A few thoughts about traditionalism and adults who depend on other adults

28 Oct

 

vacuum

I am often mistaken, especially on Twitter, as a “traditionalist” woman attempting to revitalize gender roles to enforce an old-style division of labor in which women exploit and take advantage of male labor, effectively rendering men disposable commodities designed for women’s comfort.

 

Nothing could be further from the truth.

 

Every single day of my life I am deeply, profoundly grateful for the serendipity that allows my husband and me to have the family and life we do. One of my biggest complaints about feminism and the modern dialogue about family life is that it deliberately discourages both women and men from actively planning for the future they want and so many people end up deeply unhappy when they discover they have not made the choices that allow them to have any practical choices at all. This comes about because we simply do not discuss with our children how things like college majors and job choices will impact family structures and I personally believe that is a deliberate strategy on the part of Marxist feminism in particular to render the family a meaningless unit, incapable of supporting the individuals within, leaving society with no choice but to expand the control and power of the state.

 

And that pisses me off.

 

At no point was I ever encouraged to consider how my educational aspirations would affect my choices in life. I was taught, like most of us, to pursue my passions and interests and do what I found interesting and fulfilling. Like most 18 year olds entering college, I thought watching movies was pretty fun and it certainly interested me, so I enrolled in Film Theory. How very clever of me. There are basically three things you can do with a degree in Film Theory

 

  1. You can continue on and take a PhD in the subject matter and pray to all the gods that ever existed in the entire history of the universe that you can land an academic job (the odds are not in your favor)
  2. You can pray to all those same gods that you land a job as a film reviewer (the odds are still not in your favor)
  3. You can don a green apron and start perfecting your mochawhappachino skills.

barista

I came to my senses after one summer deploying my Barista of Arts summa cum latte degree and enrolled in an MBA program, but I went there still not understanding how my choices would play out and impact my later life choices. I could have taken management accounting which would have been a useful skill, but I found international strategy so much more interesting, so that is where I specialized. Again, how clever of me. Not one person around me was having any discussion of any kind about how these choices would affect the life I wanted for myself and the family I imagined. And even when self-proclaimed feminists are specifically asked to discuss this issue with women, they refuse to do so and turn the conversation back to pantsuits and corner offices. Feminists actively discourage women from making their family plans a priority and they ignore men completely when it comes to this issue.

 

I lucked out. I met my husband in graduate school and we had shared values and goals that we discussed with one another, almost in hushed tones, as if what we were planning was unspeakable in polite society. “I would like our children raised at home. Would you?”

 

And so it all played out. My husband makes sufficient income to support us comfortably, – again a stroke of luck and not a deliberate plan. His job allows him to do a significant portion of his work at home, meaning he has been deeply involved in our children’s lives from birth. He is not gone 16 hours a day while I hold the fort and the children barely recognize him.

 

And that all comes down to luck.

 

It shouldn’t.

 

I am not a woman at home, dependent on my husband for my income because I believe that is the right and proper role for women and men. Nonsense. I am here because at no point was I ever encouraged to think about making choices that would allow me to be economically productive while being the wife and mother I wanted to be, so I made stupid choices. There are so many occupations that are more friendly to the family life my husband and I both wanted, but I didn’t make them. I take responsibility for that, but I am also angered and disappointed that we do not encourage men or women to consider their family plans when the time comes to make these decisions.

 

Here is how I deal with this issue with my own children: when my children express an interest in a particular career or occupation, I encourage them to think about that in terms of a family. When my son says he would like to be a cardiologist, I ask him if he thinks he would like to be married and have children. Would you like to see your children? A cardiologist works long hours and has to deal with emergencies and he will miss many dance recitals and baseball games but he will have a lot of money and do very important work. I do not discourage my children from any interests, but I do ask them to consider how that interest will impact the life they want for themselves.

 

I do not believe that men and women have set, concrete roles to play in society. I very strongly believe that the ideal way to raise children is at home with a loving parent present, but whether that is mom or dad makes no difference to me. Two parents working alternating schedules so one is always home, a fulltime daddy, a fulltime mommy – what matters is that children are being cared for by a loving parent.

 

That doesn’t happen by accident. It takes planning.

 

The only place I have encountered that is willing to even discuss these issues is the men’s rights movement. The ability to plan and make choices that allow for flexible, non-traditional, non-rigid family roles is deeply tied to men’s rights. Men’s right to choose parenthood is profoundly important. A whoopsie – baby does not necessarily have an impact on a woman’s life or choices because she has choices. And she can impose legal responsibility for those choices on a man, who has no say at all. This has an obviously enormous impact on what choices are open to men who know they can be held legally responsible for children they did not intend and do not want. Lack of reproductive rights severely restricts men’s choices.

 

The discussion over shared parenting leads directly into the debate about who is the better caregiver for small children – women or men. The answer is very simple: men and women are equally capable of being loving, caring parents. Until men have the legal right to be assumed caregivers for their children, men’s care-giving choices are again severely restricted.

 

The epidemic of male suicide is linked directly to the emotional vulnerability of men and how we do not have places in society for men to safely and openly discuss the challenges and stresses of their lives. Daddy groups would go a long way towards addressing this need for men to safely and openly discuss their own issues, free from the thought-policing of feminists and in ways that are specific and comfortable to men.

 

And what happens when men try to gather and speak about these issues? What happens when women and men come together to address how the enforcement of traditional gender roles affects all of us?

Feminists call in bomb threats, pull fire alarms, scream into bullhorns, blow noisemakers and harass and verbally abuse the men and women who have gathered to talk.

 

cake

Feminists talk big words when it comes to gender roles and gender equality, but the reality is much more like having their cake and eating it, too. Feminism is not interested in having men abandon their traditional roles as stoic, silent providers. They just don’t want women to live up to the inverse of that kind of rigid thinking about gender, but the truth is that traditional gender roles can be suffocating for some people. Traditional gender roles can be chains that bind, for men and women both.

 

I am not against the traditional division of labor in families. I consider it none of my damn business who gets up when things go bump in the night or who cooks dinner or who kills the spiders. What I do care about is that those roles are not rigidly enforced either through social conditioning or by refusing to discuss the issues that tend to lead to traditional gender roles.

 

I want them to be choices, carefully considered and freely made.  By both men and women.

 

As it stands, women have far more choices than men because they can legally hold men responsible for their own choices and yet reap the spoils of men’s care and labor through family courts. Given the starkness of men’s choices, is it any wonder they either reject marriage and family completely, or adhere to traditional provider roles where they at least have some chance of surviving the devastation of family breakdown?

 

No one is served by this situation. Women have taken full advantage of socially engineered freedoms that give them the chance to modify or outright reject traditional feminine roles, or to fully embrace and enjoy those roles. Men have no such freedom. I have yet to meet a feminist willing to discuss how men’s lack of legal rights restricts their choices in a way women would never tolerate.

 

There is a word for this situation: gynocentrism. Women do not want to perch endlessly on their pedestals, waiting for their knight in shining armor. They want to get on and off the pedestal at will, depending on what they want at any particular time. Men are still expected to be shining knights. They do not get to dismount their steeds and must live to serve women. How the hell is this equality?

 

I love that my husband supports me and does not require me to earn an income. I love that I have spent a huge part of my life caring for our home, our children, our family. I love that I am allowed to choose what parts of the feminine I wish to embrace. I am also ridiculously fortunate. Lady Luck smiled on me.

 

That’s unacceptable. As the saying goes, “luck is not a factor”. Or it shouldn’t be.

 

True freedom, true equality, true choices – they will only come about when men and women have equal rights under the law. Men’s rights will push the conversation about families, children, careers, choices into the open. If women can’t impose legal or social responsibility on men, they will have to start talking to them.

 

My guess is that lots of men will be more than happy to accept traditional male roles, in exchange for wives who accept traditional female roles. Lots of men will negotiate a balance with their partners that works for everyone.

camo

 

But there will also be a ton of men who grab the camo diaper bag, kiss their corporate wives good-bye and head to the park for Daddy and Me playday.

 

And that’s a good thing.

 

Lots of love,

 

JB

 

 

 

 

179 Responses to “A few thoughts about traditionalism and adults who depend on other adults”

  1. jeremy October 28, 2014 at 13:16 #

    I like the tone of your article, JB, but disagree with one aspect of your argument. Regardless of having honest inter-gender dialogue, I do not believe that more men will “kiss their corporate wives good-bye and grab a diaper bag.”
    What that suggestion ignores is each gender’s inherent biological imperatives – the things we find attractive in members of the opposite sex.

    I can’t say that if we have an honest conversation about fat-shaming that men will suddenly start finding heavy women attractive. Men may intellectually understand that a woman has the right to choose to gain weight, but they can not make themselves be attracted to such a woman.

    In the same way, a woman may intellectually understand that a man has the right to choose to be a full-time parent and not earn an income, but most women would lose attraction to such a man (and statistics back this up). A man’s social proof, income, and level of power are sexual attractants to most women, whereas they are not attractants to most men. Most men will not lose attraction to a stay-at-home mom wife, but most women WILL lose attraction to a stay-at-home dad.

    Like you, JB, I don’t believe that traditional gender roles should be set in stone, and I agree that a couple should be free to negotiate what will work for them. But just as a woman would be best advised to consider what she really wants when she chooses a career, men and women would both do well to keep in mind what they each find attractive in the opposite sex and do their best not to violate those principles.

    Like

  2. judgybitch October 28, 2014 at 13:47 #

    I agree 100% here with you. Make sure you understand what impact your choices will have on your libido and relationship, I still want to see this be a viable choice for anyone who believes it is the right choice for themselves.

    Like

  3. APO October 28, 2014 at 14:05 #

    “Two parents working alternating schedules so one is always home, a fulltime daddy, a fulltime mommy – what matters is that children are being cared for by a loving parent.”

    I realize that you are only using this as a possible example of a way to work out raising a child and for a few this “may” work. But this type of schedule is very, very straining on the relationship itself when both parents are never around/awake at the same time. There is very little “us time” in this scenario (been there, done that). 8 hours of sleep is usually considered a healthy amount. Then you have a 9 hour work day with likely 30 minute drive each way so 10 hours. Most people want maybe an hour to themselves when they get home to unwind. Work out? There’s another hour. Not a lot of time left for “us” especially when the other parent, by this time, wants to “tag out” of the parent role to get ready for work.

    I suppose this could work for those not working the traditional 40 hour week or working from home but for middle class people (the majority and declining class) who go to work and make/repair stuff, staying at home isn’t an option nor is setting your own schedule. I realize one should “think about this when making decisions” but only so many can be managers in this world who work from an office setting. There have to be those in a society that actually go to work and “make stuff” and for them the more traditional role of one parent staying home full time is really going to be the one that fits.

    Again, I realize you were not advocating the tag-team wrestling approach for everyone and that it was just an example for maybe a few people, but when I read it, it brought back a lot of memories of how difficult it was and I thought I would share that for people to ponder for their own choices.

    As always, I very much enjoy and appreciate your posts.

    Like

  4. jeremy October 28, 2014 at 14:16 #

    The problem here, JB, is the affect heuristic. People who feel good about something tend to ignore statistics, exaggerate benefits and ignore risks. A person who perceives themselves as being in a good relationship will tend to ignore the 50% divorce statistic. An experiment was done when newlyweds were asked how likely they think their marriages will end in divorce. Almost all of them thought there was a zero percent likelihood. They may have been aware of statistics in the general population, but thought that those statistics did not apply to them.

    How many women who go to school and choose a “good career” eventually find themselves surprised by how much they want to be a mom? Why should they be so surprised? Statistics show that most women eventually want children, and most women with children prefer to work part-time or not at all! They are surprised because of the affect heuristic – they thought their career was good, felt good about it, and ignored statistics.

    My fear, if your “honest conversation” plan is realized, is that the same principle will apply. People WANT to believe the equalist fantasies of feminism because they sound good. People (and especially women) WANT to believe that a man or a woman can work, and a man or a woman can take care of the kids, and that it shouldn’t matter who does what. Yet statistics show that the happiest marriages are the ones with the more traditional division of labour, with the man as the primary breadwinner and the woman as the primary caregiver. The more people stray from this, the greater the danger of unhappiness, statistically.

    How many female breadwinners are surprised that their men feel emasculated? How many female breadwinners are surprised that they end up resenting their men and losing respect for them when they give up their jobs? They should not be surprised – statistics show this is what will happen. They are surprised because of the affect heuristic. They don’t believe statistics apply to themselves. They may have the honest conversation, but don’t necessarily know how to be honest with themselves.

