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.
I don’t know if I believe in Ashley. To be honest it wouldn’t surprise me as there are misogynistic women out there. Women who honest to god believe they are inferior to men and will accept douchey behavior like his with a giggle. Internalized misogyny or low self esteem…whatever it is I have little sympathy for female misogynists as I do male ones. They can believe they are inferior all they want, but don’t expect all women to accept that shit with “tee-hee”
Because seriously I trust a random stranger on the internet’s word about their life more than I trust Brandon’s word about hsi life at this point
Well, yeah. A random stranger has never lied to you. Brandon has.
Maybe Brandon’s dad taught him “it’s your own fault for relying on me when I’m an unreliable father.”
Talking about how Brandon and Ashley’s relationship could work reminded me of this documentary:
http://www.idfa.nl/industry/tags/project.aspx?id=3e11bf88-eeab-4521-b499-cfd389ee5716
called “I, Psychopath” by Ian Walker. I haven’t seen it all because I got upset watching it. The B&A show reminded me about how Sam treats his wife in the doco.
HAHAHAHAHAHA. Of course she did, but her tone sounds a bit disrespectful. Were there spankings?
I’m no longer Ashostic, I’m an Asheist. I do not believe.
Rutee: My weakened acceptance isn’t that she doesn’t want to talk to us (were I in her shoes, I’d probably pass too), but the, “stop talking to all those man-haters”.
It’s telling that the adjective wasn’t related to our being mean to Brandon, or to our being feminist, per se, it’s that we are all “man-haters” when the substance of most of the disagreements with Brandon aren’t (and never have been) issues of man hatred, but rather his cluelessness about marriage, contracts, finance, what feminism should care about, privacy issues, consent, bodily autonomy and his utter lack of respect for other people.
But right now there is a sub-thread about his inability to support one of his insults and suddenly Ashley isn’t all giggles and fucking against the wall after a down on her knees blowjob, nope, this time she is petulant about how he gives attention to “man-haters” instead of her.
So my willingness to believe any of his characterisations of her is pretty much shot. At this point (while I am still willing to accept that he has a girlfriend) nothing about her has any credence, because he has shown that, even in the one relationship he claims to have which should show some level of empathy, and respect for another human being, he is completely willing to treat that person as nothing more than prop to make Brandon look good.
He is, in this, as in everything else he has done here, a hypocrite, and something of a liar.
I became an Asheist from the moment Brandon told us that she was a very private person and that he didn’t like talking about her.
Aside from the spankings and being taken roughly up against a wall, of course.
Maybe Ashley has no curiosity at all, but if I knew that my wife regularly engaged in online arguments with the same group of people (which Ashley now indisputably does), I’d find it hard to resist taking a peek.
And were I to do so in Ashley’s position, not only would I see my beloved’s ass handed to him on a top-class dinner service complete with three-star Michelin garnishes every single day, but I’d also discover that he’s been talking about our sex life, and indeed characterizing me as some kind of submissive airhead.
And if that isn’t a fair description – and given that Brandon seems incapable of fair description, this seems not just plausible but likely – I’d be a bit miffed. To say the least.
@Brandon: can you actually list specific positions that were proposed by first and second wave feminism that you agree with? And can you list actual specific positions supported by third wave feminism? And, as I asked before, what do you think of fourth wave feminism?
Or is it just that the first/second wave feminists are totally in the case of first dead, and in the case of mostly second wave feminists too old for you to date (I’m talking about people living THEN, not the people born later who may espouse these ideas) ,and in the case of third wave, it being more made up of women of your generation that irks you?
That is, is it really about the ideas, or ALLABOUTBRANDON?
Ithiliana, do you really need to ask? You know it’s ALLABOUTBRANDON.
I’m positive that what he knows about any wave of feminism could dance on the head of a pin.
As for the way “Ashley” characterized us as “man haters,” you really need to write better dialog, Brandon. On the other hand, if she does exist, maybe it’s a good thing that two people who speak almost exclusively in cliches found each other.
@Brandon: can you actually list specific positions that were proposed by first and second wave feminism that you agree with? And can you list actual specific positions supported by third wave feminism? And, as I asked before, what do you think of fourth wave feminism?
Srsly Brandon, what was good about feminism, and where did it go wrong?
Is it merely that feminism from before you were born can be excused for not being ALLABOUTBRANDON?
Their first meeting musta went a little something like this:
Brandon: “What’s a pretty girl like you doing in a place like this?”
