Categories
alpha asshole cock carousel alpha males antifeminism armageddon gloating I'm totally being sarcastic marriage strike men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny MRA reactionary bullshit the spearhead your time will come

The Spearhead: “Educated” women are destined for spinsterhood and misery

No one will ever love her.

Oh, you ladies, why do you even bother getting educated – sorry, “educated?”  Don’t you know that if you get too educated you might end up marrying some dude who is less educated than you, which is apparently contrary to the laws of nature? Or maybe you’ll end up not getting married at all? The horror.

On The Spearhead, guest poster Lyn87 explains how he dropped some “red pill” knowledge on a buddy of his during a recent outing:

One guy has teenage daughters that he’s planning to put through college. I could not resist inserting some red pill into the mix, so I mentioned that 60% of degrees were going to women, and that women prefer to marry up. Since “educated” women don’t often go for “uneducated” men, a lot of women of his daughter’s generation were on their way toward spinsterhood for lack of “suitable” mates.

So women with education are only “educated” in scare-quotes. But men who are “uneducated” also get the scare quotes, because presumably they are wise beyond their years of formal study.

Alas, Lyn87’s friend wasn’t convinced by this brilliant argument to reconsider his decision to put his daughters through college, which leads Lyn87 to consider the possibility that “that some malevolent group of “Jezebels” is dissolving blue pills into the supply of drinking water.” Lions and tigers and malevolent Jezebels, oh my!

Consider his daughters. I’m sure they are good kids who would make any parent proud. But they don’t live on an island – they live among their peers and within the confines of biological and demographic reality. Even if EVERY one of their male college classmates marries one of his female classmates, a third of those young women will not find a male age-peer who is even her “academic equal,” much less someone with a higher level of education. But not every male graduate will marry a female classmate. Some will marry down. Some will choose not marry at all. Then subtract out the guys who are “creepy,” gay, or otherwise unsuitable, and we are left with a generation of “educated” women who are barreling toward a demographic wall at high velocity.

So women marrying guys with less education, or deciding not to marry at all, is somehow the equivalent of careening into a brick wall at top speed?

Marry up? My buddy’s daughters will be lucky if they can marry “across.” Many women of that generation will face hard choices: supply and demand in the adult world doesn’t much care how “empowered” you were in college. The women of that generation may be able to marry down, but few will want to. They may not marry at all and become wards of the state when they bear bastard children. They may become involuntary childless spinsters. They may go for much older men, but many of them have been through the Family Court meat grinder and must devote much of their effort to paying their exes’ bills.

Or they could end up like a friend of mine, happily unmarried at the age of 40 and dating a dude in his twenties. Or like another friend of mine, also 40, in a happily open marriage with a man a few years her junior and with several regular partners on the side. Or in a committed lesbian relationship.

And why assume that any single woman older than, oh, 25 is “involuntarily childless?”  Most of the women I hang out with don’t want kids. They really, really don’t.

There are more things in heaven and earth, Lyn87, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.

We know the score here: the degrees these girls are getting cluster in the “Who are you trying to kid?” category. They are not truly superior to the guys of their generation, but that degree in “You Must Be Joking!” makes them think they are. Most emerge from college with a pile of debt, no marketable skills they didn’t already possess in high school, and a few laps around the carousel – older but no wiser, and blissfully unaware that half of their years of prime beauty and fertility are already in the rear-view mirror.

Ugh. This again? At the age of 22 or so, “half of their years of prime beauty and fertility” are gone? Really? Their biological clock starts ticking at the age of, what, 16?

So instead of going to college, girls should be getting hitched before they even graduate from high school, so as to maximize their prime years of beauty and fertility? Sorry to have to break this to you, Lyn87, but that’s a recipe for disaster — even by “traditionalist” standards. According to a 2001 study by the Centers for Disease Control, nearly half of those who marry before they’re 18 divorce within ten years; that’s twice the divorce rate of those who wait until they’re at least 25.

Lyn87, somehow I suspect your buddy with the teenage daughters is doing a better job of looking out for their best interests than you are.

Some, er, “highlights” from the comments.

Kendoka seconds Lyn87’s concerns:

I question the popular wisdom of fathers relinquishing custody and authority over their 18 year old daughters by putting them through an institution designed to indoctrinate and create entitled promiscuous feminist careerist harpies and not loving wives and mothers through marriage.