    Like

  5. judgybitch October 28, 2014 at 14:29 #

    I absolutely agree with you here. The conversation is complicated and that’s why it’s so important to have. I tell my children exactly what you just said: my daughters will likely WANT to be mothers and WANT to be at home with their children and my son will most likely WANT to be the provider for his family.

    I encourage them to think of that as the default – if it turns out differently, no harm done.

    Because they are growing up with a mother at home fulltime they don’t have to imagine the advantages or the realities. Like every job, there are parts of this job that suck. I’m honest about what I like and don’t like and how I handle the parts I don’t like.

    It’s just such a terrible disservice that we don’t talk about this honestly, and I agree that putting on feminist rose-colored glasses is not helpful. Not any more so than just ignoring the whole conversation.

    Like

  6. Spaniard October 28, 2014 at 14:56 #

    Career women want to be housewives, housewives want to be career women, women who do both things are totally exhausted.

    Like

  7. Christopher Hawks October 28, 2014 at 15:56 #

    As usual you have written an insiteful article. I think you are spot on that these discussions should be happening. The commenters discussing men being emasculated have a point, but if the discussion are had and a man at home isn’t denigrated for that “work” or choice, than artitututes could shift. I was born in ’71 and I well remember the mommy vs working woman debates at church and at school. The cry from stay at home moms was that they wanted to be respected, and of course raising children is fundamentally important for society. In short, a man at home, should also be respected too. (It’s been pointed out elsewhere that if he’s at home though it would be good to be doing something in addition to raising kids, kind of like you doing this blog and social media for AVFM.). Thanks for your work and I’m ready for more judgy bitch t.v.!

    Like

  8. Sisyphean October 28, 2014 at 16:14 #

    Unfortunately very few people make enough to support a spouse and children at home, so the point is kind of moot except in an abstract “Who would stay home IF we could afford to have one of us stay home” kind of way.

    Like

  9. caprizchka October 28, 2014 at 16:30 #

    As a once highly-successful professional I entirely regret the sort of men I attracted. I think that telling little girls that they are “intelligent” and “smart” just for showing up pretty well guarantees that they will only attract satellite-men rather than leaders. Since both sexes prefer male leaders, generally speaking and of course there are exceptions, I think we could use a little more leadership today. As for those leaders, what do they want? Whatever it is, I think we should give it to them.

    Like

  10. Goober October 28, 2014 at 16:43 #

    You mentioned “Daddy and Me” play dates. This brought up a memory of a support group-ish type thing that Mrs. Goober went to after the birth of our first child called “Mommy and Me”.

    It was a group of new mothers who got together to talk about their babies, and their trials, tribulations, cheat codes, and do artsy craftsy stuff with the kid.

    I had a comp day off work once, and decided to tag along to see what this place was all about, and when I walked through the door, it took about zero seconds flat for the facilitator to make it very clear that I was not welcome.

    It’s called “mommy and me” not “daddy, mommy, and me!” was the explanation. Apparently, my presence caused women to feel uncomfortable, so they wouldn’t open up and share like they would without me there.

    Poor, fragile dears.

    Equality my ass. Fathers, it seems, don’t HAVE trials and tribulations when it comes to raising kids. They have no interest in hearing aobut how other parents dealt with tantrums, or things they had come up with to amuse and teach their children. Fathers either don’t have those problems, or they do, but fuck them, let them figure it out themselves.

    Mrs. Goober, to her credit, told the entire group to kiss her ass and left with me. She never went back.

    Like

  11. Goober October 28, 2014 at 16:44 #

    Oh, yeah, forgot to add – Mrs. Goober is now 4 months along with Baby #2. Everything is going well this time. Fingers crossed.

    Like

  12. jeremy October 28, 2014 at 16:49 #

    That’s the crux of the issue, caprizchka, isn’t it? Men and women are not attracted to the same things. If a male ego-invests his concept of masculinity in his intelligence, leadership, and ability to be a provider, he will consider those qualities to be masculine qualities. Thus, a woman possessing those qualities will appear masculine and therefore un-attractive to him. Men are attracted to complementarity – femininity, not masculinity.

    Whereas women are generally attracted to men who possess the features they most admire in themselves (or wish they had themselves), but in greater measure. Thus, an intelligent, successful woman generally desires a man who is even more intelligent and successful than she is…..who will generally not be attracted to someone like her.

    You want a masculine man? Be feminine. You want to be a successful leader? You will need to find a man who ego-invests his concept of masculinity in something other than those qualities in order to find you attractive.

    Liked by 1 person

  13. Goober October 28, 2014 at 16:49 #

    Excellent comment. It does seem to me that people of all types tend to want what they don’t have, and when they get it, they want what they had before.

    I think a lot of that goes back to the lies we tell our kids. There is no sacrifice anymore. There is no understanding of the fact that making one choice will necessarily preclude other options. We tell our kids that the sky is the limit, and that they can be anything they want to be, and ALL THE THINGS they want to be, but that’s a lie.

    It doesn’t work that way. Want to be a good mom? You won’t also have a “kick ass career.” Choose one, or do both and be mediocre at both. Those are your options. The inability to understand this simple truth has lead to more unhappyness, more misery, and more divorce than I care to consider.

    You choose what you think is best, and you live happily with the choices you’ve made. Can’t be happy? Try something else until you are… But every one of those “something else’s” is going to entail another sacrifice. Every choice you make does.

    This is such common sense knowledge, but we’ve denied this to our children for two generations now, and it is showing up in a big way.

    Like

  14. APO October 28, 2014 at 17:20 #

    Which goes back to what JB was stating about having discussions with one’s children about the choices they make. Want to go to college and study political science or basket weaving, you’re going to go into debt for very little return. Choose things like engineering and computer science and the return is very different and you can afford to have one stay at home. If a child does not want to go to college, decide on a trade school which is much cheaper and, although not as great a return when finished, can support a family if that family chooses to live more modestly. Again, it’s about guiding our little ones on the choices they make and getting them to think long term rather than short term.

    Like

  15. Sisyphean October 28, 2014 at 17:31 #

    Oh I agree and I hugely applaud that portion of her post. However, there seems to be a lot of magical thinking out there with regard to jobs, especially around college majors. Very few people have the ability and drive to complete an engineering degree. However those that do face competition from outsourcing and entire flotillas of H1B’s brought in specifically to depress wages. Lots of for profit schools that bill themselves as trade schools are nothing more than glorified diploma mills leaving students in debt and still serving coffee. The manufacturing jobs that used to anchor the middle class have moved out of the country in large numbers, hollowing out entire cities. Economics is not the only driver for behavior, but it most definitely makes a difference.

    Like

  16. caprizchka October 28, 2014 at 18:10 #

    How do you like your coffee?

    Like

  17. slacker October 28, 2014 at 18:33 #

    I’ve seen people call you a traditionalist on other sites and blogs and it annoys me to no end because it just isn’t fair. The most “traditionalist” thing I think I have ever seen you write is that a lot of women would ultimately be happier with their lives if they had children, not just a career, and that women should be free to choose to be a stay at home mom without being labeled a traitor or underachiever by feminists.

    I really don’t see how being in favor of people having multiple options in life makes you a traditionalist but then again I really shouldn’t be surprised when feminists twist the truth to attack someone that doesn’t believe their rhetoric.

    Like

  18. APO October 28, 2014 at 19:11 #

    I agree, which is why it is important to help your children make these decisions. It needs to be stressed that, whatever they end up choosing to do with their lives, they need to be able to pay the bills at the end of the day. Life doesn’t care if you don’t want to be an engineer or computer person or some other technical field. But life does care about being able to pay the bills. So, eventually a path in life needs to be pursued whether the kids say they have the drive or not to pursue it. Most do have drive but are used to being lazy and getting a medal for showing up. Put some fire under their butts and it’s amazing the transformation that can take place.
    And there are still jobs out there in many good fields and sometimes it just takes a little creativity to get them. Go intern at companies while in school. Or do a co-op thing where you work at a company off and on for 3 months at a time while still in school. Not only can you get your face at a big company this way but can get your face in multiple divisions at said big company which can lead to great job opportunities at the end. Or, work at a company for stupid low pay to get experience and then use that experience to get a better job down the line. (BTW, I’ve done all of the above methods.) But again, sometimes this takes leading the kids to understand that these opportunities and methods exist.

    Like

  19. comslave (@comslave) October 28, 2014 at 20:46 #

    The sad part is your kids are going to go through twenty years of being told the family is evil and oppressive by our educational system. I doubt they have a chance at family life.

    Like

  20. Clover October 28, 2014 at 21:49 #

    Well I am grateful every day that I came across your blog in time, before I made too many stupid decisions. I doubt I would be in such a good place now if I’d never read some of your posts about relationships and realised that everybody around me was encouraging me to act like an entitled bitch.
    I’ve never thought you were a traditionalist, but by showing women how they can work towards a housewife/motherhood goal *if they want that*, I think you’ve helped many people who suit such an arrangement. If some people can’t see past that to the breadth of your posts and spot the underlying message of personal responsibility, that says more about their issues than your writing.

    Like

  21. That_Susan October 28, 2014 at 21:59 #

    I think it’s a really good idea for kids to interact a lot with people who are actually working in the fields that they themselves want to major in. As my fourteen year old daughter wants to go into acting, it’s been exciting to me to learn from her high school theatre arts teacher that for people who are willing and able to work backstage as well as act, it really is possible to become an Equity actor and find continuous work. Many theatre companies are more open to hiring actors who can do tech work, too.

    Of course, theatre work also involves working lots of evening and weekend hours, which might or might not work out well with raising a family; it depends on what kind of arrangement she and her future spouse want to work out, if they decide to have kids. I’m also seeing that she has a strong aptitude for leadership, and think she might really enjoy majoring in both management and theatre, or maybe English and theatre since she’s an awesome writer, too.

    My younger daughter is only nine, so who knows what she’ll end up deciding…but she got really enthused a few years back when we were visiting my husband in the hospital and a music therapist came in and started playing the guitar and singing to the guy in the other bed. She loves singing, composing songs, and playing music; she also really loves babies and small children, and people in general.

    I certainly don’t devalue fields like engineering and computer science for people with actual interests and aptitudes in those areas — but I think the best thing is for each person to learn about his or her passions, while at the same time finding points where those passions intersect with what the world actually needs and is willing to pay for. And, of course, to think about their vision for family life and what kind of work will fit best with that. Janet is absolutely right that couples need to sit down and have frank discussions about what they really want, rather than just letting it happen.

    Like

  22. Jim October 28, 2014 at 22:20 #

    Exactly. Have people ever wondered why most women (no not all) always seem to look for a man that is taller, stronger, and even smarter and make more money than they do? It’s just biology. We’re all human and we have certain biological characteristics that make us who we are. Yes, there are many variations of this and even exceptions (there are ALWAYS exceptions. But as we know that does not disprove the rule).

    The Marxists actually believe they can re-engineer human nature (I can’t imagine the mountain of sheer arrogance and narcissism that it takes to believe they can even do that) and simply mix and match male and female as if their isn’t any difference between them.

    As a man, femininity is extremely attractive in a woman and is a non-negotiable. If it wasn’t I could just go date another man and I wouldn’t care. You remove the femininity from a woman and I just can’t get turned on.

    My main concern is simply not to be treated like a black person under Jim Crow. A woman should NEVER be allowed to have me arrested, fired, prevent from seeing my kids, steal my income through the government, or destroy my life an any way just because she has the vagina. I have every right to the integrity of my person and property as she does. That’s why I’m interested in these issues. I’m sick of sociopathic bastards using the sledgehammer of government to enforce their sick ideology on me or steal my income for their own use. That’s just cowardly and barbaric.

    However other people want to live (and I don’t give a shit how they live as long as they leave me alone) is fine but don’t write laws making me a slave just because somebody wants to have complete totalitarian power over me. Why is it so hard for some people to just live and let live (as if I didn’t know)?

    Like

  23. Jim October 28, 2014 at 22:25 #

    Comment of the month.

    Like

  24. Jim October 28, 2014 at 22:29 #

    Glad you’ve got a good woman there Goober. She’s got you’re back. They’re so hard to come by these days.

    Like

  25. Cadders October 28, 2014 at 22:43 #

    Completely agree.

    My wife is a childminder and over the years has minded for over 50 families. In all that time, just one – one! – mom has stayed the course as a full time working mum. Most go part time after having kids, and / or drop down to a much less high profile job once they hit their 40th birthday (this particular trend needs further analysis but the frequency with which it happens is quite startling).

    So, by this reckoning feminism / equality – whatever you want to call it – suits about 2% of moms.

    Although fine in theory, I suspect a truly honest conversation would, sooner rather than later, see much more polarization of the sexes to traditional sex roles that JB anticipates.

