We met new A Voice for Men writer Clint Carpentier earlier this week, when we took a look at a recent post of his waxing nostalgic about the good old days before marital rape laws, when wives couldn’t say “no” to their husbands and expect the law to take this no any more seriously than a husband intent on rape.
In a second posting, he’s doubled down on the whole marital rape thing and incorporated into a vast and fantastical vision of the past and future of humankind that bears so little resemblance to reality that it’s worth quoting in detail as a sort of case study in Men Going Their Own Way delusions.
Carpentier, clearly a Man Going His Own Way From Reality, begins with a brief and erroneous survey of human prehistory that he seems to have picked up at the University of His Own Ass:
The concept of marriage is relatively new to the human species, but was based on the ancient contract emotionally agreed upon by our primitive ancestors when they discovered that due to their big brains, their offspring were born less mature by necessity than other, less intelligent species; this contract promoted the exchange of three C’s (cooking, cleaning, and copulation) from the female, and three P’s from the male (protection, provision, and progeny).
So not only is Carpentier returning to his notion that compulsory copulation is proper wifely duty, but he apparently thinks that the prehistoric “wife” sat around the cave all day eating neolithic bon bons while her husband marched off to hunt mammoths for her — or perhaps commuted by foot-powered car to his job as a Brontosaurus crane operator at Slate Rock and Gravel Company.
In fact, the notion that male hunters were the main providers in prehistoric society seems to have been little more than a projection of the patriarchal attitudes of older generations of anthropologists onto the past. As best as we can figure it today, prehistoric women were involved not only in extensive gathering but in hunting as well, probably providing the bulk of the calories in the prehistoric diet.
To Carpentier, apparently, it’s all gone to hell since our days in the caves. Today, he laments, “the legal system has been unabashedly twisting the ancient contract into something that amounts to slavery” for men, while giving women more benefits, including the ability to say no to sex, which Carpentier, as in his previous post, describes as a terrible hardship for men:
The responsibilities for women have been eliminated by technology and gender politics, while at the same time their contract benefits have increased. On the whole what was once her responsibility, to copulate, has become whim and weapon. With a legal system in place which has been designed for her to exploit and abuse, it is becoming increasingly difficult to trust women enough to even associate with, never mind marry.
Yep, we’re now coming to the “I’m taking my ball and going home” part of Carpentier’s rant, a necessary part of any MGTOW manifesto worth its salt.
What women didn’t realize was that the very things which made their lives easier – be they appliances or conveniently boxed pre-made meals at the grocery store – simultaneously reduced the necessity for women.
Let’s let that sink in for a moment: because of washing machines and TV dinners, half of the human population is becoming obsolete.
Women have inadvertently been reduced to gestational incubators; everything else, men can take care of on their own.
But Carpentier is convinced that SCIENCE will soon find a way to create what he calls a “gestational beer keg” to enable men to make a little end-run around that traditional (cis) womanly function. All men will need is their eggs, and well, that won’t be a problem:
[M]ake no mistake, women will sell their eggs, and they’ll do it willingly, just as they sell their bodies … And with the advent of Vasagel, a male fertility inhibitor, which is safe, reversible, and lasts roughly ten years per shot, women will lose the stranglehold of procreation over men.
So, wait, do men want to be able to gestate babies in beer kegs, or do they want to avoid having kids altogether? To Carpentier it hardly seems to matter, as his main goal seems to be to say “I told you so” to women.
At this point Carpentier puts on his futurist cap and sets forth what he sees as two possible futures for humanity.
The first, and most obvious answer – and one I so dearly hope for – is women wake up, grow up, and take responsibility for their own life choices. Women are not children, and husbands are not their dads. A radical paradigm shift will have to happen before men begin to have trust in the ancient contract again. A burgeoning respect for the sex that created and continues to maintain the civilization women so blithely enjoy would be nice. Men have been working on it for five thousand years specifically for women. A little recognition would be appreciated.
WE HUNTED THE MAMMOTH TO FEED YOU!
