Over in the Men Going Their Own Way subreddit, one recent convert to the MGTOW philosophy admits that there is one thing about the females that’s really baffling.
Namely, why do any of them work, when they could just use their magic hoo-has to snag some poor dude and live off of him, lying on the couch watching Jerry Springer amidst a pile of bon-bon wrappers?
[H]ow does MGTOW explain working women? Why do women work low or pseudo status positions for employers that are primarily public facing? I feel like the women who work at Waffle House / Starbucks / whatever probably have a more consistently stressful time of things than I do working a STEM job, they’re paid less, and they’re burning SMV time working a plebian job.
Why do women work low and pseudo status positions like these? How does MGTOW explain women who opt in to these arrangements when they could likely bf/marry/B.D.Govt their way to a less stressful life?
In case you’re not intimately familiar with misogyny-speak, SMV stands for “Sexual Market Value,” which, these dudes believe, starts declining for women after they hit the ripe old age of 25 or so and start getting all old and ugly. And “B.D.Govt” means “Big Daddy Government,” always ready to help a girl out with some of that sweet, sweet welfare cash.
Happily, the subreddit’s regulars are more than willing to mansplain the puzzling fact of women having jobs.
A fellow called NormanDaNubcaek has a whole long list of reasons.
-They may have squandered their childhood/teen years, already putting them at a disadvantage to serious students
-They don’t want to put in the initial effort getting the proper training (Think instant vs delayed gratification)
-STEM actually requires critical thinking skills
-The job, while perhaps stressful, is regular and simple (more repetitive work vs less work that is more complex)
-Their jobs already have a lot of women, so they just join the pack, or other women recommend them to join
-They already have massive debt from a garbage degree and can’t afford to go back to school
-They used to be supported by a man, but now have to earn their own living until the next guy comes around.
Lostapwbm has a somewhat more detailed explanation, and one that is slightly more rooted in consensus reality, if not always in the rules of grammar.
“Poor women have always had to work,” he writes.
Housewife is typically a role that only the wife of a successful or frugal man, and feminism is a vanity project of rich white women.
So why can’t these Starbucks ladies “bf/marry their way out” of the working world? First, he explains, there’s the problem of man-access.
[T]hey don’t have access to a man of sufficiently higher economic status that she can go from working woman to housewife/lady of the house.
And then of course there is the problem of these women being such stuck up snooty you-know-whats that they can’t appreciate the perfectly decent men right there under their nose ISN’T THAT RIGHT KIMBERLY SOME DAY YOU’LL REALIZE I WAS THERE ALL ALONG WE WERE MEANT TO BE oh whoops.
A lot of women aren’t attracted to the type of man who would lift her out of her lower economic status. He’s boring/lame/has no game. He just wants to move up his job, pay his bills, and basically live a drama-free life.
Well, ok, but what about living off of Big Daddy G?
Women dependent on the government (B.D. Govt as you put it) are in that category of drama-lovers. Three kids by two guys, ex-boyfriends are drug addicts/dealers, whatever you prefer, but the takeaway is these women don’t want a less stressful life because they emotionally feed on that drama.
Wordjedi agrees that these Starbucks baristas are a bunch of stuck up rom-com lovers holding out for some imaginary perfect dude but ha ha the joke’s on them — if they sleep with too many Mr. Right-Nows while waiting for Mr. Right, they’ll get so burned out on dick that something something cats box of wine.
Yeah, I’m having a little trouble summarizing this one. You try:
Remember that women still flock to romcom movies in droves. They still really think mating is equal, that two people who were meant to be together tritely run together through a meadow and embrace.
Until she finds her perfect six figure hunk, a girl’s gotta have some random stiff dick in her now and then, right? Especially when she’s had a few drinks so has an excuse not to give a fuck? ====> hookup culture.
Unfortunately, people give less and less of an (emotional) fuck for each random hookup. Bye bye, perfect romance. She’s bored with dick by the time she meets him, if she ever does. ====> box wine + cats + Starbucks barista 4-evah
The explanaiton proffered by good_man_gone is if anything even less cogent. He starts out by suggesting that any women you see working just weren’t pretty enough to score themselves the high-quality beta bux.
“I never in my life have seen a perfect ten flipping burgers for 7$ /hour,” he declares, with an almost audible wink.