    Because these women’s choices were of course, facilitated by all but one of the dads (guess which one!) sticking with the ‘traditional’ provider role even though it clearly increased the demands placed upon them. The men too, accepted the traditional role, even though by any measure it made their burden heavier.

    Why – because both men and women instinctively find comfort in traditional roles.

    Like

  26. Goober October 28, 2014 at 23:10 #

    I’m glad of it, too. She is really great. She’s got my back in so many ways I can’t count them. Since i have her back unconditionally, it’s nice to have that favor returned.

    Once, when there was some friction between me and the mother in law, she told her mother – her MOTHER – that when she was in my house, she lived by my rules or she could GTFO. This was three years into our relationship, before we got married. That pretty much convinced me that she was marriagable material.

    Like

  27. Goober October 28, 2014 at 23:16 #

    If you love your daughter, have the talk with her now that aspirations to being an “actor” will have some very serious trade-offs.

    That is not a field that is renowned for providing very stable, reasonably-paying jobs. She will sacrifice more than she knows to try to be an actress, and probably will end up not being one at all.

    Prepare her. Do her that service, at least, and teach her to have a backup plan. Teach her that no, you CAN’T be anything you want to be, unless you’re willing to pay the price for that.

    Chase your dreams, but be prepared to do something else if those dreams don’t stack up, and also understand the consequences of choosing your dream.

    If never having any money, working wierd hours, and constantly having to move from town to town to follow your act are what she wants in life, then more power to her…

    Oh, and don’t forget the sex scenes. She gets to get naked with strange men all the time. I’m sure her boyfriends will love that.

    Do not allow her to go into anything with stars in her eyes. Ensure that she measures the rewards and consequences, and goes in with her eyes wide open.

    Like

  28. Jason Wexler October 28, 2014 at 23:28 #

    I know it’s none of my business, but don’t encourage an aspiring writer to get an English degree, it won’t help them. I did an analysis of 547 notable writers who published between 1880 and 2013, notability determined by being known for writing a classic novel, or being nominated for an ALA litterary award or the Nebula or Hugo award, or having been a New York Times best seller; I looked at their educational backgrounds and found two who had English degrees, Upton Sinclair and John Green (who are both great, respectable authors). On the other hand I found 217 who had only high school educations including 41 who’ve published since 2000, and 64 who dropped out of high school or only barely graduated including Hemmingway and Capote, as well as another 140 or so college dropouts including Vidal and Steinbeck. Most of the remainder are active scientists and historians with graduate degrees like Asimov, Clarke, Heinlein, Tolkein, Lewis and Niffenegger who wrote speculative fiction. You’ll note I left out Pulitzer Prize nominees from the initial analysis, of more than 200 nominees since 1980 almost all of them have English degrees. You’ll also find if you look them up, you’ve heard of maybe six of them, and if you read some of their work that it is clearly intended to appeal to other English majors, but that they forgot to include important basics like character development and plots.

    If you google “should writers get English degrees” the results will be a lot of articles and blogs that say no, for reasons ranging from “literary analysis isn’t creativity” to “no outside employability” to “too narrow a perspictive on the world”. Encourage a writer to write on their own, do self publishing on sites like deviantart to constructive criticism, and to then find a literary agent.

    Like

  29. Jason Wexler October 28, 2014 at 23:29 #

    Yeah and this too.

    Like

  30. Jim October 28, 2014 at 23:31 #

    Before anyone says anything yes, I meant “your” not “you’re”. Damn typos.

    “Once, when there was some friction between me and the mother in law, she told her mother – her MOTHER – that when she was in my house, she lived by my rules or she could GTFO. This was three years into our relationship, before we got married. That pretty much convinced me that she was marriagable material.”

    I can see why. The most important part of your post is “HER mother”. Not yours bet HERS.

    “Since i have her back unconditionally, it’s nice to have that favor returned.”

    That’s rare Goober. Very rare these days. You found the needle in the haystack. Kind of like winning the lottery only better. lol.

    Like

  31. The Real Peterman October 29, 2014 at 00:02 #

    I would love to be a stay-at-home dad.

    Liked by 1 person

  32. The Real Peterman October 29, 2014 at 00:03 #

    Great, great article, JB!

    Like

  33. nrjnigel October 29, 2014 at 00:04 #

    JB. This is actually Lovely. Clearly put and making a case for equity in basic legal rights and some sensible guidance made available to young people in general. Such a simple yet persuasive manifesto. I hope you continue to find the time to “pen” such clarity.

    Like

  34. Fred October 29, 2014 at 00:13 #

    This post has been bugging me all day.

    Options only have value when exercised. Unused options become worthless burdens.

    The rotten truth is, for many people, being successful enough to have options means doing all sorts of shit you hate. And it kills you.

    Fuck my college degrees, fuck my credentials, fuck my STEM job, and fuck the life choices that gave me options. I didn’t want this shit.

    I should have had more fun. Nobody ever tells a kid to enjoy life.

    Giving yourself options, following your dreams, doing what your love, being independent…it all the same bullshit in a different package.

    Like

  35. bbhippopotamus October 29, 2014 at 00:35 #

    Can’t help feeling that if men did have complete equality with women i.e. did have equal de facto childcare rights etc, women might start properly nurturing their nurturing role for fear of having it taken away.If they couldn’t have everything as they currently do they might start to identify what they really thought was important.

    Like

  36. George Makedon October 29, 2014 at 01:15 #

    Feminism’s core , flagship and adamant -set in stone- condition is, that women MUST WORK in the public arena, market or whatever “public” ! Accordingly the worst “failure” in this highly abnormal context ( unheard of , during the bulk of the Universal Human experience of the last 40.000 years until ofcource the relatively recent social Holocaust) is for her to be a housewife and a REAL mother . It is this precise notion that went so successful all along , since it was mainly propagated ( not initially so much -but in alliance- ) with the Occultist misandric but POWERLESS in the begining , Lesbo-feminist divisions ( all Feminist organisations during 70’s in U.S., were run by Lesbians -Guardian- 2006 ) , propageted that is , by the MALE hardcore Arch-Capitalist strategists , bend in EXPLOITING the Female “slaveable” population particularly after the destruction brought about, by the two WW wars . The “baits” used , such as “economic independence” , ” utilisation of potential” , “freedom of choise” , “equality” etc. ‘ are completely B.S. under any serious analysis at any level of exegesis . The vast Universal Civilisations of the past and Schools of thought, as well as social paradigms , did not mark -or allowed – such a “contribution” from women , as their heights were set mainly on either social mores of virtue and morality , or spheres of Spiritual atonement and not freakish paragons of fiscal -cut throat- addiction, and shameless attitudes of “bolsy” materialism and sadistic “leadership’ . Accordingly in this climate , the role of woman was wisely and naturally – I repeat – NATURALLY set , on preserving the Sacred in Family and Motherhood . As Camille Paglia said the biggest Empowerment of women is Motherhood . . . Of course this main role does not prevent any woman to utilise any potential in PERSONAL Knowledge , virtue or Spirituality . On the contrary as Plato stressed : “Education” for material gain IS NOT condusive to personal and general good and is rather destructive . And I think as any sane person would agree , our society suffers greatly -as never before -in this aspect of existential anguish . Personally -I may be wrong – but I estimate that 95% of all social evils ,( including – God forbid -women’s deteriorating state of health , I am afraid ) directly or indirectly, have as a main cause the accursed Feminism which for first time in History poisons and tears apart the ontological and archetypal -harmonised union of Opposites -which is the very core of Life itself . Therefore silly and DESTRUCTIVE “equalised” options as theones presented by the above “that Susan” , or Alchemies of alternative changeable roles are avoiding the “elephant in the room” . That is that the traditional roles -of male ‘outwarness’ and female ‘inwarness’ ARE set in stone and HORMONALLY ingrained , and its nightmarish mutation-under “equalisation”, leads to the very horrible mutation of the Ontologically SEPARETED characteristics of the two sexes , whereas any attempt to avoid this tide and preserve the original , is diabolically labeled as “sexist” .

    Like

  37. APO October 29, 2014 at 02:15 #

    Okay, then sell or get rid of some of your “options” and go have fun. And “successful” means different things. Do you mean “have lots of money” or “living a good life”? To me it’s the latter. They don’t mean the same thing.

    Like

  38. Spaniard October 29, 2014 at 08:55 #

    What is sure is that housewives don’t want to be waitress, they want to be journalists in Fashion TV; and career women don’t want to be working class housewives, they want to be middle-upper class housewives. Or, directly, they want to be bored lazy upper class “housewives” shopping, spa, all day long. Nanny takes care of the children.

    And men have no options: they have to work yes or yes. A man choosing to be a househubby it is a wealthy rarity like John Lennon from 1975 to 1980. But, finally, he retuned to work: “Double Fantasy” record (1980). It is not possible for a man to be a a househubby forever. That is completely unnatural.

    Like

  39. Spaniard October 29, 2014 at 08:56 #

    waitresses

    Like

  40. That_Susan October 29, 2014 at 12:02 #

    She actually is an actress now — but I see what you mean about the difficulty of being able to support yourself with just acting. For her right now, there’s such a sense of excitement and feeling of camaraderie with every production that she’s a part of, and a feeling of letdown when that production ends, and an eagerness to be moving right along to the next one.

    Going from job to job can certainly be stressful for anyone raising a family, but it may be fun and the opposite of monotony for a young person. She’s not completely sure that she wants kids.

    She also has a real gift for writing, so I’m encouraging her to keep that spark going, too, and doing everything I can to look for ways for her to get the education she wants without going into debt. And if she gets turned on to it, double majoring in something like management could be a really good thing.

    Like

  41. That_Susan October 29, 2014 at 12:06 #

    Great idea!

    Like

  42. Sisyphean October 29, 2014 at 13:02 #

    This is exactly my experience with regard to visual art. Don’t go to art school is the growing new mantra among illustrators, concept artists and creature designers, i.e. people who earn a decent living from their art. Being good at something means doing it, seeking constructive feedback, studying the greats, and doing it more. Period.

    Like

  43. Jason Wexler October 29, 2014 at 13:53 #

    What an embarrassingly obvious point for me to have missed, until you said it. I’ve been feuding with “English departments” since high school on the question of utility, but only became suspicious their value for writers recently (in the last two years), when I inadvertently learned about Steinbecks educational travails. On the other hand it became immediately obvious to me, when I met them, that all of my college “friends” majoring in music, were wasting their time, for the reasons we’re discussing. It didn’t take me long after to apply the same reasoning to all of the arts and drama, however it never occurred to me that writers would be wasting time in English departments, until I did my big research project I described to Susan…. Shame on me for not seing the connection of writing to the other arts at least directly, until this morning.

    Like

  44. Spaniard October 29, 2014 at 14:18 #

    I don’t agree totally, The thing is even more complex:

    “If I male ego invests his concept of masculinity in his intelligence, leadeship, and ability to be a provider, he will consider those qualities to be masculine qualities”. Yes, HE will consider it but not women, generally. Women consider that kind of man a “nice guy”. They vomit at it. Women not want to be protected, they want to be abused, and even beaten.

    Caprizchka is an over 40 woman. It is normal than she likes your so civilized statement. But, probably, when she was in her 20s/30s (she is very attractive now so yo can imagine how she was back then), she was attracted (and she attracted) to that kind of men she call “satellites” I presume that is a hamster-rationalization of “players”, or “they played me”. Obviously she mean “bad boys”. I am completely sure she does not mean “boring, honest nice guys who are followers instead of leaders”. After all, a “bad boy” no need to be a leader, a bad boy can be, perfectly, a “satellite” or a scammer.

    In other hand, Caprizchka, she is a confessed submissive (nothing wrong about that), but being a submissive could mean a lot of things: Submissive to a leader, professionally succesful, protective provider man? Not necessarily. Submissive to a waster loser bad boy? Maybe.

    The problem with female subs is that is they are never actual subs. Submissive women are dominatrix to most of men. They are dominatrix who want to be dominated. And when they find the man who does it… they loose control and are totally in the hands of the male dom. Psycology of sadomasochism is very complex.

    Caprizchka herself is a “valkiry type”: 6 feet, athletic, blonde, cigar smoker, travelled, languages, (once) proffesionally succesful… do you really think she is a submissive woman?

    Sorry, Caprizchka, you know I have a lot of affecton for you, I am just using your comments as a female archetype. It is not you personally. Hope you do not mind.
    If I am wrong, correct me.

    Like

  45. Spaniard October 29, 2014 at 14:25 #

    I was born in ’70. Yes, I remember that debates. Late 70s in Spain. In early 70s was out of question that. Tradcon dictatorship here until 1975.

