Today, some Deep Thoughts about men, women, children, empathy, mini-vans, and patriarchy, from the inimitable Men’s Rights activist and proud misogynist Rob Fedders, whom I found being quoted with approval and even some relish by MGTOWer elder MarkyMark on his little blog today.
Mr. Fedders starts off with a classic misogynist trope: women are like children.
Very few women are capable of empathizing with men. There are about as many women who have the ability to empathize with men as there are children capable of empathizing with adults.
This is what most men fail to grasp, and why they go round and round in circles trying to “explain things” to women.
Women just don’t care. We are here for their purposes, not ours. …
Women will never “care” about men in the same way that men “care” about the wellbeing of women. …
We are designed like this by nature … .
Mr. Fedders offers proof of this evolutionary design by considering a dilemma that preoccupied our ancient ancestors on the African savannah. Namely: who gets the minivan?
You can even see how this works with the way that men and women buy family vehicles. The wife and kids are always put in the best vehicle/mini-van/SUV as possible to “protect them” etc. etc. while the husband drives the run-down piece of crap to work… when the time comes that the husband gets a second vehicle you can usually hear the wife chirping in, “We had to get Joe a new truck… because the last one wasn’t safe and we don’t know what we would do if something happened to him.
That’s the way it has always been and the way it will likely always be.
Apparently, men hunted the mammoth in crappy old pickup trucks.
Fedders returns to his main theme:
Men are a tool to women… a “business.” And to successfully work that business, they must always appear in the needy/attention category. Babies who don’t cry don’t get milk… and women who don’t get attention don’t get taken care of by men. It is an innate feature of humans.
Oh, and in case you were wondering, women have ruled the world from time immemorial.
Women do control society’s values and mores… they lead with what they think is fashionable, and men follow, because by nature we are designed to give women what they want.
And, oh, women invented patriarchy as well.
Women “are” society. What women’s wants are is what society’s want’s are. This is where women are lying when they talk about the dreaded “patriarchy.” The patriarchy only existed because women explicitly approved of it, and endorsed it morally – causing the men to follow suit.
Turns out that patriarchy is basically just a way to make all men slaves to their women:
This is what is happening today too. Most of the anti-feminist battle is not going to be between men and women… it is going to be between women who want a “traditional man” and those who want a collective “government husband.” In both cases, the women are advocating for men to take care of women – with little concern for the man’s wants and needs – one wants a personal slave to serve her & her offspring, while the other wants a slave class to serve women and their offspring in general.
It’s the way human beings are designed. Who cares whether women rule, or if they rule the rulers? The result is the same.
I knew women were sneaky, but I had no idea they were this sneaky.
Run an errand and y’all get hilarious! Which is, of course, why you’re awesome.
“>I think “serial monogamy” means “one partner at a time” as opposed to “one partner ever.” So technically not redundant, but in an age when the former is more common than the latter, it seems redundant.”
The former fundy in me finds the idea of one partner, ever, or you’re terrible, too off putting to remember. So yeah, that probably is the strict definition of monogamy, making “serial monogamy” not really redundant, just seemingly so. /pedantry 🙂
I’ve also heard it in the context of serious relationships… as in people who divorce and remarry. Kind of the same way people are less likely to stay in the same job their whole lives like they used to.
Also, I don’t get how this dude thinks serial dating is considered bad. It’s parallel dating when it’s without the knowledge of all participants that gets the bad rap. As long as you stop seeing one person before you date the next, how could anyone have a problem with that? Oh, I know, super-christians… I was a bit thrown by his reference to super-christianity as if it were the standard for everyone. I guess if he does live in a judgey christian patriachy bubble then it would give you a skewed idea of public opinion. But still, tv… if tv has taught us anything, it’s that serial dating (aka dating) is actually pretty normal.
Argenti, I agree. Serial monogamy means something quite different to me from just monogamy. It specifies there’s more than one partner, and (again, to me) implies there might be several and it might be expected. Monogamy to me strongly implies the expectation, or perhaps just the hope, that there’s only one, ever.
@The Kittehs: I think mra’s/mgtow’s get off on people paying attention to them. They write their crappy, lengthy, overly theatrical “manifestos” in the hopes of getting e-high fives from other online dudebros, and when that’s not enough, they seek out other blogs, articles & comment sections to spew their propaganda at people. This allows them to feel “important”.
I mean, there’s nothing wrong with wanting attention, but they’ve chosen an incredibly asshatted way to go about getting it.
