Categories
antifeminism armageddon drama kings dude you've got no fucking idea what you're talking about evil SJWs grandiosity men who should not ever be with women ever MGTOW misogyny MRA post contains sarcasm reddit

Viking-bearded manbaby predicts end of civilization if feminists keep being so feministy

Uh oh.
Uh oh.

Ok, so I don’t want to alarm you or anything but one of those Men’s Rights Activists they have so many of over on Reddit has some genuine concerns about western civilization, specifically with regard to its possible imminent collapse, due to feminists being so damn feministy and making men so mad — totally justifiably, bros! — that they’re going to stop wanting to have babies with ladies any more, thus leading to the end of civilization, as referred to earlier in this sentence.

Well, shoot, I think that might have been his whole argument right there, but let’s take a look at his post anyway, which he has helpfully if ungrammatically titled “Genuine concern that due to the actions of 3rd wave feminists and the rise of MGTOW The western world is reaching a point of possible collapse.”

Oh, and if you’re wondering about the viking beard thing, I looked at some of his older comments and he seems to like talking about his beard, so I thought I would mention it.

So let’s move right along and get into the meat of Mr. BlightedArrow91’s warning re. that impending end of civilization thing.

Mr. BlightedArrow91 starts off his post, which as you may recall was entitled “”Genuine concern that due to the actions of 3rd wave feminists and the rise of MGTOW The western world is reaching a point of possible collapse” by noting that he’s worried “that the actions of feminists and SJW’s … will lead to the decline of western civilization.”

Ok, so like the first thing you need to sustain a civilization is babies. Specifically, 2.1 babies per family. But alas, feminists hate babies! And so, due to

the lack of and attack on new families and the family lifestyle, and several other factors caused and perpetuated by feminists as a whole, I’m genuinely worried that western civilization will be dead within the next 30-100 years.

Ok, so to sum up what we’ve learned so far: feminists hate babies and, wait, what was the other thing? Oh yeah, this dude is apparently worried about western civilization, with regard to the whole “possible collapse” thing. I think he might have mentioned that a couple of times.

Now bear with me, I know this sounds a little crazy at first, but let’s take a look at a few of the finer details here, Over the last 20 years there has been two major surges of sjw and third wave feminist culture, it’s been there the whole time, it was just much bigger during the 90’s, and now.

Ok, twenty years, two big surges of feminism.

During both surges the birthrate and marriage rate of the western world has dropped significantly.

Uh oh!

With the current justifiable rise and increase of MGTOW and the ever increasing craziness, aggression, and regressive nature of third-wave feminists,and the needed TFR(total fertility rate) of 2.1 annually, This number of decreased births and decreased marriages will grow and grow.

Ok, look, you just have to get used to the fact that this dude doesn’t really understand when to capitalize words. Now that we’ve got that out of the way, oh no!

If that number does grow, the likelihood of a TFR and subsequent population replacement level decline will be inevitable, which will eventually lead to the fall of western civilization.

In other words, there’s going to be a baby shortage. I don’t want to cause a panic or anything, but you may need to start hoarding babies.

Luckily, they’re generally pretty small, if noisy and a bit smelly.

Now, obviously — obviously! –feminism can’t last forever. I mean, even a viking-bearded manbaby who can’t capitalize words correctly can see that.

Now don’t get me wrong, I do understand that the SJW and third-wave feminist cultures will die down eventually, but will the backlashes created from both movements be let go of, and will we not see another resurgence of them in the near future afterward?

I don’t actually understand the question, so let’s just say “maybe?”

Now that MRA’s actually are making headway and will eventually show the average male exactly how stacked society is against them are we going to see an even larger rise of MGTOW and men just saying fuck it?

I guess maybe yes? I mean, the standard reaction most dudes have when they hear about or run into MGTOWs is “I want to be more like these bitter manbabies who spend their entire lives complaining about the women they supposedly totally don’t need and that means you too mom, I hear you out there in the hall!”

I mean, it’s not like most dudes hear about MGTOW and say, what the hell is wrong with these sad, angry doofuses?

Anyway, Mr. BlightedArrow91 isn’t done talking yet.

Going by the fact that two PC culture and SJW surges have happened both in 1991-2000, and 2011-present, is it not possible to surmise that by 2031 we will see another rise of both?

Wait what? I’m going to go with “maybe” again.

I fear, that if the future follows the past 20 years history of whining over trivialities,lies,and myths, and the constant demonizing of men, we will see this pattern continue, and we will see a large population decline from men refusing to mate, which could possibly lead to the same happening from the opposite gender, and if this does happen, we very well may be on the beginning trail of the end of the west.

Wait, is this just the first paragraph again?

Are we in some kind of weird Groundhog Day time loop, but instead of gallivanting around Punxsutawney, Pennsylvania and rescuing kids who fall out of trees and learning how to ice sculpt and play the piano and basically get in touch with our own soul, we have to read half-baked MRA manifestos over and over again until our brains fall out?