    Like

  46. That_Susan October 29, 2014 at 14:54 #

    George Makedon, I wanted to respond to this little quote from your above post: “Therefore silly and DESTRUCTIVE ‘equalised’ options as theones presented by the above ‘that Susan’…”

    I don’t understand what you found so offensive about my post about my own daughters’ interests and gifts? Although I don’t have any real theatre background myself, seeing how my teen daughter has grown through her involvement in it leads me to disagree with your view that a passion for theatre is “silly and DESTRUCTIVE” — and I don’t even get what you meant by “equalised” (sic).

    In addition to her involvement through her fine and performing arts high school (it’s a public magnet school, we can’t afford private), she’s also part of a Shakespeare group in our community, and one thing that’s really impressed her is how much can be accomplished by a group of people when everyone is motivated and ready to work together. Her Shakespeare group performs various Shakespeare works together, while also creating their own props and costumes, and they put amazing productions together in a really short time.

    I’m seeing that, as well as her sheer love of acting, she also gets really excited about being productive and working with a group on a common goal. She loves it when she has an opportunity to organize the work and take a leadership role, which is one reason why I think she could have a real future in management. She’s just gotten accepted to be part of an LGBTQ awareness project where she and a group of young people will be writing and performing their own program. Theatre is providing her with awesome opportunities to develop her speaking and leadership skills; it’s not silly at all.

    Like

  47. That_Susan October 29, 2014 at 15:17 #

    Sisyphean wrote, “Being good at something means doing it, seeking constructive feedback, studying the greats, and doing it more. Period.”

    I completely agree with this. That’s why I say that my fourteen year old is an actress and a writer RIGHT NOW. Because she is actively doing these things and learning to do them better. I say this while realizing that there’s a huge difference between “being” something you’re passionate about being, and having that thing support you.

    She also really wants the college experience, so my main goal is to help her get the experience she wants without accumulating any debt. I think debt is a huge energy-sapper for creative people who may love their art enough not to care about being rich, but who certainly need those basics like food, shelter, and clothing.

    She’s getting excellent grades and is right on-track with her goal of participating in a program that’s available for motivated students in our inner city school district, in which selected students spend their junior and senior years getting college credits at our local community college (all costs are covered by the school district), and graduate with both a high school diploma and an associates degree.

    At this point, she’s very interested in continuing her studies and getting a bachelor of arts in theatre at the branch of our state university that is actually located in our city, meaning that she could save on costs by living at home.

    When I needed to go back to work a few years ago, I was very blessed to be able to get a job working from home, giving telephone English lessons to business people all over the world. The base requirement for this job is a bachelor’s degree, and that degree can be in ANYTHING.

    So even though my bachelor’s degree in social work didn’t lead me into a social work career, having it meant that a door was opened for me to make decent money without having to leave the house. I get to set my own hours and can plan breaks throughout the day, based on the needs of my family. And of course there’s no commute, so that gives me more time with my family, too. This makes me very glad that I got that degree, even though I didn’t “use” it in the conventional sense.

    Like

  48. That_Susan October 29, 2014 at 16:36 #

    I recently read a really interesting article (link below), titled “Why Top Tech CEOs Want Employees With Liberal Arts Degrees.” There’s even a quote from Steve Jobs in there about the value of combining technology with liberal arts and the humanities. Apparently, liberal arts majors provide technology companies with a much-needed perspective — but to get hired, it sounds like it’s a good idea to take at least a few courses in areas like programming and coding, and include that coursework on your resume.

    This is really good news for young people whose strengths are more humanities-leaning than math and science-leaning.

    http://www.fastcompany.com/3034947/the-future-of-work/why-top-tech-ceos-want-employees-with-liberal-arts-degrees

    Like

  49. Sisyphean October 29, 2014 at 16:59 #

    I’ve done a some local theater in my area (I am not far from NYC) and I’ve met all the other local actors and actresses, all of whom have loads of debt from theater degrees, none of whom are employed in an acting capacity or paying creative directorship. If my son wanted to pursue acting, given what I know now, I’d suggest that he focus on a trade or degree that would pay the bills first while also reading great plays and acting in every local theater production he could. He’d get the critical experience of auditioning and performing from those local theater roles while he earned his bacon bringing degree and then he could take that trade or degreed profession and move to NYC or LA and do auditions whenever he had time off. If he was cast for pilot he could take a leave of absence. Now with a daughter, it’s harder, or easier depending on how traditional you are. There’s no reason a girl couldn’t be a mom, married to a guy with a good trade in LA or NJ or NY who auditions while her kids are at school. What I’d worry about as a father of a drama interested daughter is the Garfunkel and Oats scenario (look them up on youtube), where the girl goes to juiliard, gets all the best training that daddy’s money can buy, is pretty, is talented… but still has a middling (at best) career and ends up in her thirties unmarried with no children and a lot of bitterness.

    Like

  50. Sisyphean October 29, 2014 at 17:13 #

    Exactly, compounding the point is the fact that outside of basic fundamentals all of the arts encourage pupils to develop their own style, which they can only do on their own, so why are we in lectures? Why are we learning “the right way” to do this or that if there is no right way but the way that speaks to you, that motivates you to do more, and that people want to buy? These three things are rarely mutually exclusive, far less so than arts professors would have us believe. A degree outside of the arts could actually help a person learn about the world in a way that allows them to experience the working world, other cultures, people, to make sense of those things and come to a meaningful synthesis in their work. It’s precisely this need for lived experience that causes so many great writers and artists to be well over 30 when they make their greatest most influential works.

    Like

  51. Goober October 29, 2014 at 17:49 #

    You’ve made your choices. If you’re unhappy with them, change and make different choices and try something new.

    It isn’t hard, once you recognize that you’ve siply become entrenched in a paradigm that you’re holding onto because it’s comfortable, and shoving it aside is scary.

    Again, if you choose not to do this, you’ve made your choice. Stop being unhappy and live with the choice you’ve made.

    Like

  52. Jason Wexler October 29, 2014 at 18:09 #

    I’m a fan of Garfunkle and Oates, and it never occurred to me that Rikki was bitter per say. I think they are doing o.k. for themselves, if there is bitterness it may be the result of unrealistic dreams or expectations. I want to be a singer, musician or actor is not the same thing as I want to be a super star.

    Like

  53. Sisyphean October 29, 2014 at 18:16 #

    We can agree to disagree then. I’d say that the song “Pregnant women are smug” does seem to me to be rooted in bitterness, at least a little. My wife was listening to that one (As I watched the Garfunkel and Oates show at 12:00AM on IFC the other evening, out of morbid curiosity) and she begged me to turn it off because she wanted to punch them, which I thought was hilarious. The whole point of that episode seemed to be: “We are unhappy with our lives and we don’t know what went wrong and also we hate women with husbands and families.”

    Like

  54. That_Susan October 29, 2014 at 18:25 #

    Yes, I’ve been drilling it into her that debt is something that will seriously weigh her down. We are in a very tough situation financially, so she’s been quite aware of the value of a dollar for quite some time now. She’s very careful about how she spends her allowance, as she knows that something may come up that she wants to do, such as an impromptu caste party at Winstead’s, and her dad and I may not have any money to give her for food.

    This is one reason why she’s jumping at the chance to get two years of college under her belt while she’s still in high school and the cost would be covered by the district. For any remaining studies, because of our finances, from what I’ve seen online about federal guidelines, it looks like all of her college expenses can be covered by government financial aid, so long as she’s happy going to a public state university, which she seems to be fine with right now.

    So she can start her adult life without any debt, and if she does decide to pursue the bachelor of arts in theatre, I’m going to encourage her to think about double majoring in business administration, or at least using some of her elective hours to take courses in a field like business or computer science. Whatever happens with regard to her theatre aspirations, she is such a high energy person and such a born leader, that she will absolutely not be wasting the taxpayers’ money by getting a liberal arts degree. She will put it to some sort of very good use.

    She’s so interested in being productive, and in social justice and changing society for the better, that I know she’ll be giving immensely more back to the world than what she’ll be receiving in the form of scholarships and financial aid.

    As far as being single, she doesn’t want that either. She’s a lesbian and hopes to meet the right woman early in life, though she’s kind of accepted that she probably won’t meet that woman until college. Most of the not-completely-straight girls that she meets now are bi girls who prefer dating boys. She did meet one girl who wasn’t ready to be out yet and just wanted a phone relationship, and one who said she’d like to “experiment” with lesbianism — but my daughter doesn’t want to be anyone’s phone girlfriend or experiment, so she’s holding out for someone who knows who she is, is ready to be out, and is ready to commit to one person. She seems to recognize that that that’s not where most 14-year-old girls are at.

    She is not sure about kids yet — and of course, as a lesbian, this would have to be an intentional choice on her part. She thinks she might like to adopt. She’s such a practical person that I’m sore that she and her future wife can figure out how to manage all that when and if the time comes.

    Like

  55. Jason Wexler October 29, 2014 at 18:39 #

    I guess I’m not that big a fan, while I don’t own a tv (who needs one with computer based netflix), I did not know they had a show. “Pregnant Women are Smug” was the second song of theirs I ever heard and it cemented my love for them, I like it because I think it is irreverent, not because I think it’s true. In my view all comedy can’t help but be the Schadenfreude joy at someone’s misfortunes, even if it’s the comedian, so my favorite comedy is that which tackles subjects which tend to be otherwise avoided by mainstream comedy (Stephen Lynch’s “Special Olympics” is an ideal example of this principle), after all laughter need not be derisive, it can be therapeutic. So I try not to look for deeper offensive meanings in comedy, the difference between offensive and irreverent usually makes itself clear in the context.

    After that defense, it is amusing to note I was on the fence about them after hearing the first song of theirs I heard, “Gay Boyfriend”, I had liked another song by the Hazzards with the same title a lot better and was always disappointed when the version that Pandora played was the Garfunkle and Oates one.

    Like

  56. ladjpw October 29, 2014 at 19:00 #

    Susan, thank you so much for this post.  I’ve mentioned a couple of times that I switched to JB’s blog after an argument on the atheist blog I was reading at the time, wherein the author seriously and unironically posted a question “as the open minded, thoughtful, rational community what ideas other than pro-life should be off the table for discussion, by anyone claiming to be an atheist?”  In truth the author was part of a “pack” of some of the most solipsistic, close minded and data/science denying people I’d ever encountered, save for the sycophants who commented on their blogs; I don’t know if the phrase “friend of Rebecca Watson” would mean anything here.  Anyway, you are many of the things these people hated the most, so the nonchalant love, wisdom and tolerance you just displayed would make their heads explode if they read it, the cognitive dissonance of who you really are versuses how they want to perceive people like you, would be too much for them to deal with.  All of which made me smile both for my decision months ago to like you, and the brilliance of what you just said.

    Like

  57. That_Susan October 29, 2014 at 19:10 #

    Thanks so much! 🙂

    Like

  58. Goober October 29, 2014 at 23:49 #

    This is just hamster-dancing by liberal arts majors who are trying to justify spending four years of their lives and a good portion of their life’s income on something that they are finding to be completely worthless.

    It is not true in the slightest.

    Unless you set yourself apart from the countless hoardes of lib arts majors in some way, you’re just going to be one of so many people shaking the same degree and competing for the same four jobs.

    My advice to all of my children, and I believe it should be to yours, also, is as follows:

    1.) If you’re going to college, major in a STEM field that will allow you a good chance (80%) at a job paying 45,000 to 50,000 STARTING SALARY or don’t bother. You’re spending too much money, and sacrificing productive years for too little return.

    2.) If you’re not going to college, take a technical school course. Surveying. CAD. CNC. RN. Ultra-sound tech… The list goes on, but the point is, spend a little less time, way less money, and get a job making the 40 to 50K a year.

    3.) If you don’t want to do either 1 or 2, then enroll in an apprenticeship for a skilled trade of your choice. Even better, you don’t pay shit for this, THEY PAY YOU. And once you’re out of the apprenticeship, you’ll be making damn good money.

    Pipe fitters in my area, prevailing wage, are starting at $53 an hour. That’s close enough to $120,000 a year STARTING that I’ll just go ahead and round it out.

    Oh, and the aprentice wage? $28 an hour. Again, THEY PAY YOU to learn your trade. Not a bad deal, eh?

    The problem is that we’ve taught our kids that working in the trades and working with your hands and sweat is a sign that you’ve failed somehow.

    It isn’t. Historically, working in askilled trade was an very honorable thing. Why have we made it so wrong to actually make things with our hands and effort?

    Why is it so much more attractive to our kids these days to be a writer or an actor, than to actually desire to create something tangible?

