Over on Patriactionary, a proudly reactionary and patriarchal Christian blog, the blogger who calls himself electricangel is angry at himself – for not being an even bigger douchebag than he already is.
You see, he’s just heard from his wife that one of her friends isn’t happy about hitting the big 4-0. Apparently, his wife’s friend
broke down in tears, sobbing uncontrollably. What had hit her was the realization that she was 40, with no husband, no children, no prospects of either, and she was staring at a future of loneliness.
His reaction to this news?
I wish I could tell you that an evil smile of vengeance crept across my face, and the children this woman discarded were getting their revenge upon her. That this was payback for riding the cock carousel for years, always aiming at the guys she wanted, not the guys she could get.
But alas, hidden deep inside in his tiny misogynistic heart there remains a tiny fragment of sympathy.
But I cannot tell you anything other than how saddened I was at her tale, and how this sadness will rip out the hearts of so many women who did not set out to become lonely, childless spinsters, but whose families and societies removed the strictures on their behavior so that their own lack of self-control was left unbounded. This will be the ongoing social disaster of coming years.
I did say it was a tiny fragment.
But he still wants to use this woman’s story for his own ends.
In discussing this woman, I am insistent upon her becoming an object lesson to my wife, and especially for my wife to tell the beautiful, smart, virgin young women close to her about what happens to carousel riders. Life is a coin you may spend any way you like, but you may only spend it once. This woman spent it on an amusement park ride. Now the park is closing, she has been thrown off the ride, and faces 45 years of solitude.
Yeah, because no woman over the age of 40 is capable of ever finding a date or a mate.
Yeah, because her sadness at hitting 40 is going to last for the rest of her life.
Oh, and the bit about “the children this woman discarded?” She didn’t “discard” any children. She simply didn’t have any. She’s not “discarding children” any more than those with penises instead of vaginas are “discarding children” each and every time they masturbate to orgasm.
In the comments, not everyone is quite so restrained as electricangel.
“I don’t even know this woman and I’m pissing myself laughing at her,” writes one commenter going by the name Friendzone. “Fuck her.”
Take The Red Pill is equally unsympathetic:
I have NO sympathy for this woman whatsoever. Just like most Modern Women, she bought into the feminist deception with eyes wide open with never a thought about the future. Well the future has arrived and it looks a lot like a cold, lonely one for her – just like the cold, lonely youth and young adulthood that MOST men have had and continue to have.
Karma has come due, and the bicycles have realized that they don’t need fish, either.
When women like her are young, they treat decent men abominably – being as cruel and sadistic as they can be when rejecting an ‘unwanted’ man’s advances – simultaneously, they enjoy being ‘free whores’ for every player, dirtbag, and Alpha thug who crosses their path; then when they reach their thirties and are little more than ugly, repellent, diseased trollops (often with some thug’s illegitimate spawn or two in tow), they complain about ‘the lack of good men’.
Others adopt Electricangel’s more, er, mature approach. Will S. decides to be a pompous dick about it, while patting himself on the back for his enlightened attitude:
Indeed, it is proper to not gloat, but rather mourn what we have lost, as a society, and feel sorry for those who have made poor decisions – and try to help others not make such poor decisions, by pointing to unfortunate examples, that at least others might learn something from them.
Sometimes, schadenfreude is tempting, but we Christians do generally know better than that.
Because patronizingly exploiting someone’s (probably temporary) sadness to make other people feel shitty about their own lives is such a moral thing to do. Is faux sympathy better than no sympathy at all?
Our friend Sunshinemary jumps on the “let this be a lesson to the rest of you sluts” bandwagon:
We need not mock such women, but we need to hold up their tales as cautionary examples to other young women. The older women themselves cannot face that their lives should serve as an example of what not to do, and they will rationalize it forever.
Electricangel expounds on his plan to use this woman’s apparent misfortune for his own ends:
I am using her as a vector to drop comments to my wife about the dangers of the carousel. Next is the overt suggestion that she talk to some young women about this friend specifically.
Uh, I guess you don’t let your wife read this blog, huh? Because if I discovered that someone close to me was talking about me in such a creepily manipulative and patronizing way, that person would no longer be a part of my life.