A Father’s work is not complete until he has guided his daughter directly into marriage with his authority transfered to her husband. “Careers” can wait. Family cannot.

DruidV shares his less-than-fond memories of life in the 1980s, and offers a note of optimism for the future (for dudes anyway):

Way back in prehistoric times, say around 1985, I used to find myself very depressed when I would take note of all the foolish and desperate males I knew, who were jumping through impossible hoops for fickle females that just would let the poor bastards continue to keep right on jumping through those hoops, apparently just for their own entertainment. These twats seemed to take an almost sociopathic delight in this ‘sport’. The males were simply trying to be accepted.
Pathetic, really.

Nowadays, I look about and see that young males are sick, tired, disgusted and jaded with these soulless cunts. Make no mistake, the hoops are still there, firmly in place for the males to jump through, but they are seeing less and less traffic every day.

I for one can easily see the females of generation z growing old alone, but for their cats and dying that way too and from what I’ve seen, these bitches can forget about marrying up, or even across anymore. These asshole entitlement whores won’t even be marrying down, in the not too distant future.

YAY!!!

Keyster presents a similarly optimistic scenario for the future — if predicting the apocalypse counts as optimism, which it generally does in MRA circles:

We have a perfect storm brewing of women working, men not, and each one rejecting marriage. In case no one noticed the Feminists started the gender war, and they won. Present day we live with the spiraling consequences; societal decline. Upon the collapse women will be the victims, AGAIN. The survivors will be men with only their own self-interest in mind. The last remnants of white-knightery will struggle to protect and provide, but will be ill-equipped to handle the guilt of failing.

Days of Broken Arrows isn’t quite so dramatic. He merely predicts that the dad planning on sending his girls to college will end up regretting this decision:

[N]ow instead of his daughter someday marrying the guy she met at 18, he’d prefer [her] to be using every orifice when she’s a fucktoy for a line of Alpha males who’ll pump and dump her. And he means that he doesn’t want a son-in-law or grandchildren. Well, I guess that’s all well and good, so long as it’s not “the way it used to be.”

Huh. Do colleges even have classes any more, or is it just one long orgy? How do these Alpha males have any time to study?

468 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Sharculese
12 years ago

Futrelle – your entire site is based on the premise that: “any yahoo who comments on an MRA site is a representative sample of the “men’s movement” by association, and thus their comment ‘boobery’ may be employed to attack that movement, (through mockery)”

it’s actually ‘anyone who says misogynistic shit is up for mockery’

it doesn’t have to be mras, you crybabies just insist on making everything about you. it’s one of the reasons your worthless as a movement.

cloudiah
12 years ago

Joe, I want to invite you to take the Manboobz challenge! No purchase necessary.

The First Joe
The First Joe
12 years ago

@Sharkulese – well, I do care about trans folks, not that you could ever bring yourself to believe it.
Beyond general compassionate humanism (I know, I know you don’t believe me on that either, *yawn*) I have particular sympathy for trans folks, because:

Shitty as it is to read some of the appallling crap that RadFems throw at men, there are a LOT more men and we’re in a lot stronger position to push back against that, whereas trans people who are few and far between get shit from pretty much bloody everyone already and I think it’s fucking terrible that a bunch of people (RadFems) who claim to be oh-so-wonderful go out of their way to be as nasty as possible to them.

Also because: personal stuff.

Rutee Katreya
12 years ago

@Futrelle – your entire site is based on the premise that: “any yahoo who comments on an MRA site is a representative sample of the “men’s movement” by association, and thus their comment ‘boobery’ may be employed to attack that movement, (through mockery)”

AVFM is often declared the ‘moderate MRA site’ by our trolls. When David quotes from the main posts, what then? What about upvoted comments on Spearhead or r/mr?

I appreciate you outing yourself as a standard MRA Troll though. Nailing these talking points settles the matter nicely

Argenti Aertheri
Argenti Aertheri
12 years ago

“there are a LOT more men”

That clause? It requires context — do you mean on internet (which is nearly impossible to study), or in one particular country, or the world at large?

This is important because if you meant “in the US” you’re wrong (by about 1%, but still wrong)

Cliff Pervocracy
12 years ago

Joe, you’ve posted on Manboobz! You are now as “associated” with The Bewilderness as any of us are.