    I know people who would rather make $8 an hour working in a call center than $53 an hour installing the hydronic heating system in a school. They would see that call center job as more legitimate, more honorable, and a sign of success, while they would look at that pipe fitter and think “what a loser” even though he could buy and sell them three times over.

    Like

  59. Ryan October 30, 2014 at 00:00 #

    That was a brilliant article, as was your related video on this subject. They are exactly what people needed to hear from you right now. It is not so much your personal life that matters to people, it is your values on equality and equity and your perspectives on traditionalism and gynocentrism that people needed clarification on. I notice Paul Elam is now doing the same thing on his YouTube channel. This is what I wanted to see happen and this was what I was talking about in my last comment to you. This clears the air and defuses things. The problem with life is that it is complicated and words and terms can be easily miscontrued, especially when we are talking about issues like men’s rights which have been ignored for centuries. Ask the average person in the street what gynocentrism or male disposability is and they would not have a clue. The greatest thing about the recent internal back and forth within the MHRM right now, is we are all having an open dicussion about what we mean when we say MGTOW, equality, gender equity, male disposability, gynocentrism, traditionalism etc. This needed to happen and it was long overdue.

    The MHRM has had a major growth spurt and it is inevitable that from time to time, we need to revisit certain values, topics and facets of life to make sure we are all on the same page and speaking the same language. If we don’t speak the same language then it can appear people are at odds with each other in the MHRM, when they are not and simply are refering to different things. There is a book called the tyranny of words that I highly recommend. Feminists know how to manipulate language, that is why they are so insidious. This is what we all need to watch out for.

    With respect to the series of statements you have made or articles you have written that has been brought up by Diana Davison, I will say this. I am aware of the fact that people are constantly learning and that people make mistakes, change their minds and evolve their thinking as they acquire knowledge over time. What someone writes a year or two years ago, may not neccessarily reflect there views in the present. Furthermore, as time goes by and people discuss their beliefs and opinions online, they get better at refining what their values really are and what they really mean to convey. Lastly not everything anyone says will always be consistent with what they believe. To an extent we are all hypocrites and make mistakes. That is human. I am no different, you are no different, Paul is no different, Diana is no different, John Hembling is no different, Karen Straughan is no different. I give people latitude to make errors, even feminists.

    From what I can tell of the current state of your blog and your current activity within the MHRM, you don’t support gynocentrism, you do consider men lives as being of equal value and you do respect men’s right to choose how to live their own lives and male self-determination. Therefore I cannot see a problem. Okay maybe you said some things in the past I strongly disagree with, but that does not seem to be reflected in what you are doing or saying now within the MHRM. Clearly either your thinking has changed, you have refined your communication of your perspectives or opinions to convey are better and more precise meaning or perhaps a combination of both. That is fine. Hell I am no different and I don’t think any other person within the MHRM or MGTOW is. Feminists and old school traditionalists are the ones not evolving their thinking and opinions.

    Your current position is what matters because that is what matters with respect to AVFM and the MHRM, not what you said a year ago or two years ago before AVFM and the MHRM. Prof. Janice Fiamengo was a feminist, Paul Elam was once according to his account a feminist (my apologies if I wrong on that, I thought he said that once), I briefly identified as a feminist myself. People change their minds, their thinking and their positions on things. That is perfectly okay with most people, including me.

    I think this matter has been put to rest and I will share this article and your related video to others.

    Like

  60. mamaziller October 30, 2014 at 08:23 #

    wow you said that perfectly. i completely agree. you understand women.

    Like

  61. That_Susan October 30, 2014 at 10:47 #

    I don’t look down on the trades at all. I have tremendous respect for people who can fix stuff and keep it running.

    Like

  62. That_Susan October 30, 2014 at 10:58 #

    “Why is it so much more attractive to our kids these days to be a writer or an actor, than to actually desire to create something tangible? ”

    I think writing, acting, and creating tangible things are all valuable. I don’t see the need to devalue any one of them in order to promote the other.

    Like

  63. Spaniard October 30, 2014 at 11:42 #

    I think is not big deal understanding women.
    Women are simper than the mechanism of a broom.

    “Women are surface disguised as a depth” said the wise man.

    Like

  64. easttexasfatboy October 30, 2014 at 15:49 #

    Judgybitch – Women will never give up what the government has given them. What’s worse, they’ll clamor for more. The only way this sad state of affairs will be stopped is by some major event that resets society. Civil war, Islamic invasion, pandemic, something of that sort. So severe that women’s survival is really in question. Like having to flee to avoid being beheaded for being a feminist-marxist. IMO, male contraceptives sounds nice, but it really would only effect a few women. What’s necessary must affect nearly all. Kinda like a major war. German women after ww2 were very different than before. Prewar German society was similar to today. Rotten to the core. What most folks don’t realize is that the Germans went with Hitler because things were so out of control. That was a horrible choice. Women who had to dig themselves out of bombed out buildings, fight horrific fires on the edge of starvation didn’t have time for nonsense after the war. MGTOW is a rational response to a stacked deck. I’m 58 years old, been frivorced and plundered. Came upon the red pill. Too late to help me, but I’ve learned a lot. Hypergamy and the threatpoint, marital theft and frivorce. If you don’t warn your children about such things, you’ll have to deal with the consequences. Feral young women cannot be rehabilitated. Incurable mental disease. They’re literally raised that way. And, yes, they’re the prettiest, because of the training they get from their mothers. Only a major social upheaval will stop this. BTW, when ISIS moves into a town, they have a list of who they’re going to kill. If we have fighting here in the US, they’re going to know who the feminist-marxists are.

    Like

  65. George Makedon October 30, 2014 at 21:18 #

    The upcoming DEPRIVED generations will change all this ! ( The unevitability of Patriarchy – Steven Goldberg ) .

    Like

  66. George Makedon October 30, 2014 at 21:28 #

    Unbelievable ! “That Susan” and “that” casual . . and with a crest to mach !

    Like

  67. George Makedon October 30, 2014 at 21:41 #

    Yeah – ladjpw – , VERY close minded . . In fact all of us have no ancestors, civilization or history , and sleep on trees !

    Like

  68. George Makedon October 30, 2014 at 21:45 #

    With you !

    Liked by 1 person

  69. bookooball October 30, 2014 at 21:46 #

    I just found your blog. Where are more women like you? America has pretty slim pickings when it comes to quality women. Keep up the good work!

    Like

  70. That_Susan October 30, 2014 at 21:56 #

    George Makedon wrote: “Unbelievable ! ‘That Susan’ and ‘that’ casual . . and with a crest to mach !”

    I promise I won’t go all “feminazi” on anyone who’s kind enough to “mansplain” — or maybe it would be more accurate to say, “Georgesplain” — this one to me.

    After spending the few minutes I’m willing to spend trying to figure it out independently, I’ve determined that the above quote is indecipherable for one of five possible reasons —

    1) George is drunk.
    2) George has such a high IQ that his posts make no sense to the average person.
    3) George has such a low IQ that his posts make no sense to the average person.
    4) George is in a STEM field and is too busy grappling with real world stuff to care about intangible ideals like having his written words actually say something.
    5) George doesn’t care about making sense, so no one else should care enough to try to make sense of what he says.

    If George or anyone else has some other explanation that they’d like to share, thanks in advance.

    Like

  71. Jason Wexler October 30, 2014 at 22:07 #

    There is a 6th possibility, he could be using voice to text, my messages look like that when I use voice to text if I’m in a hurry or I don’t correct them. However I ascribe a low probability to that, as I actually have to speak my punctuation marks when I’m doing voice to text as I am now. Which will leave me really screwed if I ever actually have to write the words,. Or!

    Like

  72. caprizchka October 30, 2014 at 22:13 #

    You’re wrong.

    Like

  73. Khira October 30, 2014 at 22:41 #

    The problem with so called traditionalism is two things: Men are only valued for their financial status and women are only valued for their reproductive status. It creates women whose only aim is to lock a rich man in. Why would any man want to marry such a gold digger, if I want to make my house cleaned and cook, I could do it myself or even if I don’t have a time I would hire someone. If a man wants children, he can donate his sperms. Many say “women want taller, stronger, and smarter men.” So what do women bring to the table? Having read you JB, I guess you will say “the ability to love her husband and children more than the love for herself” but I am sure Mr. JB has the same feelings for you and your children. And you told many times you support him in many aspects, that means you have something to bring to the table. In order to do that, you have to be more well versed than JB in some areas.
    Women demand men who are superior to them in every area according to some. So why should men waste time with women who are completely inferior to them? Why should they marry women whom they will not have any respect? Childbirth is not the answer. After all, any woman including low quality sluts can do that. One should complement his/her spouse not compete. In order to complement one’s spouse, both sides should have some qualities they are better at than the other.
    That is why as a trans woman, I think I would absolutely go MGTOW if I were a man.
    I would like to hear you, JB. Thank you.

    Like

  74. bookooball October 30, 2014 at 22:58 #

    For some of us, rather than go or own way, we choose to follow our natural urge to lead. The best way to lead is by example. All around us we see that the social cataclysm is happening. Due to all the environmental factors that shape our ideals; spiritually and politically. As people on both sides become more restrained and exhausted due to the deterioration of civilization, they will be forced to more tightly cling to their beliefs or forgo them all together. Albert Pike speaks directly about this in Morals and Dogma.

    The feminist idea was created by the Idealist left/atheist/liberal/communist as a means to destroy the very foundation of society – Family. By telling women they “need a man like a fish needs a bicycle” the light of luciferian blinds the prideful ego with flattery, not aware of the spiritual and psychological consequences it will have on them later in life. I’m not here as an extreme right wing nut telling you traditional family is the only way, in merely a messenger to let you know that the 7 deadly sins are real. Just as did the church become the whore. God bless you everyone!

    Like

  75. Jason Wexler October 30, 2014 at 23:04 #

    The logical response to your questions about child birth, probably involve eugenics. Any “brainless slut” may be able to have a baby, but if a man in this scenario wants quality children who can stand on their own, he’s going to want quality genetic stock to ensure his children are successful. That said I dont buy into the scenario that men and women really want the things being discussed in this sub thread.

    Although within the context of the scenario being described, I suppose women could also offer the man status, as in his status increases with other men either by the number of women he is able to bed or support or both; or possibly because of the attractiveness of his spouse….

    Like

  76. caprizchka October 30, 2014 at 23:25 #

    Women are capable of appearing to be different archetypes to different men. Change the genders and the statement is still true. However anyone who fully represents an archetype is merely a parody of a human being. This doesn’t seem to stop men of course, from reviewing the online catalog of “archetypes” and finding the flavor that they like. And women do the same. However, a woman who offers herself as a “submissive” to all men is a prostitute, and I’m no pro.

    Men who fail to recognize the depth of characters in the various archetypes they review in the catalogs of their fantasies tend to make snap judgments based on whatever card the lady places on the top of the deck. Short attention spans nowadays comprise all youth–with “youth” not having an upper age limit. Catering to the short-attention-spanned by leading them to a dead-end is a marvelous way of filtering the Alphas from the betas. This way to cookies and milk! Patience isn’t legendary among children.

    The old “double-standard” and “Alpha fucks/beta bucks” are mnemonic reminders of the duality (and even multidimensional aspects) of all human beings. The side presented to you indicates where you stand. Now you know where you stand. Can you please stop making Judgybitch’s site the forum for your disappointment? It’s disrespectful of her. Thank you. Now was that dominant enough for you? Good. You’re welcome to your fantasy of me but please stop representing yourself as my agent because you are not.

    Like

  77. Goober October 30, 2014 at 23:55 #

    I’d like to add one thing to your statement – EVERY good person on Earth must have the ability to love others more than they love themselves. Not just women. Not just wives. Not just mothers. Everyone.

    If you can’t think of a single person on this planet that you wouldn’t willingly and gladly take a bullet for, you’re doing it wrong.

    I think that this is what so many people are missing.

    Good comment!

    (My list is long – My wife, my daughter, and any one of my nephews and nieces, to start with. Probably my little sister….)

    Like

  78. bookooball October 31, 2014 at 00:14 #

    As the pieces fall into place the picture of the puzzle begins to become more clear. I see many self proclaimed “alphas” that are merely ruffling the tailfeathers. As society becomes more game aware, synthetic forms of alpha will always be snuffed out by feminine intuition sooner or later.

    Liked by 1 person

  79. bookooball October 31, 2014 at 00:17 #

    Sheer brilliance, a very wise man indeed.

