Men’s Rights Activists, and anti-feminists generally, are forever warning anyone who will listen that excessive feminism could, any day now, bring about the end of western civilization itself.
This is not a terribly new or original idea. And a post on Nazified pickup artist blog Chateau Heartiste today reminds us just how old and unoriginal this notion is.
The proprietor of that blog, James “Heartiste” Weidmann, brings his readers’ attention to a lengthy quotation from a 1911 book by a fellow named Octavius Beale.
[U]nreasonable demands for exaggerated “rights ” of women will always find a limit in the fact that the majority of men will constantly prefer for wives those who do not claim such rights, but who rather seek their happiness in cultivating and developing their specially feminine virtues and attributes, apart from any aim at equality with men.
Take that, feminist cat ladies with no husbands!
These attributes will also therefore be preferably inherited, whilst the extreme tendencies of the women’s rights movement will usually not come into heredity, but will constantly tend to die out.
Well, he was half right. Feminism did die out, for a time, but then it came back.
Notwithstanding, should woman-rule —contrary to all expectations— become so strong in any single State that it will be able to enforce all its demands, even the most extreme, that result could only be possible where the men are completely degenerated.
Degenerated, huh? Can you see where this is going?
Such a nation would soon be supplanted and dissolved by healthier peoples, who might, perhaps, stand on a lower scale of culture.
I believe he is referring to what the Nazis of today like to call “white genocide.” Back in 1911, Beale called it “Racial Decay” — which was in fact the title of his book.
Amazing how quickly and easily Beale slid from antifeminism to white supremacy. Just as so many antifeminists do today.
Heartiste follows up Beale’s dire, racist warning with a dire, racist warning of his own.
After declaring “equalism” to be “a corruption of civilized man’s soul,” he tries his best to rally the troops in defense of their white “tribe.”
[F]emcuntery will only achieve wrecking power in a nation of degenerated men unable and unwilling to act to preserve their culture and protect their tribe. Women are followers and will follow their nation right into the abyss if it guarantees their social standing among peers; as I’ve been saying, it’ll take shitlord men with big balls to bring their women to heel and their nation back to greatness.
Heartiste, seriously, no one wants to hear about your balls.
@Brud
Nope. I can personally tell you that my father’s an abusive scumbag, which was known by the court as he’d tried shit on them, and he still managed to cling to custody for years. I had to break that shit myself because the court wouldn’t do it. And I wasn’t in my “tender years” either.
Again, your argument is bullshit. A man who wants custody will always get it, no matter how much scum he’s made of.
Brud, no.
Women do the majority of childcare as well as the majority of care for elderly or disabled family members. That sometimes means having to take time off of work
Thats a personal choice. if you want to do that you shouldnt be crying about the “patriarchy” paying you less. Its a meritocracy.
No, you don’t have to communicate clearly. But if you want to people to understand you, it’s best you do. If you choose not to write clearly, you don’t have any cause to complain when people don’t know what you’re saying.
If you want to win an argument, you do need to communicate your point clearly. If you just want to troll, being incoherent will do.
Jesus fuck. I work full time and am the primary caregiver for a stroke patient. You are an inhumane piece of shit.
Ban this fuck.
“Nope. I can personally tell you that my father’s an abusive asshole, which was known by the court as he’d tried shit on them, and he still managed to cling to custody for years. I had to break that shit myself because the court wouldn’t do it. And I wasn’t in my “tender years” either.
Again, your argument is bullshit.”
Anecdotal evidence isnt good evidence. My father was the nicest guy in the world, my mother cheated on him and divorced him taking half of all the money hes earned even though she was married to him for 3 years.
Half of the money it took 15 years for him to accumulate. My mother also got custody of me and I rarely saw my father for 17 years, my mother didnt give a shit about me, I was just a source of income for her.
Nevertheless, my anecdotal evidence has nothing to do with the matter at hand either.
Are you saying men don’t care about their children or their aging parents?
If not, why should family courts award custody to men?
If men choose not to care for their kids, isn’t not getting physical custody of them after a divorce a consequence of that choice? You can’t have it both ways, bub.
Oh, so you didn’t do any research. You read other people’s research, and in some cases, their assfax. Way to oversell your high-school-grade nonsense, Brad. I was promised research and got links to Andrea Hardie instead.
I am disappoint, son.
Which financial crimes would those be? And why is a standard that is okay for financial crimes okay to use for violent crimes?
Well, you’re not being clear because I still don’t understand what your question is.
I’m saying that I was almost a physicist but was run out of the program because I present as female and am perceived as female. I know some female engineering students who experienced similar. When a professor literally takes you aside and tells you that your A-grade work isn’t good enough and you should consider stepping aside so the B-grade men in the class aren’t distracted by your very presence, it’s difficult to maintain motivation. When the other students decide to prank you in lab instead of working with you to get a good grade, it’s difficult to pass the lab. Are you going to tell me that it was my free, uninfluenced choice to not be a physicist, when that was literally my life dream and it was ruined by misogynist men?
I can’t even with you.
The reason is that women are shunted into lower-paid, service-level jobs which offer only part-time work at much higher rates. That’s the actual reason, divorced from whatever cobwebs are floating around your brain. For some women this is fine, because they are expected to care for young and old family members and the flexibility of part-time work is good for this, but the fact that women are expected to be caregivers and burdened with all the caregiving work is, itself, a misogynist expectation that influences decision making.
??? I’m a feminist, and I personally have done some activism on this topic. WTF is wrong with you?
