about being falsely accused of. It’s ok if that’s against the law, it’s better to commit a lot of felonies than the risk of being falsely accused)
And we have here his distilled wisdom on parenting, sexual morés and the virtues of hypocrisy.
a non virginsomeone who shows poor judgement for a wife!Crap.. the last was a response to Jill the Spinster. I don’t know how it moved into the buffer, it was in a separate notepad entry.
Jill the Spinster: I know, poor Ashley will never be able to get married after slutting around with Brandon – no decent man wants
a non virginsomeone who shows poor judgement for a wife!I love how demanding respect from people is twisted by feminists to mean “controlling and abusive”.
And please…can someone tell me how my hypothetical child would “suffer” if I denied him a few pens and paper? Now if I was refusing to take the kid to the hospital…that would be suffering and abuse. A kid losing out on a few pens isn’t.
@Pecunium: I can’t define it because it is subjective to every man. Some men see no problem with a woman that has slept with 100 dudes. Some say she is a whore after 1 guy. I am sort of in the middle, where it is unrealistic to demand virginity in today’s society but If I was comparing two woman, I would most likely go for the one that had fewer partners.
Also, “equality” in the context of dating is retarded. While I am for equality when it comes to the courts and economics. Things like dating are never going to be equal and it is silly to think that they could be.
It seemed like a perfectly valid point to me – you do mention “respect” a lot, without much in the way of acknowledgement that it has to be earned.
I suspect I’m far from alone in not really sensing much affection between you and Ashley – you’re constantly talking about “respect” and “rules”, but I don’t get even the tiniest hint of what she’s like as an individual person or what you both get out of your relationship. Whereas plenty of others here – and I daresay that includes me too – have sketched very vivid keyboard-portraits of their loved ones.
Suppose they refused to tell you, on the entirely reasonable grounds that it’s none of your damn business what they got up to before they met you?
Like I said, Brandon, keep fucking that chicken.
Do you ever admit you’re wrong? Ever?
It’s supremely douchey to say to your kid “Mommy didn’t ask for something you need in precisely the right way, so I am not getting it for you! Because my needs are more important that yours, Brandon Jr.!” Multitudes of posters have pointed out why. But much like the famous “I will video all my sexual encounters to protect myself from false rape accusations” thread, you just will not admit that you said something stupid and assholish.
Gosh, you must be FUN to work with!
@Wetherby: By respect I mean be polite, friendly and respectful until the other person has been impolite, unfriendly, rude or insulting. To point to a cheesy ad movie, this line from Road House sums it up nicely, “I want you to be nice until it’s time to not be nice”.
I basically walk through this world based mostly on that. Family, friends, random strangers get respect from me by default until they are rude or insulting. At which point I become less respectful or I might verbally snap back if they are overly insulting. I am not going to reward bad behavior by doing something for someone while they are showing me no respect or appreciation that I am doing it for them. That is just a recipe for getting walked on your whole life.
I don’t really talk about Ashley that way here because she has asked me not to. She is very private about certain things and she doesn’t want certain information just thrown out on the internet. I respect that choice and I try not to divulge certain personal information about her. I care far more about her than what a handful of commenters think (“Ashley”, “Ashnostic”, etc…). I don’t have to prove that she exists or that she is my girlfriend, because I already know the answer and I don’t really care if virtually anonymous commenters think differently. That is not my problem…but theirs.
Overall though, my relationship doesn’t really have that many “rules” and we are pretty open and free-spirited. We have a few basic expectations of each other (no cheating. respect one another even while disagreeing, etc…). You know, basic civility. Other than that, we just enjoy each others company and try to do things we both like.
So if you talked to your partner wrong and she threw a shitft and refused to do something for your child, (nothing life-threatening!), would you humbly accept that?
(Projected Brandon answer: “I wouldn’t make a mistake!”)
The issue is not “rewarding someone who asked you to do something incorrectly,” Brandon, the issue is “hurting someone else for actions of another.”
If Mom said “you NEED to buy me a birthday cake” you are not hurting anyone else by telling her no since she was in your view rude.
If Mom said “you NEED to buy Billy a birthday cake” and you refuse because she said it in a way you dislike and view as disrespectful (the rest of us just look at it as splitting up the chore list for a kid’s birthday), you are punishing the child for the mother’s action.
Even if it is just something like pens for school, it is still punishing the child for the mother’s actions to ensure her compliance with your demands.
Ashley is very private, but she’s fine with posts like “Ashley was on her knees…what did I miss?” and the one where you read these posts aloud to her and she giggled and asked you to spank her?
Suuuuure she is. Sure.
You think equality in relationships is ridiculous…yet in this exact thread you said that you and your partner are held to the exact same standards.
And by all means, please provide examples of my “man-hating.” Remember: Insulting you doesn’t count.
“I love how demanding respect from people is twisted by feminists to mean “controlling and abusive”. ”
I love how you demand respect, yet don’t tolerate anyone demanding anything of you. Odd.