    Like

  80. George Makedon October 31, 2014 at 00:20 #

    Suzan darling , IT IS plain . If you please “unlock” each of my words in regards to your ‘unbelievable’ post regarding your daughter and contemplate also to what your Mother or Grandmother would think , hopefully you’ll see what I mean . Gosh this site is very addictive, but now forgive me I have to rush . Later on or tommorow, I will elaborate in detail on your previous comment to my original -long- post . p.s . The “crest” is next to your name and is NO good I am afraid .

    Like

  81. George Makedon October 31, 2014 at 00:45 #

    YOU ARE beautiful , but are you LOYAL ?

    Like

  82. George Makedon October 31, 2014 at 00:50 #

    I am very sorry I missed the name . . Caprizchka , YOU ARE very beautiful , but are you LOYAL ?

    Like

  83. George Makedon October 31, 2014 at 01:06 #

    Suzan darling , IT IS plain . If you please “unlock” each of my words in regards to your ‘unbelievable’ post regarding your daughter and contemplate also to what your Mother or Grandmother would think , hopefully you’ll see what I mean . Gosh this site is very addictive, but now forgive me I have to rush . Later on or tommorow, I will elaborate in detail on your previous comment to my original -long- post . p.s . The “crest” is next to your name and is NO good I am afraid .

    Like

  84. George Makedon October 31, 2014 at 01:35 #

    Yes , but with a very deep heart when they are NOT touched by the poisonous feminism .

    Like

  85. bookooball October 31, 2014 at 02:19 #

    Even without feminism, women will be more pragmatic about love. This is nature’s way of ensuring her mate will continually keep wooing her. Don’t fool yourself… us men are the idealistic ones.

    Like

  86. caprizchka October 31, 2014 at 05:26 #

    You’ll have to ask my Dominant that question. Any answer I may provide might sound like I’m applying for a job. I’m not.

    Like

  87. Spaniard October 31, 2014 at 08:31 #

    Of course I am not your agent. I do not try to be.

    Your type, I like so much. It is my type: “the valkiry”.

    I am not disappointed about women. I just think it is a fascinating subject: “women”.

    I am not alpha, neither beta, I am a “john”. That is my archetype.

    It is my personal believe that most women who are into BDSM are “switchers”. But most men are only “subs” and a few of them are “doms”.

    What catched my attention from your comment was:
    “I enterely regret the sort of men I attracted”.
    Dear, I am complteley sure you attracted ALL kind of men. If you allowed to get in just the “satelites” maybe you have a little responsability in it. It is like when a woman says: “He got me pregnant”. Well, maybe that lady had a little cooperation in that.

    Like

  88. Spaniard October 31, 2014 at 11:42 #

    CAUGHT.

    Like

  89. Spaniard October 31, 2014 at 11:52 #

    I had a look in your blog.
    You like paradoxes. It is true: traditionalism is -regarding to mating- socialism. Every male gets a woman. And sex positive feminism has more to do with ultra capitalism. Just a few males get all the women.
    So, actually, the Tea Party should support sex positive feminism. And the Socialist Party of America should support traditional family.

    Liked by 1 person

  90. Spaniard October 31, 2014 at 12:08 #

    Correction: career women do NOT want to be leisure upper class housewives. That is extremely boring and lack of dignity for a career woman. But they DO -secretely, sometimes openly- want to be middle-upper class housewives.
    The life of a middle-upper class housewive is extremely appealing to career women: childen, garden, dog, fireplace, kitchen, cakes, cookies, sandwiches, hubbie sitting in the armchair smoking pipe and reading newspaper…

    Like

  91. bookooball October 31, 2014 at 14:37 #

    I’m yet to meet an American(much less career) woman worthy of any of that.

    Like

  92. Spaniard October 31, 2014 at 14:58 #

    The problem is the case they leave their careers, they become housewives and in a couple of years they are bored and “unhappy”. Then they divorce and go back to their careers + hubbie´s money.

    And the right opposite: the housewife become a career woman, and in a couple of years she is so stressed, and she want to go back to housewife life, then she sues the company for whatever reason (sex harassment mainly) and then she is back home + company´s money,

    La donna e mobile.

    By the way, the wise man: Fridrich Nietzsche.

    Like

  93. bookooball October 31, 2014 at 16:27 #

    Yes, I recommend anyone to read Nietzsche and Machiavelli. Nihilism and extropianism are the two halves of human nature: some believe life has meaning, others do not. Most people fall somewhere in the middle but lean on one side more than the other. However, as rift in society between the two ideals begins to widen, leaning will only get you lost in the crack.

    Like

  94. jeremy October 31, 2014 at 17:13 #

    I will try to answer your question to the best of my ability, Khira. You asked why, if women want a man who is better than them, would a man want a woman who is his inferior. But your question is based on a fallacious assumption.

    Men do not want a woman who is “inferior” to them. Men generally want a woman whose strengths complement their own, rather than being identical to their own. I will use myself as an (albeit imperfect) example. I have always ego-invested my masculinity in my ability to be a provider-protector (as many men do). Thus, my intelligence, drive, education, and income potential are generally the yardsticks by which I measure my masculinity (and again, many men use different yardsticks, but I think I fall in the majority). Thus, when I was searching for a wife, I was not looking for a woman who was my equal in those traits which I considered “masculine”. Instead, I searched for someone whose strengths would complement my own, such that we would be stronger in our union than we would be apart. Someone whose strengths lay in her emotional intelligence/availability, social aptitude (which I lack), patience, caring, nurturing……concepts that I consider to be FEMININE, to complement my masculine qualities.

    You see, Khira, it is not about who is superior. Rather, it is about finding someone who is superior at the things she needs to be, while appreciating my superiority in the things I offer. That way we can both complement and appreciate each other.

    Like

  95. bookooball October 31, 2014 at 17:50 #

    This is the foundational principle that most women have trouble grasping. They imagine their ideal lover as being attracted to the same things they are.

    Like

  96. That_Susan October 31, 2014 at 18:35 #

    Jeremy wrote, “You see, Khira, it is not about who is superior. Rather, it is about finding someone who is superior at the things she needs to be, while appreciating my superiority in the things I offer. That way we can both complement and appreciate each other.”

    This is a great way of putting it. Since every man and every woman is a unique individual with unique strengths and weaknesses, there is no one “type” that every man or every woman is looking for. My husband and I have complementary strengths and weaknesses, and we are able to fashion a life that works for us. I don’t think either of us fits what superficial people would call the “ideal man” or “ideal woman.”

    Once you’ve found your complement, you don’t need to stay all obsessed with questions like, “Will she still be attracted to me if I wash the dishes?” or “Will he still be attracted to me if I’m not scared of spiders?” Concepts like hypergamy and the red pill are just not that meaningful to us because we’re too busy living life and raising our kids.

    At the crucial time, the things that needed to happen to bring my husband and me together, happened, and now we are family. The thought of ditching me because “red pill” and “men aren’t attracted to fat chicks” doesn’t even cross his mind, and the thought of ditching him because “hypergamy” doesn’t cross my mind either.

    I do understand that roughly half of all marriages end in divorce — but of course, the other side of the coin is that roughly half of all marriages survive. This doesn’t mean that everyone who stays married is deliriously happy, I think it’s a mix for most people, but I think that there are a good number of those married folks who have graduated from being all obsessed over wondering, “Did I make the right choice, or could I do better even now?” to deciding “I want the kind of person who sticks with me for better or worse so I’m going to BE that kind of person, too.”

    Like

  97. caprizchka October 31, 2014 at 18:51 #

    I already made my statement at my pleasure not yours. Obviously, you picked at the wrong vine and now you would like to call the grapes sour. You are souring a fine woman’s blog page in your childish peevishness. Your resolve to embody a single archetype makes your own agency suspect. Please prove me wrong with regard to your own agency by leaving Ms. Bloomfield out of this–or at the least compensate her for your lack of decorum. That would please me. Thank you.

    Like

  98. caprizchka October 31, 2014 at 18:54 #

    Indeed. And the same applies to the perverse appearance of the “Feminist submissive,” in my sphere, PUA’s and Feminist submissives positively deserve each other.

    Like

  99. bookooball October 31, 2014 at 19:14 #

    Competition? lol I’m a very attractive and game aware man. I’ve got attraction down to a science and have options because I cultivate the masculine ego mindset and I’m a natural born leader. I understand socialsexual hierarchy, hypergamy, dark triad, r/K environmental factors…blah blah blah

    Gaming women is tiring and loathsome. American women turn my stomach. I’ll be outta here in a few years.

    Like

  100. bookooball October 31, 2014 at 19:58 #

    Absolutely. Same applies to dominant women, submissive men and the terrible sex lives they will have to endure.

    Like

  101. bookooball October 31, 2014 at 20:01 #

    You’re most certainly a beta.

    Like

  102. caprizchka October 31, 2014 at 20:05 #

    Some of my best friends have been Dominant women! We appreciate not having to compete with each other because we find each other’s men repulsive. I for one do not wish to dictate the private lives of others–that’s what the Feminists do.

    Like

  103. That_Susan October 31, 2014 at 20:14 #

    I’ve actually heard that non-alpha men are more likely to be better in bed, because they tend to care more about giving than just taking what they want. I personally don’t have any point of comparison, as I’ve only ever been with my husband, who is definitely the giving sort, but one person online told me that the reason so many women want to hook up with alphas is not because the sex is so great, but it’s just like such an honor for them to receive any sort of attention from an alpha.

    I think most women grow out of that and start to care more about finding a guy they can be happy with than about shagging the guy that all the other women are trying to shag. I remember as a teenager and young adult that I was very wrapped up in having a life that other women would envy and define as a happy life — but part of growing up is realizing that being happy has NOTHING to do with whether anyone else would want your life, and EVERYTHING to do with making the life you want.

    Like

  104. bookooball October 31, 2014 at 20:14 #

    Fair enough… though in my experiences and the men around me, when a woman no longer looks up to a man, her natural urge to find a man that she can look up to will eventually override her logic.

    I understand the Buddhist yin/yang pairing of opposites, but I have a hard time swallowing the androgynous gender view. Believe it or not, I might have some personal experience in this arena. From what I have seen and been through, I see those who embrace their naturally given roles are rewarded the most.

    Like

  105. bookooball October 31, 2014 at 20:19 #

    That is hamstering from the women who can’t land a strong, alpha leader. The sex when an alpha will always be more exciting, passionate, and fun. Boring old beta is trying to please her.

    Do or do not, there is no try. -Jedi Master Yoda

    Like

  106. bookooball October 31, 2014 at 20:23 #

    Welcome to the realization that both parties are simply a rouse.

    Like

  107. caprizchka October 31, 2014 at 20:37 #

    I personally agree, but to paraphrase John Stuart Mill, if it is “natural” then no laws are required to enforce it.

    Like

  108. bookooball October 31, 2014 at 21:06 #

    You just contradicted yourself. Natural law can’t be changed. Eggs are rare, sperm is abundant, even in modern society.

    Like

  109. That_Susan October 31, 2014 at 21:40 #

    If I understood correctly, when caprizchka said, “I personally agree, but to paraphrase John Stuart Mill, if it is ‘natural’ then no laws are required to enforce it,” she was responding to your following statement: “From what I have seen and been through, I see those who embrace their naturally given roles are rewarded the most.”

    Simple facts of natural law, such as the quantity of eggs and sperm, don’t need to be “enforced” by anyone, kind of like you don’t have to “enforce” the laws of gravity, etcetera. And if what you call “naturally-given roles” were as natural as natural law, what would be the need or point for anyone to exhort anyone to fit into these roles; wouldn’t it be as pointless and silly as exhorting autumn leaves to change color and fall to the forest floor?

    I DO believe that conformity to social expectations can be very rewarding, and I have no problem with doing what it takes to get along with others and create happiness so long as it doesn’t interfere with doing what I know to be right, or involve harm to others or myself. Neither conformity, nor non-conformity, in and of themselves, bring the greatest rewards, at least in my opinion. I think we reap the greatest rewards by learning to be people of integrity — by learning to be ourselves in every situation, both when it’s easy and when it’s not.

    Like

  110. That_Susan October 31, 2014 at 22:02 #

    I get it — anyone who doesn’t fall down and worship alpha is just “hamstering” and pretending to be happy when YOU know they’re just deceiving themselves. And I won’t even ask how you gained your expert knowledge of alpha and beta males’ sexual performance.

    It’s funny to me because, at 50, I’m enjoying what I’d consider to be the happiest phase of my life thus far, even though I’m living in what many young people, including myself at a younger age, would have seen as some rather shitty circumstances — I don’t mean ALL my circumstances, just certain stuff I’d never imagined that I could be dealing with and still be happy.

    I personally believe that EVERY person who has found happiness has at some point grown out of the tiring phase of feeling like they have to “land” the ideal lover, the ideal job, or the ideal life. Who knows, maybe leaving the U.S. will give you a broader perspective about that.

