The gender-divisive cackling hens who write features articles for newspapers -- which are typcially gynocentric to begin with -- are having a field day with the recession, treating it as just another battleground in the gender wars, little different than the great toilet seat up-or-down debate. Here's a shining example of this yellow -- make that pink -- journalism in its full glory: Women are victors in ‘mancession’
Did you get that? Women are the "victors." Over men, that is. Men are losing their jobs at an unprecedented pace and these clever Pulitzer wannabes have even concocted a delightful little word that manages to pull off the seemingly impossible trick of both belittling men and trivializing the recession at the same time -- "mancession." You know, like a "manwich." Or the "manscaping" that women features writers find so fascinating, in a junior high girl kind-of-way. Or Seinfeld's "manzier."
Never mind that this talk of women's "victory" blinks at the fact that the genders are so interwoven that what hurts a man generally hurts one and usually more than one females, not to mention little males. You see, that level of nuance muddies up a perfectly good tale for the gender divisive crowd who prefer their narratives black and white with the oppressed and subjugated females coming out on top at the end.
Let us be perfectly candid: to many of these folks, the recession is payback time -- hapless and usually blue-collar men (who never heard the word "misogyny") and their collateral damage-families paying for the sins of the patriarchy; the free market's way of leveling the playing field.
But lets not assume features writers are the bottom of the barrel when it comes to capitalizing on the misfortune of men in this recession. That distinction is, of course, reserved for the radical feminists who, as usual, stand at the forefront of having no concern for the suffering of anyone born with a Y-chromosome. As reported last week: "'In times of economic crisis, when the size of a woman's paycheck is highlighted, the focus on pay equity can become more striking,'" said Julianne Malveaux, president of Bennett College for Women in North Carolina."
See? Another benefit of the "mancession" -- it can be used as an occasion to justify pay equity! Gasp! Isn't that just fabulous? (And don't get me started on the reasons for the gender pay gap -- which have essentially nothing to do with discrimination.)
And, of course, we all know about their selfish, hateful efforts to siphon substantial stimulus monies away from the group that needs them most -- men who've lost their jobs -- in an effort to create a feminist nirvana. This is akin to taking money from breast cancer research and transferring it to research for a disease that is almost non-existent and that doesn't need it, such as cancer of the penis. (But please don't get me started on the asymmetrical government funding that favors female cancers over male cancers that really do need more funding, such as prostate and testicular cancer -- that's a related, but different topic.) As one of these selfish women clucked, "We don't want this stimulus package to just create jobs for burly men."
"Burly men." Nice. You see, it's not enough to insist men's suffering doesn't deserve to be alleviated, it's also essential to demean them in the process.
Every man and boy in the world could contract a fatal disease that only strikes the Y-chromosome and features writers and radical feminists somehow would spin it to be about women. They never miss a chance to advance their agenda, especially if it means kicking men in the balls when they're down.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
11 comments:
Outstanding post. Cannot fault it.
One of the great post. Essential reading.
The female bias in education and employment cannot last, because its inefficient and costly, and at some point, those in control have to say 'hold on a minute, we need to face the reality here, and stop sidelining men'.
In Britain, we have sunk massive amounts of money into the NHS (National Health Service) over the course of the current labour government, but most of that money goes to pay wages, in particular for female nurses. My mother is a nurse, and all I ever hear is "well debbie said this, and Janet said that.", its like a school yard there, I wonder just how much work they get done.
It cannot continue indefinately, and why should the private sector bankroll the public sector, made up largley of unproductive women?
On a social note, only this week, the feminised labour government in Britain has come forward and said children are in desperate need of fathers. This is counter to 12 years of male bashing and the dismissal of the importance of the traditional family unit (man, women,and child). They are starting to realize we are on the edge of social disaster here. But the problem is, its too late to stop imo. There is going to be a slow down in progression overall, and its quite obvious that we are becoming more and more uncivilized in society as a whole.
And now they want men to step in and make everything right?
What do they say to British men that have been portrayed as stupid and lazy at best, and at worst, potential rapist, murdering, pedophiles?
Especially now, since the truth about the demonisation of men is now at everymans finger tips via the internet.
Because women now earn their own money and support themselves, they are starting to drop the 'caring, sharing' act, and we are seeing them as they really are.
The true nature of women is being exposed exactly because they have been given freedom to act naturally. Their bad behaviour will increasingly be seen on 24 hour news, internet blogs, internet forums, newspapers and in general society.
What happens when men become aware of female behaviour such as false rape accusations? the pyschosexual abuse of children by mothers? paternity fraud? Violence by proxy? and all the other unpalatable truths about womens behaviour?
This is not the end for men, its the end of the myth of 'woman' as emotionally and morally superior.
SteveUK,
Great observations. I would add one thing to this:
This is not the end for men, its the end of the myth of 'woman' as emotionally and morally superior.
We are likely seeing the beginning of the end of western civilized society with it. As more and more men check out of the system, and reproduction levels diminish, immigrants, who are still having large families will supplant our societies with their own. Europe is seeing this slowly but surely take place with Islam. The U.K., France, etc., are already seeing Sharia law allowed for those segments of the population.
The U.S. is seeing this take place with immigrants from Hispanic countries.
The sad part is, that we aren't telling these people, if you want to be part of this culture and have access to the opportunities it provides, then you don't get to keep your own seperate standards. You must accept our way of doing things (especially in the legal arena), or you can go home. Your choice. It's too bad our politicians don't want to listen and support their own citizenry, and instead are bending over backwards for those who wish to do have the benefits, but not the responsibility (hmmmmm.... sounds like feminism, doesn't it?).
I don't think we're anywhere near the end of western civilization. The immigrants are bringing their values with them -- which are far more patriarchal than those of most American males! So traditional family values are moving north, not bleeding away to the south.
The problem is that too few men even care about their own issues. They don't identify with men as a social class so they let the feminists push their vile agenda and get away with it. It isn't that men are too beaten down to do anything about it -- it's that they're distracted. Mostly they're happy with their lives and don't care.
It isn't that the pro-feminists have overwhelmed what you could call the "masculine vote." Lots of politicians are elected whom the feminists don't like -- Bush being an obvious example. But so far, the politicians whom men as a collective group put into office pursue policies that are even more harmful to men, instead of helping them. Instead of men at the top trying to give men at the bottom a helping hand they're often giving them a kick in the face.
But never fear; there's hope. Our issues are spreading.
Men do not think of themselves as a class. Other groups think that men "stick together" -- that we're all plotting at the urinals about how we're going to fuck women, both figuratively and literally.
That's really the joke, isn't it? Men see other men as competition. And I do believe most men are too busy pushing ahead to stop and think about these issues. Even the recession: of course men are going to be hit the hardest since men are at the heart of what drives the economy. Take all the men away and the economy collapses, and civilization ends (even if they had a supply of sperm to keep producing babies).
A kick in the balls is a good way to analyze the mancession -- a gender specific hurt that women can't even imagine how it feels.
Anon wrote:
". . . of course men are going to be hit the hardest since men are at the heart of what drives the economy. Take all the men away and the economy collapses, and civilization ends . . . ."
Maybe men should take a year off and collapse the economy. That would teach the feminists and their corporate enablers (speaking of which can you believe that Feministing has corporate and government sponsors) that we mean business. We could call it the "Great Mancott."
Get it, a "man"cott instead of "boy"cott.
Hey, I couldn't resist.
Good one, Russ.
How many men in the feminized media realize how they look attacking men during this mancession? Did it ever occur to them that they could be replaced and find themselves suffering the same as the men thet kick?
SteveUK,
well put.
Post a Comment