And then he says the first positive thing about women I’ve seen him say:
This isn’t about misogyny. This is about disillusionment; we love women, we love their flustered approach to parallel parking, we love it… lift something heavy, or get something high down, we love their sense of helplessness, even when we know they’re not.
That’s right: the only thing he likes about women is what he imagines to be their general incompetence and their possibly feigned “sense of helplessness.”
You know what I love about MGTOWers? Their endless troubles with the basics of grammar. Diagram that last “sentence” of his. I dare you!
In any case, in this scenario, the only way women will be able to get themselves back in the good graces of the men they have wronged by, I guess, not wanting to be raped by their husbands, is for them to admit they were wrong and ask gently for forgiveness:
Men might not be willing to accept the ancient contract back, but we have an amazing capacity to forgive a guilty smile, just meet us halfway, we can work this out.
If women don’t return to men, humbled and ashamed, Carpentier predicts a rather more dramatic future. That is to say: THE APOCALYPSE.
It will start slow, with stores refusing service to those who don’t have the mark of the beast tattooed on their foreheads.
Sorry, wrong apocalypse:
The second thing I can see happening is MGTOW’s becoming criminalized. And here’s how it will happen: it’ll start with a single’s tax, applicable only to men, specifically men who live underneath the tax bracket.
Yeah, this will happen shortly after Congress passes the Monkeys Flying Out of My Butt Revenue Enhancement Opportunity Act of 2014.
Oh, but the Revelations of Clint Carpentier are just getting started. After taxing all the single men, the evil gynocracy will go after their sperm:
If Vasagel can’t be quashed at the FDA level, it will become highly taxed, or just made outright illegal; it’s unlikely anyone with a criminal record, however slight, will be allowed to get a Vasagel injection, on the fear that the doctor may well lose his practicing license. You’ll watch as your fathers, uncles, brothers, friends, get picked up one by one, for what will boil down to not manning up and doing their duty as “men.”
Dude, NO ONE — not even your poor abused socks — WANTS YOUR PRECIOUS BODILY FLUIDS.
But in Carpentier’s mind the evil gyno-governmental conspiracy to steal men’s sperm and make them all into involuntary daddies will ultimately bring everything crashing down:
You’ll feel the first shocks, as the infrastructure fails to maintain itself under the strain of invisible workers who have been imprisoned. You’ll watch as convicts are forced into slave labor to sustain the infrastructure. You’ll feel the crunch as taxes increase, then increase again, because no government seems to understand that slaves and government workers cannot create GDP; without GDP, you have no tax base, without a tax base, you can’t maintain a government, and a large portion of women work for the government, whether directly or through welfare.
And then Carpentier pulls out his trump card:
And this is only if men are so kind as not to revolt.
Yep. It’s always the same old story with these guys: If you don’t listen up, ladies, the world you know will collapse, MEN will arise as one in fury at the women who destroyed the civilization they worked so hard to build, and a new MANLY MALE MANARCHY will put itself in charge.
And presumably the marital raping will begin in earnest again.
Once again, it all comes down to fury that women can say “no.”
Some choice quotes under that one:
“The crazies calling us misogynists are so fucking wrong it’s not even funny. If we didn’t LOVE women we wouldn’t be here, this website wouldn’t even exist. We’d all be reading Return of Kings. We are here because we love women and we have the hope and the desire to fix things so that we can continue loving without fear.”
“They do not realize that in some ways what we do here is a desperate reaching out for them, not a shoving away. It looks that way sometimes, admittedly, but in the real gist of things, we men here are trying to convince them of their wrongs, so they can hang around and we can enjoy them more (but some of the rules HAVE to be on OUR terms no matter what it says to them).”
I was reading the comments and became very confused; since I go here so often, I couldn’t stop thinking the commenters were actually mocking him.
But they weren’t, and it was saddening.
Also, could we start a safe home for all the socks these guys have abused?
David, that island is perfect. <3
Won’t people think of the socks for once?