Ashley: “Tee hee!”
Brandon: “If I told you you had a beautiful body, would you hold it against me?”
Ashley: “Tee hee!”
Brandon: “I hate feminists. Are you a feminist?”
Ashley: “Of course not, they’re icky! Tee hee!”
Brandon: “Wanna go back to my place?”
Ashley: “You had me at ‘I hate feminists’ tee hee! Take me, I’m yours!”
*they go back to his place, where they have very vanilla sex that he secretly tapes*
(For the Ashnostics and Ashthiests out there feel free to imagine this dialogue done entirely by Brandon, half in a girlish falsetto, and addressed to an anime girl pillow. Obviously he will still tape the encounter.)
You know, it’s good that Brandon doesn’t care about any of this, otherwise I might feel a tad guilty.
But because he doesn’t, I don’t.
Obviously he will still tape the encounter.
Lol.
Luckily for my sanity all this is run through my brain’s Anime filter before being acknowledged. It’s honestly the only way sometimes.
My friends are constantly nagged about reading Manboobz by me so I cannot see her not even looking.
Reading all of that was hysterical. You guys are a hoot.
Even though Ashley is rather feminine, she is far from having low self esteem and I don’t remember her ever saying “tee hee”.
Except when you spank her, or call her a slut, then she giggles, according to you. I still say you should leave the pillow pets alone, though.
That is a very bizarre beginning to that sentence-as if being feminine means low self esteem.
Also, she giggles right? Tee Hee is a perfectly acceptable way of pointing out how she is.
Of course feminine means low self esteem in BrandonWorld!
Any woman who hooks up with him might just suffer from that.
If it turns out Ashley actually is a soft ‘n fluffy pillow pet, is DKM gonna challenge Brandon for the right to own her? NWO and MRAL can be their seconds. :p
LOL, most fucked-up duel ever, Bagelsan.
Bagelsan, that could happen even is Ashley was a pillow. Because 1) She would be very fluffy 2) Not being human is pretty much required to fit DKM taste. But in this case, I don’t think MRAL and NWO would be interested. Well, NWO might still com, just to say that Ashley is evil for pushing two honest men to violence.
I would like to point out the irony of linking a page that contest male privileges by use of statistics about drinking problem in males, then, when asked what made his father the better parent, he tells a story about male bonding trough alcohol consumption.
Can’t you see even a tiny link between the two of them?
Anyway, I think I’ve got the secret answer of why girls need a mother: when I was a teenager, I borrowed pads to my mother all the time because I was very forgetful and was rarely prepared. I couldn’t have done that is I had no mother!
The fact that has the same genitals never really mattered – the first time I call recall her talking about sex – with a friend, not me – was to say that sex toys were something useless that came between people. oh, and that you should wait for ‘the one’ for having sex. So, sex advices from her? No thanks. And she never wore heels or make up, so that’s out. That leaves… clothes? But to say that all girls need a female parent because of my father’s terrible taste seems a little stretched out.
Brandon: No, I don’t see why I should explain to you why my father is the better parent. If you can answer that with a reasonable answer, I will answer why he is the better parent.
Because, “I said so,” isn’t an actual argument.
Bagelsan–December 1, 2011 @7:21pm
I believe that I asked a question somewhat like this before, but doesn’t it bother you, and other modern women that you are all SO unfeminine and unattractive that otherwise healthy human males would prefer fluffytoys or little lady lovelies collector dolls, seeing THEM as more attractive, sexy, and alluring, indeed as more altogether feminine than you and other FEMINISTS! I mean, you and the rest of the sisterhood from hell can hate on me, and men sort of in my situation, as much as youall like, but the fact remains that you “women” are second fiddle to fluffytoys and antique-style collector dolls! One way or another, I have my “sweet old-fashioned girls”.
Pitiful, isn’t it?
Meller, I think you just have a doll fetish, and you’re projecting it onto other men, and are mad at women for not living up to your fantasies. There’s nothing that bothers me about you having a preference for your dolls, and if that’s really what you want, then that’s fine. But you scolding us for not living up to doll-hood is what’s actually sounding a bit pitiful. I’m not upset that you have your sweet old fashioned girls. If that’s what you want, then enjoy them.
Meller, it doesn’t bother me in the slightest what you or any other man happens to think about me.
If you want your SOFGs, knock yourself out. Just stop insisting that’s what all men want, because I’ve got a husband, father, and male friends who think otherwise.