But then he goes on to suggest that almost any gal — even those who are perhaps not that pretty — can find a man dumb enough to marry her up or at least buy her a couple of drinks at closing time amirite fellas?
And still there is plenty of guys out there who will happily marry the 3s or 4s and give them money. Smv is key here. Better looks = more free stuff and money. But fugly chicks get free drinks too you know.
I have to admit I was guilty of that in the past. You know when the pub is about to close and u are hammered and suddenly your brain tells you “go ahead buy her a drink, yeah the fat small chick over there do it”
I guess the real lesson here is to never ask MGTOWs for an explanation of anything.
@LindsayIrene
Yeah, but he responded directly to my comment. I guess we can sit in time out together, then.
http://s2.dmcdn.net/PXbe7.jpg
For some reason Walter makes me very sad. I mean, I get the joke, and it is indeed a very modest proposal. But he makes me very sad.
I don’t do sarcasm or irony very well though, that is probably it!
http://iambrony.steeph.tp-radio.de/mlp/gif/fluttershy_by_mezkalito4p-d4haxch.gif
@ WWTH
The boobocracy could cause trouble in same-sex relationships, though. Two giganto-breasted women trying to embrace might end up just bouncing off of each other.
On the other hand, I would do pretty well in a boobocracy.
I suggest a different kind of cockocracy where the people who only want to talk about penises all the time get to live in on an island with like-minded people, while the rest of us get on with our lives.
I’d rather live in a boobocracy than a boorocracy.
http://49.media.tumblr.com/cdc8fceef262e389936aa2eaa57a9d6c/tumblr_n6e4ii8Z9s1saoprso1_500.gif
I tried searching for a funny gif for that. None of them were at all appropriate.
Excuse me while I bleach my eyeballs.
Haha. I think that quote will stick with me for a while.
@WWTH:
Does that mean that you and Moocow are our rightful rulers?
We are WHTM version of the Pevensies.
Does that make David the Aslan? Or is that you because you have a lion avatar?
There are times when I honestly start wondering if Walter isn’t one of the regulars here playing an elaborate game. I mean, the Walter persona is obviously a front for the actual troll, but while Walter doesn’t intend to be funny, the troll intends Walter to be. It’s very postmodern.
The suspicion arises because, well, honestly, when’s the last time one of the trolls here (or any manospherian) intended to be funny and actually succeeded?
And then the nazi stuff comes out and the idea it’s a regular goes away. Oh well.
ETA: Verily, there is no Lord of Large Dongs but Moocow, and Walter is his prophet. Which probably makes him Lucy. But who’s the castrating White Witch? *Steps aside as Mammothers rush to sign up for the role*
(Note to literal-minded trolls: I do not actually think any Mammother castrates anyone, unless they’re a nurse/doctor performing operations on people with testicular cancer.)
[whatthehell?]
So wait… in Walter’s cockocracy, is dick size absolute or relative to body size? As a 6″8′ dude, this has very peculiar ramifications for me and my place in the cockriarchy.
See… Walter… here’s the thing. I’ve read a lot of dystopian porn. Enough to grok why someone would write it and find it appealing. “Knowing your place” has nothing to do with it. The appeal comes from having things set in stone; you are X class, you get Y women, nobody has a choice and nobody can refuse.
“Entitlement” isn’t eliminated in the slightest, and you yourself proved it by using the word multiple times in describing who gets what. Instead, entitlement is confirmed; society tells you this is what you are entitled to, and you get it.
What if the particular woman chosen for you (because women are always objects in these stories) didn’t want you? There’s always some kind of punishment for the person who doesn’t follow the system. Women are literally punished, sometimes painfully, for not fulfilling the male entitlement.
So it has nothing to do with “knowing your place” in society; misogyny and groups like MRAs and Redpillers come from the inability to deal with not getting your way, and not being able to handle the possibility (or reality) of rejection. So you make up stories about circumstances where rejection is impossible, and that makes you happy.
Ack. Walter again??
Imma just kinda go back to the OP and ask just who is supposed to do these low status jobs? There are too many of them to suppose that only certain people (students/poors/retirees/bored affluents?) should do them.
And why are they shameful and low-status anyway? In large part because businesses get away with underpaying their workers. But, without these workers (who, until recently I was one of) commerce becomes impossible!
