*Can we stomach another one of those features pieces declaring that we now live in a woman's world, that men are "the second sex," and that underachieving, rudderless young men, who are being swept aside in a tidal wave of feminised values, need to find their way to a new kind of manhood in the coming matriarchy where they will be the first generation of men to not enjoy the undeserved entitlements of male privilege? These are Chicken Little pieces written by women who posit, wallow in, and ultimately celebrate the purported death of traditional masculinity in order to "empower" their female readership. It's all a steaming pile of bullshit. You do the math and tell me if, for example, the college gender gap means that our young men are rudderless: (1) It is no longer socially acceptable for women to spend their lives as housewives. The technology invented by -- guess which gender? -- has rendered housework far less time-consuming to the point that no one can pretend it's a full-time job any more, so women feel an overwhelming social pressure to get a job. (2) Women, far more than men, gravitate toward employment that is neither risky nor physically demanding -- desk jobs -- most of which require a college degree. (3) Males naturally skew wider on the IQ map than females, with lots more at the bottom -- who do not attend college -- and lots more at the top (note it's too politically incorrect to talk about them). Given this, does the college gender gap signal the "death of masculinity," or is it a natural manifestation of the difference between the sexes? There is scant evidence for the former and plenty for the latter. But that doesn't make a compelling features article for female readers who, unlike their male counterparts, see themselves in a weird competition with the opposite sex.
*"Some New York prosecutors are using the state's hate-crimes law to prosecute people who prey on the elderly. The Queens prosecutors contend the hate-crimes statute does not require proof of hatred. Instead, they say, it merely requires the defendant to hold some belief about the targeted group, such as a belief that members are easy to deceive and might have substantial assets." See here. Then, without question, false rape claims should also be a hate crime since the defendants hold some belief about the targeted group: specifically, they have penises, which organ renders rape lies plausible. Cue the feminist eye rolls.
*Male judges admit they can't help but look at scantily clad female attorneys. But see the comments beneath the story for the predictable reaction from the lunatic fringe -- women should wear whatever they want, and heaven forbid that men should be honest about a natural reaction. I wonder how the women who dress in this manner would react if some teen boy looking at them on the subway was sporting a noticeable erection. You think they'd insist such a kid should be free to wear a woody if he wants -- it's his body and all? See here
*Somebody needs to tell these chimps that their "gendered behavior" is cutlurally learned from patriarchy -- it's not innate: "But if a single chimp has wandered into their path, they will attack. Enemy males will be held down, then bitten and battered to death. Females are usually let go, but their babies will be eaten." See here These animals need to relearn what it means to be a male chimp to cure them of this unacceptable hypermasculine behavior. And I'll bet they engage in sex without getting an affirmative and enthusiastic "yes." These chimps are pigs!
*On the propriety of "women's only" poker tournaments: "Annie Duke, arguably the best-known woman player in the world, . . . advocates discontinuing the WSOP women's championship. 'Are we saying there is a difference between the intellect of men and women that means that somehow we need a separate championship event just for the women?' Duke wrote." Ah, but there's always some chivalrous man who thinks he can help empower women by insisting they are powerless and in need of special treatment: Daniel Negreanu, one of the best-known male players said this: "Men have had it pretty good, so whining about sexual equality as a man is a pretty lame excuse to take part in a ladies' event. It's beyond lame, it's just plain foolish. You aren't fighting for men's rights, or women's right(s) for that matter." See here Ah, chivalrous men, feminism's useful idiots.
*Watch out. Now its women versus women in a Title IX dispute. Specifically, should a school eliminate the volleyball team and declare cheerleading a sport? I suspect you'll never see a Title IX dispute more heated, or with more drama, than this one, for obvious reasons. See here
*". . . improvements to the species come in the male line. If changes are good, then the male survives - if not, then he most likely will not live to reproduce. That risk taking carries over into their behaviors - again it is a way to help weed out what works genetically." See here
*Girls are now drinking more than boys. My guess is this will be the next national crisis, for obvious reasons. See here
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
24 comments:
Pierce, I kind of agree with your first paragraph that the growing deficit of males versus females attending college is not quite the crisis or demise of masculinity that some seem to believe it is. (Although I do think it is somewhat unfair that a portion of young men appear to be missing out on this experience in life due to the education system being designed to favor girls and many college campuses being such hostile environments).
The notion that academic qualifications are the most important thing in life has become something of a middle-class fetish, as is the flawed and simplistic notion that academic qualifications lead to much higher earnings throughout life.
The idea that having a degree leads to higher income throughout life is a classic illustration of the correlation equals causation fallacy. While it is true that people with degrees tend to have greater economic success, this does not mean that having a degree is the cause of that success. More likely it is that people who would have been more successful anyway, such as through intelligence or being born into better circumstances, are more likely to attend college in the first place.
Given how many universities have become such hostile environments for male students, is it really such a bad thing that males are dropping out of such institutions? If I had a son, I would not want him to go to such a shithole of a place. At a young and impressionable age, there are far more productive things to be done with one's time than being brainwashed with misandry for an extra few years on top of what one would have already received at school. If the enrollment ratio is currently 60% female to 40% male, well frankly I couldn't care if it was 100% female, 0% male. And if more intelligent males started boycotting these institutions, it would further reduce their status and academia would become more of a joke than it already is.