Electricangel replies to Sunshinemary:
Yes, those who did not prioritize children will have their genetic tendencies to that behavior removed from the gene pool. Women do not have the sexual options that men do, and not letting them know this early and often is crushing.
But they must be pointed to, and shown as examples. I understand people who will laugh at and mock them; I thought I would. It’s just the enormity of a waste of a life, and the lives she threw away, and the realization that this is just the tip of huge iceberg that has gripped me.
Yes, EA, you’re such a deeply moral person. Posting an “I told you so, you whores!” post on your blog is no doubt exactly the way The Lord would like you to handle this.
In a later comment, he reiterates his plan to use this woman’s story to increase the insecurities of his wife:
I do not feel guilty at all about using this woman’s example to drop pellets of manosphere logic on my wife. It has the side benefit of my wife starting to ask me (because she’s asking herself) “What do I do to bring value to the relatinship?” It is a good thing.
First it was a sad thing, now it’s a “good thing.”
How exactly is this better than gloating? No, scratch that. How is this different than gloating?
Oops, ninja’ed.
Very true. However, what is being exchanged?
“Who ever said it was? Of course getting laid is no guarantee of morality. Thanks for stating the obvious.”
And so the discussion has come full circle. As was stated at first. How is this different from any fora with lots of women where I can read about how a man who is a virgin at 25 has to have a defective personality.
Very true. However, what is being exchanged?
Your time and your energy.
@Wandering
Again, no feminists have ever said that they must have a defective personality. Who are you arguing against?
And what is the commodity?
The Legend RPG system actually suggests handling relationships rather like a market; everyone gets tokens and you spend them when you make checks and such.
Except it doesn’t make any damn sense. Why would successfully using Diplomacy to make one person like you make you unable to make another person like you in the future?
Well for a start, forum with lots of women =/= feminist forum.
Because those fora don’t exist.
The only example you’ve given us is an article saying “be nice to people and you’re more likely to have sex,” which is not the same thing at all.
And you claim you don’t even want to have sex! What are we even arguing about?
However, you just said
So how am I in any way losing my time or energy when I’m actually spending it the most enjoyable possible way? What have I lost, given up, or exchanged? Having a great time is not a waste of time.
Okay, then, I denounce what the women at those fora said. They are wrong, because there are plenty of 25 year old virgin men who have good personalities. I don’t see why you are holding feminists accountable for what some other women say on the Internet. Women are not like bowls of soup coming from the same pot. We are just as varied as men are.
“I would call them sites with a feminist lean but not feminist sites especially when they post “opposite viewpoints” or random celeb gossip and news. Even if they were I am not sure why it would matter because you don’t want feminists to use “nice guys” no matter what. No matter how many feminists don’t like hugo its irrelevant to you.”
So Ms. Magazine isn’t feminist?
“How many times do I need to say abusers are not the same thing as nice guys. You are changing what it means to fit your purpose.”
I am talkng about manipulators, and being manipulative was one of the things mentioned at heartless bitches.
“I didn’t see you post were it was originally used and words can change meanings from their original purpose.”
http://www.heartless-bitches.com/rants/niceguys/ng.shtml
“Beep Boop robot exchange happiness in procession beep boop exchange complete beep boop. This may be shocking but humans are not robots. XD”
Great, so when can I come over and read the FEDs latest statistics report with you?
Wondering: A summary for those interested is. Why do you want sympathy for being alone when you express the opinion that men who are alone should just deal with it and accept that they deserve to be alone.
It’s an invalid summary.
I don’t recall anyone here saying women need sympathy for being alone. We seem to be arguing the OP’s view (that women at the age of 40 will suddenly burst into tears about the wasteland of their lives if they don’t have a husband and kids) was an idiot because it’s not true.
English, it’s a real thing.
The part where they use the things they talk about to manipulate women, and more often than I like to think about, rape them.
That would be the problem.
Those two things, his being an utter, and manipulative, asshole and his getting laid, might be related. It might not have anything to do with your daft ideas of “sexual economics”, because it’s not actually a marketplace; and even if we work with that, inane, metahphor, he’s not working in the open, but rather engaging in a form of, “inside” (or perhaps, insidious) trading.