    Like

  111. bookooball October 31, 2014 at 22:47 #

    You’re hamstering right now. First off, I never said, “worship an alpha” I said “land an alpha”.

    As far as getting out of the America, I’ve already spent enough time overseas in the military, “broadening my perspective” I’d say as far as culture is concerned my perspective is broad enough to see what a cesspool feminists and their precious “patriarchy” have done to it.

    Self-proclaimed alphas on “game tactic” blogs moan on about feminism, yet it is them who continue to reinforce slutty behavior in women. It is indeed rich, powerful alpha men who created feminism to increase the class gap using hypergamy. Further securing and increasing their power.

    Natural born male leaders that aren’t rich and powerful are just so rare these days women are beginning to think they should just go ahead and lead a beta. I can tell you the reason alphas are so rare is by social design. If we lived in a society that embraced masculinity and feminimity alike, boys would be raised into men and not dudes.

    The real problem is that the boys and girls have lost good role models. America now gets Bros with Yolo caps and Hoes with Yolo glasses, and a cocktail of subprime genetics floating in a sea of androgyny. You think that these factors have nothing to do with all the failed marriage and relationship statistics. If you think this is a civilized society then God help you.

    All I see right now is a woman past her prime trying to convince others she made the right choice in life. Who are you really trying to fool?

    Like

  112. Goober October 31, 2014 at 22:58 #

    You recognize that humans aren’t wolves, right?

    This whole alpha/beta thing is annoying as fuck to me.

    As if you could ever take something as complex as a living, breathing human being and boil them down into one word that would ever fit.

    Like

  113. bookooball October 31, 2014 at 23:00 #

    Quit whining and pull your pants up. You sound like a little bitch.

    Like

  114. Goober October 31, 2014 at 23:02 #

    You’re looking in the wrong places, then.

    I’ve met many.

    Most of them aren’t looking for guys with “game” and who go around talking bullshit about alphas and betas and other nonsense.

    Let me guess, you live in Chicago, Los Angeles, New York… Am I getting close?

    Like

  115. bookooball October 31, 2014 at 23:06 #

    No I live in Phoenix, one of the more supposed, “conservative” cities. You don’t realize these women you THINK are great have been poisoned by lies their entire lives. Just becauseshe tells you one thing doesn’t mean it’s true. All women say they like nice guys, but that doesn’t, mean it’s true. You think you know them, but are you actually FUCKING them?

    Like

  116. Goober October 31, 2014 at 23:08 #

    IF people will pay you for what you do, then I agree. Getting paid is a really good acid test for whether you’re producing something of worth or not. Because if you’re not, no one will pay you to do it.

    However, the number of actors and artists who actually get paid for what they do is vanishingly small.

    Meaning, the number of artists and actors who actually produce anything of worth is likewise very, very small, indeed.

    That’s why I said what I did. There are a million “writers” on the internet writing Captain Kirk/Mr. Spock erotic fan-fiction, who live in their parent’s basement and claim they are a “writer” when asked, but no one wants to pay for their crap, so they produce nothing, as far as I’m concerned.

    Like

  117. Goober October 31, 2014 at 23:22 #

    For some of us, rather than go or own way, we choose to follow our natural urge to lead. The best way to lead is by example

    Hell yes. There aren’t enough men in this world that choose to lead from example. My fear, however, is that you are going to start talking about your “ideal” example and it’s going to sound awfully PUA-ey and “alpha/beta-ey” and be a bunch on nonsense.

    Leading by example, to me, is a more traditional masculine art.

    Tell the truth. Do the right thing. Don’t take any crap from anyone (including women. including your wife). Don’t settle. Work to better yourself, and be better.

    My list does NOT include “have sex with lots of women without committing to them, ever” or “be a dick” or any of this other, new-wave bullshit that people have come up with and decided to call “alpha.”

    By its very definition, the term “alpha” denotes a family leader. A “paterfamilias” if you will. “Alpha” does not apply to the lone male wolf, swooping in to sex up single females in the pack, then darting away before he’s ensared.

    There is no honor in such a thing. There is no virtue there.

    It’s fun and games. It’s unserious. It’s flippant and careless. It’s scratching an itch. If you want to worship that, and hold that forth as the “ideal” towards which you should “lead” others, you have your way, and I have mine.

    In my opinion, a true “alpha” has created and lead, and has bonds in his life that he fears to lose. He maintains them through strength and sacrifice, as the true “alpha” in a wolf pack does. Not to cow under, or be dominated, but to be followed, as a true paterfamilias should be.

    No man that doesn’t have people in his care, in his flock and fold, that he does not love more than himself has any business claiming to be “alpha.” If you don’t have people in your care that you love enough to take a bullet for them, then you’re doing it wrong, in my opinion, and you’ve got no business calling yourself “alpha.”

    Like

  118. Goober October 31, 2014 at 23:23 #

    Half the time, the girls you’re speaking of don’t even know what THEY are attracted to, much less what they want their men to be.

    They talk a bg game about how they want a “sensitive” man who looks out for their emotional well-being, yet they always seem to end up with the exact opposite of that…

    Like

  119. Goober October 31, 2014 at 23:31 #

    You speak like this, and yet you claim to be alpha?

    Way to build yourself up.

    Way to miss out on the fact that you’ve written off an entire nation’s worth of women as being “not good enough” without once turning your gaze inward to discover why you only seem to be able to attract shitty women that “make your stomach turn”.

    I promise you that there are very worthy women in America. Lots of them. I know many. I’m married to one.

    My father gave me a good piece of advice once, when I was a small boy and came home complaining how “everyone in my class is mean to me.” His response was simple and wise, because HE was a true alpha – a real paterfamilias – and what he said still resonates:

    “If everyone is being mean to you, perhaps the problem isn’t everyone, but rather, it is you?”

    I know for a fact that America is chock-full of women that are more than “worthy” and yet you, with all your manipulation and game and good looks and social skills, seem only to be able to attract shitty women that make you physically ill.

    Perhaps, then, the problem is not “all women” but is rather more simply you?

    Like

  120. Goober October 31, 2014 at 23:40 #

    Good point on the glass half empty/half full thing.

    Half of all marriages succeed. And the statistic is skewed for repeat offenders, meaning that a lot more than half of all “first time” marriages succeed.

    The idea that because humans change with time and don’t necessarily want to spend the rest of their lives with a person they metand courted when they were in their 20s, means that the institution of marriage is “broken” is silly and flippant, like so many of the ideas coming out in this “new wave” move of feminism, and the male response (which is equally as stupid and flippant).

    Like

  121. Goober October 31, 2014 at 23:43 #

    tl;dr – it’s very easy to see a long string of shitty women behind you, and say “all women are shitty.” It’s much more difficult to look inward and figure out why you keep ending up with shitty women.

    Protip – A true self-aware man would go with the second option…

    Like

  122. bookooball November 1, 2014 at 00:16 #

    Sounds like you’re a little too introspective for your own good. That’s what the manosphere calls a gamma.

    Like

  123. bookooball November 1, 2014 at 00:21 #

    People aren’t shitty to me. In fact, I’m highly respected in regards to my social circles. If you have a good woman, that is rare and you know it. Don’t try to prop the rest of them up on the pedestal. The woman around me are nice to me because they want to be with me, but I can’t respect the values they lack. Maybe it’s different where you live.

    Like

  124. caprizchka November 1, 2014 at 00:33 #

    Have a cookie.

    Like

  125. bookooball November 1, 2014 at 00:34 #

    Mind if I grab two?

    Liked by 1 person

  126. bookooball November 1, 2014 at 00:39 #

    That all made perfect sense to me.

    Like

  127. Political Cynic November 1, 2014 at 01:03 #

    “True freedom, true equality, true choices – they will only come about when men and women have equal rights under the law. Men’s rights will push the conversation about families, children, careers, choices into the open. If women can’t impose legal or social responsibility on men, they will have to start talking to them.”

    Brilliantly well said JB.

    (And I miss you on Twitter)

    -Politicalcynic a/k/a judgybitchfanboy

    Like

  128. That_Susan November 1, 2014 at 11:09 #

    Does the manosphere have a term for people who throw terms like “gamma” or “hamstering” at anyone who disagrees with them? Is it masculine to always be on the offensive?

    If you see it as feminine to have any willingness to look inward and consider what part you might play in any of your problems — or if, in reference to one of your other posts, you even see it as feminine to care about pleasing the woman you’re with — then you’ve pretty much locked yourself into staying where you’re at — not physically, you can always change your location — but on the inside, you’re just stuck at whatever mental age you were when you decided you’d learned everything that was important to learn.

    Seems to me like being an alpha male must be kind of boring — at least intellectually. I understand that there’s a surface excitement factor in a life of continuous sexual conquests — but after a while, I’d think that even that would get boring, to just always be repeating the same pattern or gaming-move.

    Like

  129. That_Susan November 1, 2014 at 11:20 #

    THANK YOU! I’m starting to think these terms were invented by guys who were too dumb or intellectually lazy to come up with an intelligent argument whenever anyone poked holes in one of their theories. This is no different from radical feminists who, for example, throw terms like “rape apologist” at anyone who doesn’t see every drunken sexual encounter as rape.

    “If we can’t think of anything intelligent way to counter a message we don’t like, let’s just resort to name-calling as a means of shaming and silencing the messenger” seems like a mantra of pretty much every extremist.

    Like

  130. That_Susan November 1, 2014 at 11:35 #

    Very well said. I don’t think I’ve heard this definition of an alpha anywhere in the manosphere before — but it sounds very similar to the description of an alpha wolf in a Jean Craighead George book I read with my older daughter some years ago. I think I need to start distinguishing between manosphere alphas and real alphas whenever I write anything about them from here on out..

    Like

  131. bookooball November 1, 2014 at 12:01 #

    Well gee… I was sort conveying that in part of my message, wasn’t I? 😉

    Like

  132. George Makedon November 1, 2014 at 13:42 #

    God bless him then . . and you .

    Liked by 1 person

  133. George Makedon November 1, 2014 at 13:47 #

    Perfect !

    Like

  134. George Makedon November 1, 2014 at 13:54 #

    Men’s Exchilaration is never boring .

    Like

  135. George Makedon November 1, 2014 at 14:07 #

    Additionally American women in my opinion, apart from being very attractive (at least a great number of them ) , they seem to have also a kind of deep innocence and positive vibe , which on the other hand unfortunatelly , made them an easy target for corruption by all sorts of exploitive forces . But not for very long I hope .

    Like

  136. George Makedon November 1, 2014 at 14:32 #

    Due to a very pressing schedule I wasn’t able to reply properly and in depth to your request . Hopefully if we are around by Monday , I ‘ll explain . As an o-deuvre i’ll point to the core- missing : nothing wrong with Classical theatrical plays-on the contrary , but what about the rest you are suggesting ,as well as the missing valuables: Romance-Family-Motherhood ? l mean . . seriously , Lgbt AND Q ??? lol . “That sophisticated ” , or that Evil ? Mind you these are contradiction in terms . To be sophisticated is to have intelligence, knowledge etc. ( Sophia = Wisdom ), to be Evil is to be stupid ! I mean common , to a 14 years old FLOWER – MAIDEN ?

    Like

  137. That_Susan November 1, 2014 at 14:55 #

    So are you suggesting that there is something evil or “common” about same-sex attraction or that it’s the antithesis of romance, family, and motherhood?

    Like

  138. Goober November 2, 2014 at 00:20 #

    Way to deflect and dismiss, dude.

    After all, what does a gamma know, amirite?

    When you get to wherever you’re going and all you can get, still, are Shitty women, come back to this, will you?

    Because a change in venue won’t change who you are.

    You jump from epiphany to epiphany, fad to fad, cheat code to cheat code, and think each time that THIS time it’s going to work. That THIS time you’re new “thing” will be the answer to all your problems.

    But it won’t, because the issues you’re having aren’t rooted in the fact that you’re using the wrong cheat codes, or manipulating the pussy machines incorrectly.

    They are rooted in the fact that you are you.

    Your struggles will continue, I assure you, until you accept that and do something about it.

    Like

  139. Goober November 2, 2014 at 00:22 #

    Yes, because my having found a good woman was pure luck….

    /sarcasm….

    Like

  140. Goober November 2, 2014 at 00:27 #

    I didnt say people are shitting to you. I was commenting on your admitted inability to attract anything but Shitty women who are only good to pump and dump.

    You may be a great guy in all other aspects of your life. Hell, I might even like you if we ever met.

    But you’ve admitted to having serious issues with male/female interactions, both directly and indirectly. Blaming that on women seems like a bad move.

    reminds me of a woman saying “all men suck”, to be honest.