*actually pretty normal should be “the current cultural standard”
Ninjaed by Kim! 😀
I think you’ve summed them up, becausescience. Whiny little boys going LOOK AT ME! LOOK AT ME! and doing the internet version of lying screaming and kicking their heels against the wall.
There must be a correlation between the length of a post and how logically flawed that post is. Have noticed it with ranters on all subjects.
The “why I must have sex with you” pad doesn’t look particularly bad except for the “or else” option. Their pads seem a bit questionable in general…too much an attempt to “teach the controversy” almost. I have “things you must do to make me happy” and there are pairs like:
Be real
Be somebody else
Be yourself, but better
Stop smoking
Start smoking
Plus a whole shit ton that amount to MRA talking points about how women want to be worshiped and fed grapes (totally seriously). I bought the thing as a teenager to post “knock first, or else” on my door…where it remains.
…and my brother is going on about why is a dead woman in an alley morally superior to one explaining how “he” got those fatal wounds.
1) stranger rape is rare
1b) you gonna shoot your lover?
2) rape victims all too often aren’t believed
2b) and definitely won’t be when it’s believe the victim versus murder charges
But hey, you keep up with that NRA talking point.
These guys are broken records:
“Men are slaves to women. Women judge men. Men must prove their worth to women. Men must offer women value or they don’t get to be in the lives of women. Women are only with men that offer value.”
Um, in the movies maybe — especially black and white ones…or films with dragons in them.
The Beauty Myth shit women put up with every day? Jesus, do you live under a rock?
And do MRA guys generally say things like, “Hey man, you should go out with her — she’s kinda plain, but she’s got a great personality!”
Actually, now that I think about it, this sentence, “Women are only with men that offer value.” Well, if by “value” he means money, he’s wrong…though I always thought that people who say things like, “Chicks only like rich guys” are partially admitting that no woman would have anything to gain by being with them — unless he had some money. Also, most people aren’t rich, but condom sales are still really high, so….
“The essence of western and christian morality is limiting the sexual options of men to force them into circumstances that favor women.”
Really? In what way? Actually, marriage was invented by men. Free sex, free housekeeping, progeny….once again, you will find more on this in books.
“Serial Dating, (notice the whole use of “serial” to confer the evil of “serial killers” onto the phrase) bad. Game and PUA bad. Especially the last two, because they “cheat” those women’s selection mechanisms and possibly allow those beta men to trick them. Very bad. Very very very bad. Women have a right to alpha sex, not creepy beta sex.”
Uh, wow, a lot of arglebargle here. The only people who think every man in the world is either an Alpha or Beta are MRAs. Though, I not going to lie, “…creepy beta sex” does sound really awful. Do you expect women to sleep with people who strike them as creepy? Why? Don’t you think women want to sleep with people who they find attractive too — wait, what? Oh right, you’re one of those guys who thinks women aren’t suppose to like sex too much anyway…the clitoris was just an accident, and uh, hunter-gatherer days, blah-blah, women only wanted a nice secure cave to live in and, bloopity-bloop.
“Friendzone. Good as long as those men stay in it, learn their place, and never never never actually insist on reciprocation to the friendship. White Knights. Good. As long as they stay in their place.”
Oh Jesus, ever have someone sniffing around you, faking nice because they wanted to get into your pants? It’s icky. What? You’d love it if a woman tried to fuck you by faking nice? Well, that’s only because in you fantasy version of this scenario, Megan Fox is the one trying to “Nice Guy” ™ you. Now picture it with a woman who is, oh, I dunno, overweight, or actually despises men, or doesn’t care about what you want for yourself.
Or god forbid, a woman who isn’t model-like…*shudder*
Also, these are modern times, sparky, no more knights…but yes, you will find them in the movies, like with dragons or whatever, like I mentioned above.
“Even the whole “Where are the good men at?” means “Where are all those men with sexual market value two points higher than mine that earn in the top 10% of incomes even though I only earn in 65% level and have middling looks and attractiveness.”
What the fuck are you talking about?
Then you go to quote something called a “TradeCon preacher,” (is that a real gig?), and how he expects women to use sex to make men better. Well, that’s obviously a fucked-up thing to think. But you seem to want to believe it, ’cause you seem kind of mad that you don’t have your own Hot Shrew (you know, like in sitcoms), buying your groceries and giving you sex…and it’s soooooo unfair! Then letting us know it’s because you’re not rich, and only the rich have sex, by god, by god…
Read over your comments…it’s your personality. Why would a woman want to be with a man who thinks she’s a member of a no good, manipulative gender? Also, drop the Biotruths and hunter-gatherer horsehit.
