Manosphere misogynists love fantasizing about a coming apocalypse, invariably caused by the bad behavior of feminists and/or women in general, and invariably resulting in feminists and/or women in general lost and forlorn and realizing their mistakes, returning to men begging for help and asking for forgiveness. Like Doomsday Preppers waiting for the planet to suddenly shift on its axis due to the sudden reversal of the magnetic poles, most of the apocalyptic misogynists don’t seem to have the faintest idea of what they’re talking about.
Take, for example, one Paul Elam of A Voice for Men, who transformed himself into an environmentalist last week when he realized it would give him an excuse to rant about the evils of women spending money. Turns out that the “conventional wisdom” his thesis depends on — that women are responsible for 80% of spending — is essentially an urban legend, and that men and women seem to spend roughly the same amounts. Similarly, there’s evidence that suggests men and women in developed countries have similar “carbon footprints,” with men if anything a bit more pollutey.
But of course this is hardly the only bit of apocalyptic misogynistic fantasy that, upon examination, turns out to be based on patent nonsense. Manosphere misogynists – particularly those on the racist right – love to complain about the evils of single motherhood, especially in the “ghettoes,” which they imagine will lead to crime rates spiraling out of control, riots, dogs and cats living together, and any number of other apocalyptic scenarios.
As one commenter on Dalrock’s manosphereian blog put it, providing a pithy summary of the coming single-mom apocalypse:
Single mothers bring the very wellfare state they depend on closer to the brink of colapse with every illegitimate child they pop out, who will most likely in turn create more bastards and be more likely to commit crimes thus placing an ever increasing strain on the state’s purse stings. …
[T]hings will collapse soon enough and then it will be everyone for themselves. No more suckling at the government’s saggy dried up teet.
Of course, manospherians are hardly the only ones who like to blame single moms for everything. You may recall that odd moment in the presidential debates when Mitt Romney responded to a question about gun violence with “gosh to tell our kids that before they have babies, they ought to think about getting married to someone, that’s a great idea.”
There’s just one tiny problem with the whole single-motherhood-means-higher-crime-rates argument: if you look at the history of the past twenty years or so you will find that while single motherhood has been on the increase, violent crime rates have been going down, down, down. Take a look at this chart, which I have borrowed from an excellent post on The Atlantic by University of Maryland sociologist Philip Cohen.
Huh. First single motherhood and crime rise together, then crime plummets while single motherhood continues to rise. It’s almost as if the two social trends have no correlation with each other at all.
As Cohen writes:
Violent crime has fallen through the floor (or at least back to the rates of the 1970s) relative to the bad old days. And this is true not just for homicide but also for rape and other assaults. At the same time, the decline of marriage has continued apace. Looking at two aggregate trends is never enough to tell a whole story of social change, of course. However, if two trends going together doesn’t prove a causal relationship, the opposite is not quite as true. If two trends do not go together, the theory that one causes the other has a steeper hill to climb. In the case of family breakdown driving crime rates, I don’t think the story will make it anymore.
Once upon a time, when both single motherhood and crime rates were moving upwards, you couldn’t entirely blame some social critics for suggesting there might be some connection. But with twenty more years of data we can see clearly that this just isn’t so. At this point, anyone predicting a single mother crime apocalypse is either a) an ideologue, b) ignorant about the facts or c) both.
In the case of the apocalyptic manosphere ranters, it’s obviously c.
Men do have an equal choice, dipshit.
And you seem to be laboring under the assumption that babies, like shit, “just happen” and that people don’t use their damn words and talk to one another. Maybe that’s because you MRa types have a totally stunted view of what relationships look like.
Why any woman would waste time and energy trapping one of you dipshits is beyond me.
You do, fuckwit, as has been pointed out several times already. And here’s another idea (you know what they are, right?) – PiV is not the only form of sex available. There are ways to share pleasure with No Risk At All of pregnancy.
What planet is this strange alien troll from?