I’m going to go with “maybe” again.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

113 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
EJ (The Other One)
EJ (The Other One)
4 years ago

decrease the growth of the decrease in birth rates

I know what you mean, but still, you made baby differential calculus cry.

Dr. NicolaLuna
Dr. NicolaLuna
4 years ago

I know what you mean, but still, you made baby differential calculus cry.

I started off writing “increase the birth rate” but then I remembered the viking dude’s terrible sentence construction and I couldn’t resist. I find myself way funnier than I actually am!

Tessa
Tessa
4 years ago

Jamesworkshop:
Yeah. That’s what I was saying in my post. I’d heard the stuff about her word usage in that Tropes Vs Women episode, and never felt it implied she was anti-sex worker because of the reasons I mentioned. I’d been wondering if the statement earlier about her being anti-sex worker was from something else.

Kagehi
Kagehi
4 years ago

“That said I am battling my own deeply ingrained negative attitude to sex/sex work. Sex always frightened me and when I first developed thoughts on it and feminism I kind of fell into the mindset of most sex work being a form of abuse because I couldn’t envision someone not being frightened by it.”

I.. once had a much bigger issue with it too, but.. funny enough, one of the first cases of having to ask myself, “What is the real problem with it.”, came from the old Quincy TV show – in which he was strong advocate for making sure they could get help, both from cops, and from the medical industry, along with the same sort of things that everyone else was, at the time, disparaged for trying to get – condoms, and safe sex. He didn’t want to see these people on a slab, just because everyone else insisted on hating them, and in doing so denied them even the most basic rights that *everyone else* would be given, like – protection by the law, from people trying to beat, rape, or kill them.

Like a lot of things, too many of them social problems, we seem to have become divided into two camps:

1. Those people are cheating us, hurting us, somehow, dangerous, harmful to society, and need to be stopped.

2. Those people deserve respect, and help, which may, oddly enough, mean reconsidering what you mean by “dangerous” or “harmful”, especially in light of all the harm done to them trying to “protect” everyone else.

You get this with social programs, jobs people don’t think other people should be doing, and who the heck knows what else. It manifests as one side trying to help, and sometimes, the other side criminalizing the very act of helping in some manner. In terms of social programs this usually means cutting funding, complicating the paperwork, redefining what people “need” from the program, and are thus allowed to have.

With sex work.. you get the federal law redefining “trafficking” from, “The act of using coercion, or violence, to force someone to do work they would otherwise reject”, more or less, to, “Harboring sex workers, hiring sex worker, acting as an intermediary for sex workers…” Err, where did all the other trafficking go in that???

The result is stupid shit – someone arrested and charge for child endangerment, and trafficking in a minor, for ***sharing*** their apartment with someone who lied about their real age – not pimping them, just – sleeping in the same general place, and paying part of the rent. Or, all the attacks, and voluntary shut downs, of online places for people to transact (even the free ones, where the website received no money, at all, to allow people to do so). Or, Alaska, where a women, recognizing that sex work, or even, “tangential work, which might involve things that some people would confuse with sex work”, was arrested and charged with trafficking for offering what she never had – a place for people in multiple such jobs to trade information, talk about clients, or even point possible clients to someone actually willing to provide a particular sort of fantasy. The tangential work? Things like nude massages, nude cleaning services, as well as just.. anything else that might include either nudity, or which some twit might “confuse” with prostitution.

And, that is without even considering, for a long time, just what the F the difference really is between these things:

1. Being paid to appear in a lot of porn.
2. Being paid to appear in some porn, with people that you don’t know.
3. Being paid to do so **one time**, possibly with someone else that is also picked off the street.
4. Being paid for what you did on your own time, on a video.
5. Being paid to do stuff on a web cam.
6. Being paid as an escort (where you are either your own boss, or you work for a service that carefully vets its clients, and lets you say no).
7. Same as 6, but not so careful about the clients.
8. Working for yourself, but on the street. without even the questionable assistance of a pimp.
9. Same as 7, but.. you don’t get to reject clients.
10. Actually working for a full blown pimp, but being able to leave if/when you want to.
11. Actually being full on trafficked, by some guy who tells you who to service, and drugs/beats you, if you don’t comply.

Oh, and some place in there is also “strippers, who chose to some times sleep with clients”, and, “strippers who are ‘told’ to sleep with clients, or lose their jobs.”

To me, there is a massive difference in how “trafficked” someone is, going from 1 to 11 on that list. But, the law seems to think there is some imaginary line around 5 and 6. Why exactly? Because you are filming it? Even if the person paying you is a) not a director, and you are b) not even sleeping with another actor, but just some random person, chosen for that one performance? It can’t be that you are being paid, because.. why is the line *there*?