Oddly enough, I know a lot of couples, made of a cis man and a cis woman, who love each other, have great sex and (wow) made babies. One couple I know has 5 kids. The wife is in our feminist (wow) discussion circles and seems to love sex. Shocking, I know. Woman are not supposed to like or want sex… so I don’t know what her problem is. Maybe her ancestors ate too much mammoth food.
mammoth meat, I meant =P well… maybe eating mamoth food can disturb one’s generation? hmmm….
Yeah, feminists are working to tax only DA SINGLE MENZ and pigs can suddenly fly on their own natural wings. *rolls eyes*
Obviously her mammoth slayer — er, HUSBAND — isn’t holding a big enough club over her head.
So wait, how far back does he want marriage? Back when it was just something used for diplomacy between nobles of different kingdoms where the couples often didn’t care for each other and just had paramours?
Well, it certainly doesn’t sound like fighting. Fighting sounds like DIE HATED ARACHNID *rolls for initiative*.
So if it isn’t fighting, it must be fleeing, because binary.
“Women have inadvertently been reduced to gestational incubators”
Interesting that he regards this as a problem, since his entire thesis seems to be that women would ideally be nothing more than gestational incubators. Similarly, “women are not children, and husbands are not their dads” – but if they don’t do what I say, they’ll have to go sit in the time-out corner!
Also …its complete rebellion that women are getting their hair cut! UGH!!
I’m thinking a lot of them wouldn’t want anything to do with having a child if it meant that there were no women around to do all the dirty work in order to take care of the child. I personally know a lot of men that would say a big “fuck that shit” if they found out they had to change diapers and clean up baby puke all on their own. Props do the single dads out there that do, and the dads that actually help out with that stuff.
But…..could she make fire???????????????????
Well my brother didn’t fight it either then, he caught it and put it in the basement (we have a coat of snow and it would freeze, poor spider! I have no idea how he cares, but he does)
Having finished the OP, we’re refusing BC to criminals now? Someone remind me, when did the US stop sterilizing “undesirables”? (Hint, if you’re over 40, and those “undesirables” are Native American, the answer is “within your lifetime”)
Does this strike anyone else as being insulting to men as well? I mean, does he think that men are so incapable that the only way they can cook and clean for themselves is due to modern technology? Before the invention of the microwave dinner, did all men live with their mom until they got married?
Also I don’t even get how “having to cook” is seen as a chore – I friggin love cooking.
Crinkled brow…
So she has a choice to have sex ?(or not to )
And that is exploitation and abuse ?
Sorry David I am taking this literal (for now)
HOW am I “responsible” to have sex with someone I don’t want to have sex with ? How am I exploiting let alone abusing anyone if I don’t have sex with them ???????????
And I am SOOO happy for the women in the path of this guy that he finds it “increasingly difficult to associate with them let alone marry.”
He says it like its something like a loss to women .
Can you say “entitled” much ?????????
@dlouwe: yep… and it also seem to imply that men have no power of seduction towards women whatsoever. It is as like there are no women in the world actually interested in any men out there.
it is such a pile of…. phhh… I can’t even…
I noticed that too; preventing people you don’t like from reproducing has been common in many places and times, but why on earth would you force them to reproduce? If they’re undesirable, why would you want more of them?
Lana, he means it literally: he doesn’t want married women to have the right to say no.
I don’t think that they don’t understand the concept of “seduction”. it appears they believe seduction = convincing. That is not how it works.
Its not a secret some of the best chef’s around are men. Seriously just watch food T.V .(wink) . I have two sons that are COOKS. (they are yes..PAID cooks) My husband doesn’t get paid for it but he cooks ..his dad cooks .and its not “feminism .” Go to a military ship and see who is most likely (gender wise) the ships cooks.
The “beer keg” is a nice touch, though. “When MEN control the reproduction, we’ll do it in a MANLY way! With BEER!”
or sex = you owe me this.
that is actually sad.
and scary.