On this planet, in the United States, pregnant women being murdered sorta puts the kibosh on the “bitchez controlling all teh menz bullfantasy you have going there.
For everyone who missed rty23’s first comment, here ’tis:
He’s provided no proof of his arguments, nor has he responded to any of the reasoned critiques we’ve provided.
LET THE MOCKERY INCREASE!
Cliches, such cliches.
You don’t want to get anybody pregnant, 23trollz?
Don’t have sex, fartface.
Or, get a vasectomy.
And I would bet real money you cannot offer one single citation that feminists oppose male birth control.
Don’t assume all women want children (am 57, decided at age 16 that I didn’t want to have kids, or get married, and never did).
Or that men don’t–lots of men want children.
In the words of Lord Vader …
LOL. Yeah, feminists love the fact that the job of preventing pregnancy is placed squarely on the shoulders of women, and that we are expected to flood our bodies with side-effect-laden hormones to do so. You caught us: all the books and blog posts and articles about how male BC is a feminist issue were just false flags to cover up our true goals.
(That was the comment that kept getting eaten. I see you are now shifting the goalposts by claiming that all you want is a level playing field, but you still have yet to demonstrate that it’s feminists, specifically, who are opposed to male BC)
(David, if my previous attempts to post that comment are in the spam filter, please feel free to delete them. We don’t need to see it four times, and I’m sorry for clogging the filter…)
But men are being discriminated against at jobs and throughout our educational systems. It’s happening so that girls can advance. Cassandra, as the Nobel Laureate of the group, what do you have to say about this?
But men are being discriminated against at jobs and throughout our educational systems.
Citation fucking needed.
THEN STEP IT UP, SPARKY. Bring an A game and stop fucking whining.
But first, please give a citation for this claim, lest I am forced to think it another nugget of assdata.
Check out the numbers of women graduating from college as opposed to men.
Ah, the game of the dancing goalposts begins.
(Whenever trolls start calling me out by name I always suspect the return of Mr Al.)
Holy Ceiling Cat, this one’s so fucking stupid it’s giving me a headache. Is there any misogynist bullshit it hasn’t swallowed?
We are not going to dumb down the educational system so men can succeed. That would be stupid.
I get that the troll is pissed that he can’t prevent women from or force women to have abortions or use the pill or whatever so that he can control them. I get that he is so stupid he thinks there is no mens birth control and it is the evol feminists that control the R&D of big pharma.
That makes him a stupid abusive asshat instead of a garden variety asshat..
Why is am I stupid? What did I ask or say that was stupid? Discrimination and forced equality are in my imagination?
So then can I put you on the record as saying that women’s intelligence is superior to men’s?
You know, it takes more than regurgitating MRA talking points as “facts” when you’re not at the sites that spew out the misogynistic mess.
You actually have to be able to provide some evidence to support the claims.
And while I would believe that boys and men of color are discriminated against in education and employment (in part, because I’ve seen the proof), white dudes? SO NOT!
See? Like this
Hey shitlips, maybe you haven’t heard, but the one who advances the claim provides the data to back it up. This is some 101 stuff a totally smart guy like you should know.
And he seems to think* men aren’t the vast majority in positions of power, be they political, corporate, academic, military, you name it, or that any affirmative action that does help women does not favour “unqualified woman” over “qualified man,” or that women have been systematically kept from any access to education for centuries and still face systemic discrimination in male-dominated fields (which are, not coincidentally, the most prestigious and best-paid ones).
*I use the term loosely
You is are stupid because you don’t support your arguments or refute our arguments. Discrimination and forced equality (what is that I don’t even) are in your imagination.
In general, no. But every woman here is smarter than you. THAT you can put on whatever record you like.
Everything you’ve said here, so far. Not one intelligent comment yet.
Sorry, are you using more men going to college than women as evidence that men are being discriminated against?
Hahahahahaaaaaaahahaahhahahahahhahaaaaaaaa *snrk* hahahahahahahahaaaa NO. That is not right at all. I may throw an example at you shortly.
My (lady) cats are smarter than rty23.