Among those who celebrate Christmas, the holiday is often (for better or worse) a time to celebrate family, and to bring usually distant family members together – parents and their adult children, grandparents and their grandchildren, and so on.
A proposal from the guy behind the Pro-Male/Anti-Feminist Technology blog would mean a bit of a change in this tradition: it would eliminate grandchildren from the equation utterly. Not just by excluding them from the holiday celebrations, but by eliminating them altogether – at least until his demands are met.
Upset that paternal grandmothers aren’t rising up en masse and joining the father’s rights movement to support their sons in custody disputes, Mr. PMAFT has proposed a Grandchildren Strike.
Here’s part of his stirring manifesto:
It’s one thing to not realize that divorce means that you can’t see your grandchildren before a divorce happens. It’s another to be fine with it afterwards as paternal grandmothers appear to be. This is an example of team woman in action. It’s a particularly extreme example in that grandmothers are willing to never see their grandchildren again just to support daughters in law they will no longer have a connection with.
The only way to deal with this is a true grandchildren strike, denying grandchildren from potential grandmothers. A grandchildren strike should not be necessary, but as we can see, paternal grandmothers don’t care when they can no longer see their grandchildren. The only way to deal with this is to not have children in the first place.
In your face, hypothetical future grandmothers!
Usually, I advocate surrogate mothers in India for men who really want children in the current feminist climate, but doing so protects our mothers from the consequences of their actions. That is unconscionable so perhaps we should all be on a grandchildren strike.
A brilliant plan, clearly. This “strike” is designed in such a way that it will have zero effect on the women Mr. PMAFT is angry with – paternal grandmothers. Instead, it’s aimed at mothers who aren’t grandmothers, whom I guess Mr. PMAFT assumes will sign up with the father’s rights movement en masse in order to support their sons in hypothetical custody battles over grandchildren that don’t exist.
It’s as if workers angry at their boss were to go on strike not against the company at which they work, but against a rival company on the grounds that some day they might conceivably work there.
Meanwhile, the plan neatly eliminates the problem at the root of Mr. PMAFT’s anger. Men can’t lose custody battles if they don’t have any children to have custody of in the first place.
Checkmate, feminists!
I’m sorry… What? How is this going to solve anything? Are people in the MRA really this stupid?
Funny, I’m a divorced NCP, and yet my parents see my daughter multiple times per week. Of course, I’m not a douchebag who has decided to fight a protracted war with my ex-wife, and both of us recognize that our daughter’s well-being is more important than our own. It’s almost as if normal humans can get divorced without devolving to all-out war! I’m sure it’s just because I’m a mangina, though.
Why does this idiot presume that grandmothers are siding with their daughters IN LAW as opposed to their daughters by blood or adoption?
@pillowinhell Because men are oppressed and victims!
Because he’s only talking about paternal grandmothers, maternal grandmothers don’t count apparently.
@ pillowinhell
Egotism. Sure, some mother may have daughters and may want to support them, but who cares? It’s all about him. The only other people he notices and acknowledges are people just like him.
Also, why am I not surprised that, having failed to get women who’re their peers to obey their every whim, these guys are now targeting their moms? Mom should have made sure that other women would do whatever it takes to make them happy! If they aren’t happy, it’s because their mommy failed them.
Welp, that made my brain hurt.
Errr… Well, Ok then.
It is absolutely amazing the stuff people will write when they are convinced they are not getting what they deserve in life.
And ‘team woman’- PMAFT must be associated with Sunshinemary and her merry band of followers. They’re always going on about Team Woman. Because women always side with each other blindly against men, and men never do that with each other. No, not ever, and certainly not on blogs in the manosphere, why ever would you think that?
Brilliant! Asshats should totally refuse to have children to punish their mothers who are quite likely to accept never seeing their grandchildren again for the sake of the DIL and children safety and protection from asshat.
They keep going their own way but never actually manage to go because they are so entirely focused on diabolical schemes to punish anyone who fails to live up to their unrealistic expectations. The world view of the abuser is stunning in its simplicity.
This one is particularly incoherent.
I don’t think the OP quite grasps the meaning of paternal grandparent.
He’s sort of confirming what I’ve always thought about MRAs and mommy issues.
Funniest thing I’ve read all week. This guy is a genius.
Oh lord, this is one of those “replace all women with robots” weirdos. I agree that we should make sex bots so guys like this can stfu, but please don’t tell me they are actually making babies to spite their mom with.
I can imagine the scene:
Dr: So why do you want a vasectomy?
Mr PMAFT: I’m on a grandchildren strike.
Dr: I’m sorry. What do you mean?
Mr PMAFT: I’m pre-emptively punishing my mother for siding with my wife when we divorce.
Dr: You’re in the midst of a divorce?
Mr PMAFT: Oh no, I’m not married.
Dr: Oh, so you mean your future wife. How does she feel about the vasectomy?
Mr PMAFT: I wouldn’t know. I haven’t met her yet.
Dr: Erm. So you want a vasectomy to punish your mother for her hypothetically siding with your hypothetical future wife over your hypothetical divorce?
Mr PMAFT: Yep, that’s it.
Dr (calling up phone number of psychiatrist): I’ll need to refer you over this one. But just to be clear – we’re talking an actual vasectomy, not a hypothetical one, right?
In this dialogue, the doctor is of course played by Pierre.
It’s early, but I’m calling it — titianblue wins the thread.
Don’t be silly, an MRA would never get a vasectomy, because preventing babies (or providing them on demand) is the woman’s job.
Oh Pierre…
He just keeps running into these guys, no matter which profession he embarks on they just seem to follow him.
He really needs a break.
A break… Or his own comic strip detailing his adventures, traveling around the world, running into MRAs!
If i could draw, I would totally draw a comic strip about the Misadventures of Pierre.
And then I’d also draw a comic where every time someone says something misogynistic an important Feminist writer or activist drops on them or bursts through the nearest wall and woops the, upside the head.
For example:
“Women need to respect themselves and not wear clothes that make them look li”-BETTY FRIEDAN.
“Why do women only want to date douche-“MARY WOLLSTONECRAFT.
I have a crush on Pierre.
Histrophilia: it sounds like a feminist version of the Kool-Aid pitcher in the old commercials.
I read the words “drops on” and imagined feminist drop bears ….
I may have been drinking pinot …