Of course, the worst things about the law, as it stands are a) they keep babbling about an epidemic of child prostitutes, and even “training veterans to fight it”, but.. to date they have made a few dozen, out of thousands, of arrests in which those charges are even listed. The rest are all adults, and.. worse, its not clear if they, like with the adult prostitutes, actually ever make any real effort to help the supposed “victims” (i.e., the prostitutes, under this new redefinition of the war on sex work). They seem to think, “bankrupting and driving sex workers into more dangerous places”, is what will “save” the adults doing it… Which.. is a bit like conflating charities and scam artists as “the same thing”, and arresting the old people that send money to them, on the theory that, “The legit places will work it out, but at least we are bankrupting the scammer, by putting the people who keep them in business from sending them checks.”

I mean.. wtf kind of logic is it to claim that you are protecting victims, by robbing them of “shelter” (i.e. harboring them), “communication and security” (i.e. facilitating their business), and clients (i.e., taking advantage of and abusing the victims!). Err.. what???

Yeah.. for some really funny reason, while I hate, with a passion, pimps, and exploitative services, which “do” abuse the people that work for them, especially the ones that actually do traffic in the under aged, I have no sympathy for the law, and every sympathy for some women, or man, trying to pay their rent, doing something that the “moral minority” doesn’t like, maybe, at least initially, even liking it, but.. finding apathy, distrust, anger, lack of protection under the law, lack of any place/people to turn to, when in danger, lack of respect, of any kind, and, finally, not even enough basic human rights to have their own deaths investigated, if it comes to that, when the dangerous, unsafe, no one gives a damn about them, world they work in drops a psychopath in their sheets. Because.. after all, the new laws are all about “protecting the victims of trafficking – i.e. the sex workers…

Reeeeaaaaly? Gosh, must have missed all the ones they helped and protected some place. Their hiding under the desks, perhaps, giving the FBI, or the cops, blow jobs?

It should be a legal job, and those breaking the law, and assaulting, injuring, threatening, or otherwise coercing them should be jailed. Not – everyone involved except, now, under the new law – the person about to lose their rented apartment, and move into a pimp tenement, because the cops arrested, or scared off, every relatively sane, safe, and at least marginally respectful client they had, in order to “save them”.

The last time anyone came up with something this idiotic, imho, it was during the witch trials, when they drown people, to prove, by them drowning, that they where innocent, “safe” from the devil, instead of a witch.

Skiriki
Skiriki
4 years ago

Kagehi:
Also, some of the shitty stuff and attitudes you noted leads to this:

Why Carrying Condoms in NYC Might Get You Arrested

(TW for police brutality against LGBT people.)

Saphira
Saphira
4 years ago

Now bear with me, I know this sounds a little crazy at first

Yes, your premise does sound a little illogical and it continues to be illogical until the very end. Please do us all a favor and go back to talking about your beard. At least if you’re discussing that, you’re not complaining about all the women who won’t sleep with your sorry self and why that’s a bad thing for civilization. Thanks!

Jamesworkshop
Jamesworkshop
4 years ago

@Tessa Yeah I had commented in between two of yours.

Latte Cat
Latte Cat
4 years ago

This really is a big pile of horseshit. Although I fail to see how decreased birth rates can worry people so much, when it’s common knowledge that we are facing some serious overpopulation issues right now. Evil straw feminists plotting to destroy western civilisation or not, lower birth rates are something we would all benefit from.

A Land Whale
A Land Whale
4 years ago

I’d rather the species go down in equality than flourish in misogyny. XD

Chelsea
Chelsea
4 years ago
Joel
Joel
4 years ago

“and the needed TFR(total fertility rate) of 2.1 annually,”

What is it with Red Pillers and needing an acronym for everything? If you look at their Reddit (IYLATR) you’ll see that every other post will have its writer coining new ones (YSTEOPWHIWCNO) 😛

Is it a thought-stop ritual? A need to appear scientific? No idea.

Anyway, here is something funny for you,

http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?id=3907

Kagehi
Kagehi
4 years ago
Reply to  Chelsea

Not to mention that… having fewer of this idiots that make these arguments breed is “bound” to improve the rest of the human race…

Tragedy of the Commas
Tragedy of the Commas
4 years ago

@ Tessa and others, about the sex work discussion.

That third party persons have tried to convince sex workers that absolutely no feminists are on their side hasn’t helped simplify the discussion either. (Never mind that that’s a false generalization or that some sex workers identify as feminists). Occasionally you do see sex workers who’re anti-feminists. Not because of any concerns about SWERFs, but because they buy into the propaganda of third party persons, going so far as to share the obsession with Sarkeesian, or try to make money off of them:

“Mercedes Carrera politicizes and weaponizes her support of another pornographic actress who was recently identified as the victim of a home invasion robbery and rape for Gamergate, by attacking Gamergate critics and Anita Sarkeesian in particular for perceived slights against sex workers. In talking with The Daily Dot, Carrera continues to attack Sarkeesian and Brianna Wu because they were only threatened with rape whereas the pornographic actress was actually raped, and goes on to accuse Sarkeesian and Wu of being professional victims.”

In other words: if a sex worker is harmed anywhere, then Sarkeesian can be blamed for it. Somehow.