…How many posters did you have to Google-stalk for how long before you found this?

indifferentsky
12 years ago

No, Joe, that’s not the premise. If you bothered to read this site, you would see over and over again DF painstakingly chooses comments that have scads of upvotes (and if they don’t he comments on whether the comment was well received or not or who argued with it or whatever.), and he pulls from blogs that are the main voices in the movement. I’ve gone to links he’s posted where there were twisted and vile comments that never got covered here, I would assume from the way DF documents things here it’s because they were not supported comments, possibly done by trolls.

So, surprise, you’re wrong.

indifferentsky
12 years ago

“One of your manboobzers (by association through comments) posted approvingly / agreeing on a transphobic, misandrist blog, using your site as “backup” for her point. How do you feel about having your site associated with such hatred?”

Again, nice try. You failed. You can stop now.

Sharculese
12 years ago

Shitty as it is to read some of the appallling crap that RadFems throw at men, there are a LOT more men and we’re in a lot stronger position to push back against that, whereas trans people who are few and far between get shit from pretty much bloody everyone already and I think it’s fucking terrible that a bunch of people (RadFems) who claim to be oh-so-wonderful go out of their way to be as nasty as possible to them.

this is not a particularly articulate way of saying it but im gonna go ahead and take it as a genuine recognition that there are people who get it worse than you. so… alright, cool.

The First Joe
The First Joe
12 years ago

@Argenti – what part of “big part” (i.e. not the whole but a significant subset thereof do you not get? Oh wait, I forgot, your the person who doesn’t understand a damn thing I say).

The point of bringing this up is – another foundational manboobz thing is pulling up “X” and then demanding “where are the moderate men’s right’s peeps who will condemn ‘X’?? Where?? Whhhheerrrrre??”(see thread on Tom Martin’s BS re. underage prostitution, where I did EXACTLY that).

What I’m doing here is pulling up something dreadful and saying “Where are the manboobzers who will disavow this?” I challenge manboobzers to live up to the standards you wish to apply to men’s right’s peeps.

And yes, I am well aware that a great many feminists are NOT transphobic, and that is a very good thing.

RubyHypatia
RubyHypatia
12 years ago

The idea that a woman should be under the authority of her husband is too ridiculous for words as women are no less mature than men. It’s all about power. You’d have to be a selfish pig to want to hoard power, keeping it from women. A good husband would be happy to share power with his wife.

cloudiah
12 years ago

Joe had a nice comment on the Sally Ride post too. It almost appears that there may be a human being buried inside Joe, struggling to get out. Let your inner human shine, Joe!

The First Joe
The First Joe
12 years ago

@Sharculese – ok, wow. We agree on something. Good. 🙂

Freitag
Freitag
12 years ago

Ok, transphobia is uncool. All over and done.

ShadetheDruid
ShadetheDruid
12 years ago

I remember when Joe first came here, there was a glimmer of a moderate MRA. Then it went to shit for reasons I forget, and now he’s trying to claw it back again.

nwoslave
12 years ago

@hypatia arez (@justhypatia)
“Of course most women have married up in accordance to earning potential but when you consider that during much of history women have either not been allowed to work or have had their wages held down artificially, that’s kind of a given.”

It’s not that women weren’t allowed to work in paying jobs for most of history, they were simply incabable of equally doing so. You’re making the mistake of equating modern day push button society with past history. How many of you could compete equally with men as blacksmiths, lumberjacks, stonemasons, ect. There were no telecommuncations, phones, tvs, cars, computers, ect. Women simply gravitated towards what was good for families and communities. There was no oppression, it was common sense of making due with what was best for everyone with what was available.

Also, the marrying off of girls was anything but oppression. Do you think the girl, had no say in it? Ridiculous. Boys were taught trades in preparation for supporting a family. Girls were taught sewing, cooking, ect, to support a family as well. The father guarding his daughters viginity is true, but the flip side is so was a boys viginity guarded as well. How could it be otherwise? If you had 100 girls of age in a village and they were virgins, the 100 boys of age in that same village were virgins as well. Far better than the system we have today I’d wager. The 13 year old girl marrying the 30 year old man was a game for kings, queens and royalty.

The so called man beating his wife is a ridiculous notion as well. Again, you equate todays society with yesteryear. Most families were large by todays comparison, plus they’d settle close by each other. You think a man could beat his wife and get away with it? That woman has two brothers, a father, several uncles and a dozen cousins living within 5 miles. Word would get out faster than a viral story on the internet and that man would have the shit kicked out of him before sundown.
————–
“In fact I can’t think of a single case where a woman married a man with more education than herself in my family, although quite a few in reverse, including myself.”