I just realized, when i practice cereal monogamy, I always try to trade up to a more alpha cereal, leaving nice, good, hardworking, honest, devastated beta cereals in my wake, so I guess that would actually be cereal hypergamy.
I’m sorry, Raisin Bran, you’re very nice, but you just don’t excite me the way Cocoa Puffs does!
Is oatmeal a beta cereal? I mean, it doesn’t just get milk poured on it, it gets BOILED first.
Granola is the most alpha cereal of all. Because you don’t need anything on it. You just eat it. STRAIGHT OUT OF YOUR HAND. Alpha, QED.
@argenti aertheri
huh. That’s strange. Could they at least feed us bonbons? I don’t like many grapes.
…I…I am so confused by this… like what is he saying?
@kittehs
I hope not. Oatmeal is one of my favorite cereals. It may not look like much but it has a great
tastepersonality XDKitteh — but nobody looks at you weird if you don’t put milk in it (quite the opposite), and it’s far more customizable so it must be beta cereal. Alpha cereal would never have to change to make you like it! Alpha ceral is a one size fits all vaginas approach…just and milk and stir!
@Argenti Aertheri
I never put milk in my cereal. What does this mean, in alpha/beta/women analogy?
Argenti – yeah, that’s what I meant, oatmeal is totally beta, doing all that just to be edible.
clairedammit – WE ATE THE GRANOLA FOR BREAKFAST BEFORE WE HUNTED THE MAMMOTH FOR YOU.
“huh. That’s strange. Could they at least feed us bonbons? I don’t like many grapes.”
I think it’s a standard fare reference to debauchery. That explaination is long and involves Greco-roman mythology, but simple version is grapes make wine.
See, none of it is directly gendered, but things like “take your hands off me” are obviously tags women say a whole lot more than men. It’s accidentally playing close to MRA talking points (shit like this is, in part, where I think they get their ideas from — find one thing that implies women want to be worshipped, assume all women demand worshipping)
“…I…I am so confused by this… like what is he saying?”
That was very nearly a direct quote. The “argument” has been coming up a lot lately (like, on major feminist sites, I’d be surprised if you hadn’t seen it) — that women should be armed to prevent rape. And liberals go “um no” means we’d rather see a dead rape victim than a dead rapist, because we just hate guns that much!
When no, it’s that it wouldn’t help, and is all kinds of victim blaming, and most rapists aren’t strangers but rather people the victim knows and probably wouldn’t just shoot. And, oh yeah, rape victims aren’t often believed now, if you’ve got an unharmed not-a-victim-cuz-gun holding a literal smoking gun, over a dead would-be-rapist, you really think the not-a-victim is going to be praised for this act of self-defense?
Pull the other one.
I used to think I liked Raisin Bran quite a bit more than Cocoa Puffs, but that can’t be right, can it? Because there’s no way becausescience and I could have different tastes when it comes to cereal, our cereal preferences are in our genes!
Marie — neither do I, so it’s extra alpha? (Irrelevant but I’m lactose intolerant, I find white milk actually repulsive…when I think it smells tolerable, it’s gone off…it’s weird)
Manboob, you are so good to protect us from those bad bad men with their bad bad facts”.
Yeah, funny that according to the manosphere the “facts” always come down to women being inferior shit. Yet anyone or anything that remotely even criticizes men or masculinity, whether factual or not is shut down by MRAs screeching misandry.
Sorry but anyone that claims the facts all coincidentally put down a certain group, be it a sex, gender, race, sexuality or religion is automatically suspect in my books, because it suggests that there’s an agenda at work. And if you think everyone outside the manosphere can’t see your very obvious and biased agenda against women then you’re blind.
Also please do stick to porn. If every internet misogynist spent all their time watching porn and leaving women alone that would make me a very happy woman!
Speaking of lactose intolerant, I really should have checked to make sure I had Lactaid before eating the 4 (delicious) pieces of pizza.
I put almond milk on my cereal 😀
Damn I forgot how to blockquote!! it’s been too long 😛
@Argenti Aertheri
*blushes* I got the reference, I just was being…snarky.
Ah 🙁 I just hadn’t heard it before, so I didn’t understand.
@viscaria
Well, someone is wrong here 😉 We need to find the most alpha-est cereal.
@quackers
[blockquote] quote [/blockquote] but with < instead of [