They seek custody at much lower rates than women, but obtain custody at higher rates when they bother to ask for it. The reality is that 90% of child custody is decided outside the court, but when the court gets involved, men get custody when they ask for custody. Not 100% of the time, but more than half. Here is some actual, sourced data for you:
http://www.leadershipcouncil.org/1/res/cust_myths.html
As far as primary caregiver doctrine goes, it’s misogyny that says that women should be the primary caregivers. Maybe if men quit their jobs to stay home with the kids more often, they would be seen as primary caregivers more often. Food for thought for you!
Aaaaaaaaannd here it is, all pretense at being a reasonable, non-misogynist individual flies right out the window and Brad’s contempt for women is revealed in all its glory.
“Jesus fuck. I work full time and am the primary caregiver for a stroke patient. You are an inhumane piece of shit.”
This is how the world works.The world doesnt give a shit about how hard you worked or the charity you have done. The world only cares about what you can do for it, and in return you get money. Dont expect businesses to pay you if you arent bringing anything of worth to them. Its a give and take relationship.
I worked 80-90 hour weeks, studying full time and working a full time job for 4 years from the ages of 18-22 so I could graduate and get an engineering degree without any debt. A friend of mine(female) had to do almost the same hours because she graduated from a lower tier college so she had to intern and network her ass off to get a job with a high salary. You wont see her ask companies to pay her more cause she had a hard life.
Here, Mr Shore, you have succinctly expressed the misanthropy of capitalism, especially the laissez-faire variety. Are you saying that childcare isn’t work? that stay-at-home parents are worth less than labourers? That’s horrid. My mother busts her ass every day to deal with my problems and with those of my two younger brothers. THAT’S WORK. I should stop being polite to you.
Also, why is “patriarchy” in quotes? Do you think it’s imaginary? What do you think the patriarchy is?
I’d ask about the whereabouts of your apostrophes, but I’m just too darned polite for that.
“Are you saying men don’t care about their children or their aging parents?
If not, why should family courts award custody to men?
If men choose not to care for their kids, isn’t not getting physical custody of them after a divorce a consequence of that choice? You can’t have it both ways, bub.”
What when have I said that? Im saying that men work their asses off at work and come home and take care of their children.
To be fair women do take care of the children more than men, but not enough to have that much of an advantage in the divorce courts.
Brad never did answer the question of why uncompensated work isn’t important.
@Brod
See you come so close to the truth there. You argue a point that just so happens to fit your own personal experience, but then go on and actually say that said experience is anecdotal and that it doesn’t matter to your point. And, guess what ? It is anecdotal. The difference is that my case is one among a pretty big majority. That’s not the same. And yeah I just did mention statistics, which apparently you like “researching”, yet can’t provide anything substantial.
Are you perchance a 329-year-old with a taste for seagull?
“Here, Mr Shore, you have succinctly expressed the misanthropy of capitalism, especially the laissez-faire variety. Are you saying that childcare isn’t work? that stay-at-home parents are worth less than labourers? That’s horrid. My mother busts her ass every day to deal with my problems and with those of my two younger brothers. THAT’S WORK. I should stop being polite to you.
Also, why is “patriarchy” in quotes? Do you think it’s imaginary? What do you think the patriarchy is?”
Yes to teh company, they are worth less than laborers. Im sorry but If I was to build a company, risk all my money building it and working 100 hour weeks for 5-10 years, I am going to expect the workers to work for the money I give them. I am not going to put my future at risk by giving away money for free. Havent you heard of a win win situation? I am not going to take advantage of my workers and I dont want them to take advantage of me by working less hours than I want them to.
Do you even know what youre talking about? Laissez faire capitalism is capitalism without any governmental regulations.
Hasn’t he turned 330 yet? Also, did engineering degrees even exist in the early 18th century?
“Are you perchance a 329-year-old with a taste for seagull?”
LOL. Im sure when I say something like that its not believable but when Lindsey says that she takes care of people and has a full time job, she is believable. Hypocrisy much?
I dont mean to brag, I wouldnt have even mentioned it if she hadnt talked about how “hard” she has it.
Dont forget my friend worked as hard as I did if not harder but you are not questioning her.
See this is why i hate debates with feminists. It always comes to personal attacks and passive aggressiveness(or “real aggressiveness”). And you wonder why people dont take feminists seriously. Ive had 4 different debates like this and it always devolved into cat fights and hissy fits.
It amuses me that for Brad, demanding he give actual facts to back up his claims and gentle teasing is the same as cat fights and hissy fits. It’s extremely telling.
Sorry that I wasted so much of my time on you, Not-Brad. If I’d realized from the start whose sock you were, I wouldn’t have bothered.
Gee, Bedsores. For someone who was so concerned earlier about fallacies, you don’t mind repeatedly engaging in the just world fallacy with this bullshit
And you’re shifting the goalposts. Earlier, you said women have less wealth because we are lazy. Now you’re saying the world doesn’t care about unpaid care work. So, you’re acknowledging that women aren’t lazy? You’re just saying that men selfishly work only on their careers? Once again, no misandrist like a misogynist!
Also, businesses wouldn’t have a supply of healthy and educated workers to hire to do their work for them if someone didn’t do childcare. So yeah, businesses should fulfill a social contract. They get a lot of wealth because of unpaid work and because of public infrastructure. Your Ayn Rand level arguments are just as tired as your MRA talking points.
@Board
Dude, I did tell you : you’re a chew-toy.
“It amuses me that for Brad, demanding he give actual facts to back up his claims and gentle teasing is the same as cat fights and hissy fits. It’s extremely telling.’
What bullshit. Ive posted 7 sources. Your side gave me zero.
It’s almost like you don’t have anything better to do with your time!
LOL at some rando telling me my life isn’t actually happening.
You promised me original research and delivered nothing. How did you get through engineering school without learning what the term “research” means?