Take just food for example: without people to wait tables, restaraunts go out of business, without stockers and cashiers, grocers go out of business, without truckers and distribution center workers, no one has food to sell, without people to grow, harvest and process food, the whole thing collapses and everyone has to grow their own food.
Service and retail workers make our way of life possible and deserve respect and a living wage.
Ooh. Got a little ranty there, didn’t I?
I did a decade in the service industry! Bedrock of the economy, vital to modern life, underappreciated and underpaid. Workers unite!
What the heck is “pseudo status?”
The way these people look at life is telling. They assume someone will be in “debt from a garbage degree,” which ignores two things: There are employers that only care if you have a degree at all, not what the degree is in, and various fields have all kinds of jobs that no one outside of the field would ever guess existed.
There’s such a volume of specialized, fine-grained knowledge behind literally everything in the world that the kinds of assumptions these people make don’t amount to anything. They’re way too reductive. Obviously these people don’t really care about the world outside their own head, or they’d know that.
Can we not embed flashing gifs, please? Seizure disorders, etc.
sorry! Thought of that shortly afterwards. It wasn’t as bad on my monitor. David, if you want to pull that comment, please do!
Robots! Fear those of us in the STEM fields, we are coming for you all!
Eventually. But a computer went 5-0 against a Go champion last week. (this is a big deal in AI programming and was projected to take another decade)
@TEP:
That’s very true. Amongst the people who work with me are a couple of biologists, a medical doctor and someone with a law degree. It really doesn’t matter what you studied at university so much as what your mindset is; if you have the right mindset you can be taught the skills you need, and if you don’t have it then no amount of STEM degrees will be sufficient.
I was just reading the old post where the “scented fucking candles” meme originated:
https://www.wehuntedthemammoth.com/2012/06/02/scented-candles-oppress-men-the-spearhead-at-its-self-proclaimed-best/comment-page-7/#comments
The implication there seemed to be that women mostly work to be able to buy themselves some frivolous goods (like the infamous scented candles) and services that supposedly constitute a really large part of the economy. In this model, if modern women didn’t have these consumerist aspirations, then
a) they really could live on some average man’s expense (or failing that, on welfare) without needing their own (usually modest) salary on top of that.
b) the economy and therefore job market would be much diminished so men could fill the remaining jobs, especially considering their higher productivity
c) women could better devote their lives to motherhood (and would, if there was no government welfare and feminist anti-marriage propaganda)
@Rabid Rabbit
You know, some time ago I thought about creating a troll-persona after I read people complaining about how the trolls we get are uninteresting, but I didn’t think I could be just ridiculous and I’d end up saying horrible things MRAs and the like would say.
What if I did something like “Ha, you feminazis and your cat pictures! Don’t you know dogs are better than cats? Here, look at all those puppy pictures!” Would that be acceptable?
There’s a liberal arts dissertation in here.
@RosaDeLava
Poe’s law in action!
https://www.wehuntedthemammoth.com/2016/01/02/return-of-kings-dogs-provide-most-of-the-positive-benefits-of-women-except-sex/
@Dodom
You’re right, that cartoon was painfully stupid.
Victorious Parasol
Smalls will all wear blue overalls with a giant S, in red, covering the crotch. Their cars will also have “I have a small penis” written on them.
ej
The stipend is non-negotiable, but I can see your point about the housing situation. In this situation, everyone will buy homes, but Smalls will have limited options in terms of neighborhoods and housing types. This makes things much more fair to women. Also, to overcome the stipend women, or people born without penises, will get a special tax break.
rugbyyogi
Those other systems failed because they were focused on gender, race or religion. Those things don’t matter. Penis size does matter. It’s all that matters for a man. That’s why this system will work and bring about an eternity of peace on Earth.
kupo
If you have to ask, you’ll never know.
weirwoodtreehugger
No woman would marry a man with a small penis. Women only marry men with small dicks today because of the patriarchy. My system will eliminate the patriarchy and free women from the oppression of small dicks.
Your idea of a boobocracy is very sexist. Women are more than just some random body part. Women can’t and shouldn’t be defined by their breasts.
Kirbywarp
The cockocracy will solve that as well! Men will not be taught that they are entitled to women. They will be taught that they are entitled to contempt if their dicks are small, and submission from smaller men if their dicks are big. That is the beauty of the cockocracy, it channels male entitlement inwards, away from women and towards something vitally important.
It’s a very feminist system. Perhaps a little rad-fem, for these parts.