We live in a matriarchy because YOUR MOM, that’s why, MRA explains

Today’s lesson in Men’s Rights pseudoscience comes from a regular contributor to A Voice for Men named Stephen Jarosek, who also goes by the name “Codebuster.” The “code” he has “busted” this time? The code of the Seekret Matriarchy That Runs the World. And he’s busted it with … SCIENCE! (Or at least a very, very rough approximation of it.)

Put on your wrong-thinking caps, because Codebuster is going to get all technical here! He starts off his essay with a lengthy discussion of sciencey stuff that includes sentences like these:

Nonlocality is crucial to explaining the binding problem. It explains how neurons (and other body cells) are entangled into a unity in a manner that is analogous to how people within a city are “entangled” through telecommunications and media. …

Once we accept nonlocality as the all-pervasive given, the basic processes, based in semiotic theory, make perfect, easy sense (just briefly, semiotic theory relates to the fundamental properties of thought processes for all living entities – motivation, association and habituation).

Honestly, I only lightly skimmed this portion of his post, because it’s only relevant as a sort of throat-clearing preface to the SMOKING GUN OF MATRIARCHAL OPPRESSION that Codebuster drops about half-way through:

It is now well established that, by far, most of a human brain’s wiring (its functional specializations) is accomplished within only the first few years of life. These are the years spent under the care of the primary nurturer. 

And in most cases this “primary nurturer” is — wait for it — YOUR MOM! 

Or, to be more technical, “Your Momma.”

Jarosek doesn’t mention this, but SCIENCE has already proven many things about your momma. To wit, she is:

• so nasty that she brings crabs to the beach
• so dirty that she makes Right Guard turn left
• so poor she went to McDonald’s and put a milkshake on layaway
• so lazy that she stuck her nose out the window to let the wind blow it

Science has also proven that when she sits around the house, she really is more likely, statistically speaking, to be the primary carer for small children. As Codebuster explains,

It is the primary nurturer, usually the mother, who first defines the things that matter… the things that first wire brains, to set the foundations for all that comes later. Momma knows what she wants her little man to be, and she knows what entitlements her little girl deserves.

And that’s how the matriarchy gets you!

Children first learn how to be from their primary nurturer. It’s not rocket science to realize that The Matriarchy establishes the foundations in young minds upon which “The Patriarchy” (whatever feminists imagine that to be) is built.

That’s right: the MATRIARCHY creates “The Patriarchy” and is secretly running it the whole time! Or something.

Taken individually, The Matriarchy wields far greater power than The Patriarchy ever could. There is no such thing as a patriarchy that magically materializes on its own, from a vacuum, independently of The Matriarchy that nurtures and raises it, to then go on to oppress womankind.

Your momma is devious! So devious that I have no fucking clue exactly what sinister conspiracy Codebuster is talking about here.

Anyhoo,

Based on the training and rewards that most children receive first from their mothers, boys become men who do women’s bidding, while girls become women who, feminist indoctrination notwithstanding, prioritize the raising of children …

Boys become men who provide, and girls become women who are provided for (or, in the current affirmative-action zeitgeist, they might work so long as it does not impact too adversely on quality of life).

Huh. Most of the women I know “choose” to work in order to, you know, pay the rent and buy food and, when they have kids, pay for those kids’ expenses. I had no idea that it was optional, and that women are actually paid more not to work?

I guess it’s like when the government pays farmers not to grow crops.

Codebuster also explains that “feminism’s attack dogs” are the way they are because of poop.

They can be counted on to respond on cue with the matriarchal indoctrination that they had inculcated into them from their infancy. They know their correct place as white knights saving damsels in distress. Without question, they lay their coats over puddles so that the li’l ladies won’t get their dainty feet wet. They have no idea of the matriarchal source that governs their blind obedience to their mistress. They don’t remember back when they used to have their cute little noses rubbed into their poo on the carpet, and spanked so that they never do it again.

Now, on the surface, this theory might seem a bit like utter bullshit made up by someone looking for an excuse to blame women for everything. But Codebuster reminds us again that it is all backed by SCIENCE, or at least a very very rough approximation of it.

Neural plasticity in conjunction with lived experiences, not “genetic programming,” is the key to understanding that what works in training dumb animals for circus acts also works in training dumb males as obedient lap-dogs for The Feminist Matriarchy, or as dumb providers who don’t question the provided-fors that spend their money. …

Before anyone can hope to transcend anything, they need to first transcend The Matriarchy.

Huh. So, if the early childhood years are key to everything, it would seem — to me at least — that the current generation of Men’s Rights activists are doing a very poor job of it.

Instead of campaigning for “financial abortions” and abandoning their own children to the matriarchal overmommas, they should instead be demanding that they be the primary caregivers to the world’s babies and toddlers, poopy diapers and all. Regardless of whether the poopy diapers belong to the babies, or to them.

Hmm. Paul Elam, the head deadbeat dad of the Men’s Rights movement, seems to be casting about for a new moneymaking scheme now that donations to his pocket A Voice for Men seem to be drying up.

Might I suggest he try babysitting?

NOTE TO PARENTS: Do not ever, under any circumstances, hire Paul Elam as a babysitter.