Nice guys, among Hugo isn’t numbered (not that this is any credit to him) are being manipulative in different ways. They don’t have the advantages of position that Hugo exploits, and so they don’t get laid. As a result they complain. If they were able to get away with their manipulations they wouldn’t be Nice Guys™. they’d be Hugh Schwyzer style douchecanoes.
I’m thinking that hanging out with strangers to watch paint dry is more worth my time and energy than reading Wondering’s comments. Is what I’m thinking.
Human relationships are a lot more complicated than that, people don’t always spend time around someone because they gain something like happiness. People go to funerals often not because they want to but to respect the people that knew them or to pay respect to the dead. Whats being exchanged there? People who live with their family still have to do things with them even if they have a rocky relationship. Whats being exchanged there? Sometimes friend’s invite friend’s who you may not care for. Whats being exchanged there? Sometimes you do stuff in a relationship because its necessary not because you want to and were there is no gain or loss.
It’s the same for sex. I enjoy having sex. My partner enjoys having sex. When we have sex, we both have a great time. Absolutely nothing was exchanged in this process.
Analogies can have great explanatory power. By comparing the unfamiliar and abstract with the familiar and concrete, analogies can make difficult concepts much easier to grasp.
And this is why Wondering’s insistence on his relationships/free market analogy baffles me. Everyone knows people who are in a romantic relationship of some sort. Most people have been in a romantic relationship at some point. Even those of us who have never been in a romantic relationship have been in other sorts of relationships and are familiar with the concept. Economics, however, is not something that most people are familiar with. The free market is an abstract concept. Most people are much more familiar with romantic relationships than they are free market economics.
It makes no sense for Wondering to keep pushing this analogy. It does the opposite of what a good analogy is supposed to. It obfuscates rather than clarifies. It tries to explain something that’s easy to understand by invoking something that’s much more difficult to understand. It has no explanatory power.
That, and I’m pretty sure that the premises on which Wondering is building this analogy are just plain wrong. The free market simply isn’t analogous to romantic relationships. At all. But even if it was, this would still be a terrible analogy.
Some people are more attractive than others regardless what sex they are. Therefore, some people have more sexual options than other people do, and some people have less of such options than others. I’m pretty sure that James Dean and Marilyn Monroe had no trouble getting laid in their time.
“The part where they use the things they talk about to manipulate women, and more often than I like to think about, rape them.”
Rape is a problem yes. Manipulation, didn’t we just learn from Nice Guy ™ that women can sense a manipulator and therefore reject him. Or was that just to explain to the unlaid guy why he doesn’t get laid?
“. If they were able to get away with their manipulations they wouldn’t be Nice Guys™. they’d be Hugh Schwyzer style douchecanoes.”
But if women could sense this, as is claimed, then Hugo would never be able to get laid. Much less getting married all of 4 times.
“Amanda Marcotte: “You have more fun when your friends are having fun, right? Apply the same attitude towards dating, and you’ll become immediately hotter.””
And on the second page, where every single tip is Change, this is what? Support? Help?
Um, yes? You want advice on how to improve your life that doesn’t require you to change? I think I have identified a core problem here.
It sounds like you’re describing a Sims game instead of real life relationships. First, I have my Sim say 20 nice things to the other Sim, they go on a date, they get it on, and finally, I make their house haunted with a scary clown and some ghosts. Their relationship reaches 100 points, and I win an achievement.
MR*L, remember all those really contrite postings about how you’d Changed and you wouldn’t ever post here any more and you knew how bad it was for you?
It is bad for you. Get off the Internet right now.
HOW MANY TIMES DO i NEED TO SAY NO ONE IS ARGUING THAT. I CAN ONLY REASON SOME WOMAN SAID THAT AND WITH YOUR SOUP THEORY YOU THINK FEMINISTS HAVE A HIVE MIND.
CLAIMED BY WHO????
Then I make them go in the pool and take away the ladder, because I am a cruel god.
“Um, yes? You want advice on how to improve your life that doesn’t require you to change? I think I have identified a core problem here.”
I want advice that is consistent. As for exampel putting as much effort into oneself as one demands that the other does. Does this mean that Amanda tells BBW with a crush on Ryan Gossling that BBW should hit the gym 8 times a week and live off carrots?
Does it mean that someone with an eight-pack is well within his right to say “No Fat Chicks”?