The only trouble is that women who graduate from these places with some useless degree in PC bullshit and identity politics too often have a misplaced sense of their own intellectual and moral superiority. That is why it is best to avoid educated women when choosing a partner. The only trouble is that the rejected women will provide a constituency for feminism to continue for a while yet.
The new white middle class "Gender / Raunch" community get "empowered" by villifying hetero-sexual males. They "Empower" themselves with the strategic usage of faulty and inflamatory missinformation, and beleive it or not, the American law enforcement community is now "manufacturing statistics" which further "Empower" the white middle class "Gender / Raunch" community.
You see, by villifying poor hetero-sexual working class males, the Gender / Raunch" elite can exploit them ruthlessly.
This would seem silly if it were not so true.
"Given how many universities have become such hostile environments for male students, is it really such a bad thing that males are dropping out of such institutions? If I had a son, I would not want him to go to such a shithole of a place."
I can't speak for the US. But in the UK, I think it depends on the university. Granted we really don't seem to have the same kind of hysteria over (apparent) mass rapes happening on campus. The universities I attended weren't hostile to males - I'm not even aware of there being people employed by the sexual grievance industry on campus.
As far as I was aware - and I was on campus a lot of the time, during the daytime and in the evenings - rapes weren't happening. It just wasn't an occurence. More than that, nobody was expecting them to - no hysteria had been whipped up over male students hiding behind bushes and such. If any accusations of rape were happening, I didn't hear of them - I only ever heard about one, which happened a couple of years before I even attended. I saw guys get sent down or punished for smoking weed, or breaking other rules (though as I understand it, the rules for UK universities are FAR more lax than US ones anyway). But nothing about rape accusations ... it probably went on to some extent, but as I say, there was no 'accusation culture' to speak of. Certainly I never felt under direct threat of an accusation.
So, if any of you have sons and are wondering where they might go to university, consider sending them abroad for 3 years to the UK. Having spent time in a different country is also looked upon well by potential employers.
Anon@9:23, I agree with you that a lot of the rape hysteria and the like appears to be more of a problem in the US than in other countries.
But more generally, I think a lot of the male-bashing is worse in the US than elsewhere. I live in Australia, but I travel a fair bit to the UK and Europe. While there is a significant amount of anti-male attitudes, it does not appear to be quite as bad as in the United States.
I went to university in Australia, and while there didn't seem to be that much rape hysteria, there was definitely a great deal of radical feminist influence on campus and I felt much of the environment was somewhat hostile to male students.
Of course, one difference between universities in other countries is that in most of them students don't live on campus. They simply attend classes during the day and then go home. While a larger proportion of American colleges have students living on campus. When you have large numbers of young men and women living together, more problems are bound to arise.
But another thing I kind of notice is that Americans seem to have this attitude, more so than other countries, that real men should always be macho and never admit to weakness or complain, or, heaven forbid, admit that you are capable of being hurt by a woman.
The hysteria you mention in the U.S., is the hysteria that "Empowers" the Gender / Raunch" community as a whole.
Watch who participates in these Rape / Klan type hysteria parades and marches...look who dominate the Rape crisis centers and groups and you will find that it is nearly 80% GLBT, Gender / Raunch community...again; because by villifying hetero-sexual males, they De-Facto, offer the new Gender / Raunch lifestyle as the only "Safe" alternative.
This would seem silly if it were not the truth!!
Gaining "Empowerment" by stepping on the backs of innocent men and boys may offer some immediate "Empowerment" gains, but in the long term, will prove to be irresponsible.
Let them have it, including all the messy responsibilities.
Happy fourth of July ladies and gentlemen of The False Rape Society.
*Can we stomach another one of those features pieces declaring that we now live in a woman's world, that men are "the second sex," and that underachieving, rudderless young men, who are being swept aside in a tidal wave of feminised values,
***
Yes, because it's the truth, and men need to realize it.
Women get and/ or control:
60% of college degrees
70%+ of domestic spending
Over half of the jobs
Over half of the money
Only a tiny fraction of the prison sentences
A greater portion of social security benefits
Only a tiny fraction of the workplace injuries
Only half of the unemployed are women
13 out of 15 of the top growing occupations are dominated by women
***
And we all know how the legal system of this country treats men.
I don't care if it's offensive; we need to read those piece, and we also need to see the gloating, seething tone of the women who write them. They want the 'she-conomy' to discriminate against men.
This isn't a joke. Men are in huge trouble.
Sorry, that should read 'only one third of the unemployed are women.'
Anon at 12:40, you missed the point of what he was saying. I think the logical result of what Pierce is saying is that fewer men will attend college because males have more members at the lower end of the IQ pool, but since they have lots more at the top -- men will alway be the dominant sex. You're buying into their scare tactics.
Men will always be the dominant sex? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Yeah, male arrogance will save us from the wimmins and their Frankenstein's monster legal system. Sure -- and pigs can fly.