So there was no oppression in education either. My guess is the further you go back in history the more likely it was a wife could read as oppossed to a husband in the land of the peasant majority. Which also makes perfect sense. A man would learn a trade to support the family and the woman would learn the things needed to support the family as well. It would make far more sense to teach young girls to read and write so they could teach the children when she got married, which benefited all of them. Everything was done to benefit the family. The family is the core of any functioning society. There was no oppression of women in the past.

indifferentsky
12 years ago

Joe, had you been familiar with the manboobz blog by any honest means, you would know people’s overall attitude here toward people with relatively less power and more shit to field than others.

The First Joe
The First Joe
12 years ago

@Cliff – I didn’t google stalk anyone – if you scroll back upthread you’ll see I was reading around on the RadFem 2012 transphobia controversy and POW! there’s The Bewilderness CatSharking & manboobzing out of the screen at me!

Sharculese
12 years ago

The point of bringing this up is – another foundational manboobz thing is pulling up “X” and then demanding “where are the moderate men’s right’s peeps who will condemn ‘X’?? Where?? Whhhheerrrrre??”(see thread on Tom Martin’s BS re. underage prostitution, where I did EXACTLY that).

What I’m doing here is pulling up something dreadful and saying “Where are the manboobzers who will disavow this?” I challenge manboobzers to live up to the standards you wish to apply to men’s right’s peeps.

the difference is that we’ve never had a problem calling out transphobic radfems. we have an ongoing forum thread about the shittiness of transphobic radfem of cathy brennan (who gets told to go the fuck away the few times she’s tried to post here):

http://manboobz.forummotion.com/t964-paul-elam-s-female-doppleganger-cathy-brennan-goes-even-further

but you’re asking us to preemptively condemn someone who hasn’t said anything transphobic here for posting on another blog without telling us. that doesnt make any sense!

indifferentsky
12 years ago

Joe if you are not familiar with this blog, do not criticize it. That makes you look stupid.

Argenti Aertheri
Argenti Aertheri
12 years ago

Oh right, Joe’s either new around here or playing faux naive, either way — genderqueer here, so no, transphobia is Not Ok.

And you may recall that the general response to you calling out Tom Martin’s shit was “wonderful! please go tell the MRM that”

I understand the meaning of “a big part” perfectly by the way, but apparently I need to spell this out for you — radical feminists do not make up a big part of feminism. We’re all ears if you can produce moderate MRM sites, otherwise it really is quite fair to say that reddit and AVFM make up “a big part” of the MRM (here, I’ll make it extra easy, just answer Freitag’s comment about wtf the MRM’s goals are)

The First Joe
The First Joe
12 years ago

@ShadetheDruid – I haven’t changed, you just don’t know me.

Oh, wait, I did learn something in the whole “zie / hir” debate the other day. And I’ve changed my stance on that particular issue (i.e. I hereby agree that using a new pronoun for intersex and/or genderqueer peeps who don’t ID as either male or female is a good thing.)

CassandraSays
CassandraSays
12 years ago

According to the MRAth (which is what I’m calling MRA attempts at math from now on) on display here, going by the most charitable interpretation in which he is not suggesting that women have kids before they’re legally able to marry in most states, women’s “beauty and fertility” years are from ages 18-26. Now, if you think that 27 year old women are unfuckable old hags then…I don’t know what to say to that really other than “get your eyes checked”, but if you think that 27 or 28 or 30 year old women are no longer fertile then…do you live alone on a desert island? Because I can see with my very own eyes women older than that who’re pregnant, or have newborns or toddlers, just by walking out the door.

“They may not marry at all and become wards of the state when they bear bastard children.”

Creepy dude knows that when the government gives out welfare/child support it’s for the child, right? And that receiving it doesn’t actually make a woman a ward of the state?

Who am I kidding, he doesn’t even know what “ward of the state” means. This is what happens when you’re so sexist that you think the humanities are just for girls, folks.

Jessonian
Jessonian
12 years ago

I don’t know if I should send Joe a copy of “Derailment for Dummies” or Carl Sagan’s “The Fine Art of Baloney Detection.” Both?

But Sagan believed something not progressive at one point, right? So everything he said is wrong and anyone who associates with him believes that not-progressive thing. According to Joe.

Dilemma.

1 3 4 5 6 7 19