We need to stop kidding ourselves. Men come with no built-in superpowers that are going to rescue us from the most misandrist society in the history of the world.
Men can and will continue to be the second sex, having vastly inferior rights and status, for hundreds of years if we do nothing about it. The attitude you just expressed is suicidal.
"Oh Superman where are you now
Everything's gone wrong somehow
The men of steel, men of power
Are losing control by the hour"
-Genesis, 'Land of Confusion'
All due respect, sir, that's the same sort of attitude that the feminists have perfected. It's the same sort of attitude I see among whiny, marginalized MRAs who have no political clout. We will never overcome the injustices men face, just for being men, by adopting the victim mentality of feminists.
Why? It is kind of hard to insist we're "victims" when the vast majority of MEN don't accept that. Obviously most men do not feel like victims, and trying to tell them "but you ARE a victim, bro" is like the feminists telling women they've been raped when the women don't accept it.
If men DID buy that they were victims, it would be ended overnight, that's how powerful men are.
If we ever want to get the men on the side of this movement, we'll need to stop insisting that MEN as a class are victims, across the board, because that just sounds idiotic to most men. Most men think we're whiny losers. We need to make our case by showing men, with real evidence, that they are being discriminated because they are men in certain areas. Keep it narrow, and stop the whining. You have no credibility when you do that.
2:11, who was that addressed to? I'm assuming it wasn't at the piece itself (Archivist has posted a bunch of these in which he usually provides evidence)
Men as a class ARE the victims of our society. Our rights have been taken away and we have been slandered. Pandering to male arrogance is just making the problem worst.
This is 2010 in America. The squeaky wheel gets the grease. If this is unappealing to the male ego, then I'm terribly sorry -- but the male ego will just have to adjust.
It's either that or accept permanent second class citizen status.
Hey, the captain of the Titanic probably didn't want to hear that his unsinkable ship had struck an iceberg, but hiding from the truth doesn't change it.
Is there a single area of American life that you can name in which men aren't losing ground?
You're a victim, bro. Get used to it.
By the way, what "power" do you think that men have? We have no power that women don't. You've been reading too many comic books.
We have our 46% of the vote and our (maybe) 30% of consumer spending and inferior legal and social status, and that's it. Being able to hunt mammoths is no longer useful.
I have posted a story about a college rape liar who got -- probation. That's right, probation.
My two cents on the current debate: It is not whining to point out how men are harmed for being men, and to assert that it is whining simply falls into the feminist shtick of ridiculing "teh menz" for daring to raising an injustice that affects men. Heaven forbid! Of course it has to be persuasive, and backed up by evidence.
Most men don't think they're victims -- until it happpens to them. I can't tell you now many notes we've received from men who say "I never knew this could happen." The goal is to educate men. I agree that just telling men "you're a victim" isn't going to do it. But by demonstrating how men are disadvantaged in specific areas, it will have an impact. Father's rights are covered by Glenn Sacks, and male abuse is covered by Toy Soldier, and we cover false rape. And we need more specialists, in my opinion, who will focus on one narrow issue.
I'd urge all our readers to think about starting a blog in a specific area -- maybe how men are portrayed in the media. Or, how men are receive disproportionate sentences. The list goes on and on. If you do that and are serious about it, we'll back you here. The specialists are having some kind of impact, and when you combine all of us, I think the message is slowing getting out there.
"I'd urge all our readers to think about starting a blog in a specific area -- maybe how men are portrayed in the media. Or, how men are receive disproportionate sentences. The list goes on and on. If you do that and are serious about it, we'll back you here. The specialists are having some kind of impact, and when you combine all of us, I think the message is slowing getting out there."
I take this message on board and will being making plans.
"I'd urge all our readers to think about starting a blog in a specific area -- maybe how men are portrayed in the media. Or, how men are receive disproportionate sentences. The list goes on and on. If you do that and are serious about it, we'll back you here. The specialists are having some kind of impact, and when you combine all of us, I think the message is slowing getting out there."
Best idea yet. We can have one blog and state all the different ways men are getting screwed and most people will kind of tune out most of it,because it's like information overload.
However, if we have many blogs with just one way that men are getting screwed and possibly have them linked together directly or indirectly, people will read all the different ways men are getting screwed in,say, divorce, and then go: "Hmmm, I wonder if there are any other ways men are disadvantaged." and then go on to read about the female sentencing discount,male homelessness,male health issues, and so on.
I would start a blog myself, but I don't really have the time to maintain it.
If men DID buy that they were victims, it would be ended overnight, that's how powerful men are.
***
You know, I think this deserves another comment -- because it highlights a dangerous tendency toward arrogance among some MRAs and masculists.
Basically, the delusion here is that there is some inherent superiority built into men that assures us of an eventual victory; that male elan will come charging over the horizon to save us in the final reel.
Similarly, the French prior to WWI had an irrational belief in the superiority of the French soldier. They were proven extremely wrong when war broke out.
We must not adopt the men's rights equivalent of Plan XVII.
"I would start a blog myself, but I don't really have the time to maintain it."
You think I have the time to maintain this? But somehow I do it.
Post a Comment