    Like

  141. Goober November 2, 2014 at 00:28 #

    *Shitty. Typing on a phone so it’s autocorrecting some your/you’re and so forth.

    Like

  142. bookooball November 2, 2014 at 01:55 #

    You assume an awful lot. If you actually knew me, you’d know the reasons I feel the way I do. I spent 5 years in the military, learning an incredible amount about culture My friends know I see a vast majority of Americans(men and women) as nothing more than spoiled brats, and they don’t get mad. In fact they can agree with me. Is my opinion that offensive to you?

    I’m pretty sure I recall a post you made taking about how lucky you are to have your wife. Don’t be such a contradiction.

    Like

  143. Spaniard November 2, 2014 at 19:57 #

    I am always at your feet. Never wanted to annoy you. Just a little controversy.

    Bookooball: I am not a beta, I am an omega. Because “johns” are omegas. But I am an alpha, because I hire expensive professionals.

    I am omega too, because I am a submissive. But only in the playground. In real life I do not let women to dominate or manipulate me, then, I am alpha.

    Goober is right: alpha/beta/omega/delta/theta/epsilon… is very relative.

    Like

  144. bookooball November 2, 2014 at 20:17 #

    Prostitutes that title themselves dominatrix are suddenly professionals? You paying for sex doesn’t make you an alpha.

    Like

  145. Spaniard November 2, 2014 at 21:10 #

    No, when I hire harlots I go just for vanilla sex. I like submission with non professionals. And it is something more psycological than all that BDSM stuff with chains, masks, ties, etc. I find that very boring. But, I insist: just in the playground.

    Paying for sex makes me an omega. But paying for expensive harlots makes me an alpha.

    Like

  146. Spaniard November 2, 2014 at 21:24 #

    An ugly troll but with massive muscles is alpha or beta?
    An ugly as fuck guy but rich, womanizer and Nobel Prize of Literature (like Jean Paul Sartre) is alpha or beta?
    An ugly as fuck guy but with a large penis who has shag with hundreds sexy pornstars (like Ron Jeremy) is alpha or beta?
    A very handsome, classy man, but gay (like Rupert Everett) is alpha or beta?
    Was Adoplh Hiter alpha or beta?

    Like

  147. Spaniard November 2, 2014 at 21:29 #

    Was Jesus Christ alpha or beta? Was he a “nice guy”?
    What about God the Father? To me, the old guy was so angry all the time due to sexless life.
    What about Satan? Well, clearly a “bad boy”, but not so alpha cuz he lost the coup d’Etat agains the old guy and he was expelled to a very unpleasent place to live.

    Like

  148. Spaniard November 2, 2014 at 21:39 #

    Phoenix, Arizona… it sounds so exotic to me…

    Like

  149. George Makedon November 3, 2014 at 05:01 #

    Both and absolutely ! ( 40.000 years of human experience ) . I’ll explain .. .

    Like

  150. George Makedon November 3, 2014 at 05:41 #

    I do apologise . . I meant “comeOn, to a . . . etc” , and not common .

    Like

  151. Khira November 3, 2014 at 16:47 #

    Thank you for your responses, I’m very pleased to have this beneficial conversations.
    Same could be said about I and my partner. Our strengths and weaknesses complement each other, even if I’m physically stronger and muscular than average woman and have no ability to bear children at least for now. But I’m glad to play stepmother to his two children from a previous relationship. It’s sad that most feminists think that caring for your loved ones is demeaning, it’s what makes you HUMAN. (not man or woman, but simply human).
    This quote is excellent: “Concepts like hypergamy and the red pill are just not that meaningful to us because we’re too busy living life and raising our kids.”
    Hypergamy concept comes from people who only think about how can they benefit from their partners without thinking about what they have to offer, It’s all about Me-Me-Me mentality. Even in my FWB relationships with both sexes, I thought about pleasing my partner and discovered that I was pleased in return. Pity that most feminists would never know how it feels like.

    Like

  152. Goober November 3, 2014 at 17:45 #

    I’m not taking offense in the slightest. I’m also not mad.

    Merely trying to make a point.

    If you’re really as great a guy as you let on, it seems strange to me that you’re having so much trouble, but that’s just me.

    I grow weary of movements that hamster-dance the way feminism and the alpha/beta/gamma/sigma crowd of the MRM do.

    Yes, i said it, and I mean it.

    Many of the men’s rights guys are worse about hamstering than any feminist ever could be.

    For instance, when a guy brings up a perfectly valid point that you’d be smart to consider, you dismiss it, because the guy is totally a gamma.

    Not because he may have a point, and you may have a thing about you that needs to be improved or worked on. Oh fuck no… It’s just because gamma, amirite?

    Like

  153. Goober November 3, 2014 at 17:46 #

    There’s that quality guy bookooball claims to be. I was wondering where it was!

    /sarcasm…

    Like

  154. Goober November 3, 2014 at 17:50 #

    Show me this post where I attributed my having a good wife to “luck.”

    I can’t seem to find it.

    Like

  155. bookooball November 3, 2014 at 18:49 #

    My trouble isn’t with women… it’s with culture. You’re married, so why are you on this blog? Not everyone is here to gripe about being unable to get a girl. I’m here to share my thoughts. Take it with a grain of salt. There is merit in my words.

    Like

  156. bookooball November 3, 2014 at 19:04 #

    By the way, the fact I called you a gamma was pretty obvious, you throwing “tl;dr” out at a few paragraphs, yet posting some fairly long winded retorts yourself shows you’re more interested in being heard than listening. Let’s all be adults and quit looking for reasons to dismiss one another, how about it?

    Like

  157. That_Susan November 3, 2014 at 19:29 #

    You do realize that Janet, the author of this blog, is married, don’t you?

    Like

  158. bookooball November 3, 2014 at 19:31 #

    Yeah, your point?

    Like

  159. That_Susan November 3, 2014 at 19:48 #

    I’m so happy for you, Khira! And I like what you said here, “Hypergamy concept comes from people who only think about how can they benefit from their partners without thinking about what they have to offer, It’s all about Me-Me-Me mentality.”

    On the one hand, it’s unhealthy for anyone to approach marriage (or any relationship) as a rescue-project, and persuade themselves that whatever they want is not important, and they’re just going to pour themselves out serving and supporting the other person while expecting nothing in return (and there are indeed some codependent people who become very bitter doing just that)…

    One Bible verse that I still believe in is the one about the importance of loving our neighbor as we love ourselves. As many wise people have said, we can’t love anyone else if we don’t learn to love and care about ourselves, so people who choose relationships where they’re just giving and giving, and getting used and walked on by the other person, are not really loving that other person. That relationship is not based on love.

    But at the same time, I also love and truly believe in a verse sung by Edward Sharpe & the Magnetic Zeros — “Every part of you is just another part of me.” We are all connected, which means we can’t love ourselves without loving others. And of course, marriage is the ultimate experience of being one with another person.

    So rather than focusing so much on hypergamy, it seems like the real joy in life comes from focusing on reciprocity. Loving and giving while also being honest about our own need for love and help.

    Like

  160. That_Susan November 3, 2014 at 19:50 #

    You wondered what a married person was doing on this blog. Maybe you can explain what you meant by that.

    Like

  161. Goober November 3, 2014 at 20:59 #

    Well, no…

    .. a lot of them are actually related to me, so GROSS!

    Like

  162. Goober November 3, 2014 at 21:08 #

    “You’re married, so what are you doing on this blog?”

    You can’t imagine why a married man, who has watched several of his friends get put through the meat grinder by unjust divorce courts and lying, cheating wives would have any vested interest in the men’s rights movement?

    Why I’d like a system where I’m presumed to be an equal caretaker of my own children if my wife ever loses her shit and goes off the reservation?

    Why a guy who has achieved what many in the manosphere say is impossible – which is a happy, long term marriage with a good, American woman – might have an interest in going to manosphere sites and divesting the angry, embittered men on those sites of their idea that AWALT?

    This isn’t the first time I’ve had this conversation with a guy claiming that he’s got all the game, all the social knowledge, all the psychological know-how to be a real lady-killer, who still is bitter that it seems like all American women just aren’t worth his time.

    I’ve made the point, and I’ll continue making it – you’ve just been sniffing around the wrong group of women.

    Or, alternatively, the “right” group of women don’t want anything to do with you because you’re self-absorbed and totally confident that you are infallible in every way…

    Or, because you are the sort of person who doesn’t do introspection, and just waves away all of his foibles as being everyone else’s problem.

    Or…

    Like

  163. Goober November 3, 2014 at 21:09 #

    Funny thing is…

    …I haven’t tried to dismiss you one time.

    Projection much?

    Like

  164. Goober November 3, 2014 at 21:13 #

    Care to answer the question, anyway?

    Since you’ve been pretty adept at dodging the things I’ve said to date, try to answer just that one – where did I attribute my success in marriage to “luck”?

    Like

  165. bookooball November 3, 2014 at 21:14 #

    Didn’t dismiss me?

    “tl;dr – it’s very easy to see a long string of shitty women behind you”

    Projection much?

    You’re fucking twat.

    Like

  166. bookooball November 3, 2014 at 21:21 #

    Judgybitch’s whole blog, “A few thoughts about traditionalism and adults who depend on other adults” is based on the premise of findings a good partner shouldn’t have to come down to luck. I came to share my thoughts on american culture. Maybe you didn’t say it and I’m mistaken, but you’re starting to nick pick me like a menstrual cunt. Grow the fuck up, would you?

    Like

  167. That_Susan November 3, 2014 at 22:10 #

    ROFLMAOYSST

    Like

  168. bookooball November 3, 2014 at 22:49 #

    That’s another point that only strengthens my argument about american women. I’m surprised at you, Goober. I didn’t think you’d be so quick to defend them. Women need to be held accountable for their actions and you know it. There are problems with the cultural ideas and images that are planted in today’s youth, which is the very reason we are even having this conversation. Honestly though, don’t assume I came here sniffing for pussy. I just found judgybitch’s blog and I came to contribute an another viewpoint/perception. Get used to me. 😉

    Like

  169. That_Susan November 4, 2014 at 15:30 #

    While I definitely agree with you about the need for good role models, I see good role models as people of honesty and integrity who genuinely care for those around them. I think such a person can be a man with many traits that are conventionally considered feminine, or a woman with many traits that are conventionally considered masculine. Good role models can also be masculine men or feminine women; I think goodness is inclusive of the whole range of different personality types.

    In response to your following comment — “All I see right now is a woman past her prime trying to convince others she made the right choice in life. Who are you really trying to fool?” —

    I’ll simply say that OF COURSE a woman of fifty is past her reproductive prime, and I understand that to a young man seeking a woman to start a family with, women in my age group are simply not interesting from a dating standpoint. What I don’t understand or like is the way this term is generally used to insult women. It’s simply not a crime to be past one’s prime childbearing years. It happens to the best of us, and literally to all of us, if we live long enough.

    In my own case, I’m very thankful to have the blessing of my two beautiful daughters. If I’d missed the opportunity to have my own biological children, I’d be very sad about that but I’d get on with my life and pour my energy into loving and nurturing a portion of the human race in some other way.

    As far as your assessment that I’m trying to convince other people that I’ve made the right choices — it’s seriously okay if anyone wants to label me a “fuck up.” For a cool song about this topic, see the link below. I’m very happy about some of the choices I’ve made in my life, such as my decision to marry my husband and have a family. I also accept that some of my choices were major fuck-ups and I’ve learned from them. I’m not sure why you think I’m trying to “fool” anyone.

    Like

  170. That_Susan November 4, 2014 at 18:20 #

    I wanted to respond to the following comment of yours: “You’re hamstering right now. First off, I never said, ‘worship an alpha’ I said ‘land an alpha’.”.

    Do analogies really hurt your brain that much? Can you really not see that it’s a form of worship to say that there’s one specific male personality type that every. single. heterosexual woman wants to be with, and that any woman who says she’s happy with another type of man is just “hamstering” because she didn’t manage to “land” that one type?

    Why would the world offer such an array of human diversity if there were only one type of man and one type of woman that was attractive, and if those who weren’t born fitting that particular mold were doomed to miss out on real happiness — and could only “hamster” on and on trying to deceive everyone into thinking they were happy — unless they had enough sense to try to conform themselves to whatever your version of the ideal was?

    I realize you think you’ve got it all figured out now, and you don’t want anyone to confuse you by talking about reality. Throwing out terms like “gamma” or “woman past her prime” or “hamstering” is your way of protecting yourself from any ideas that might challenge the mental construction that you’re currently so comfortable with. It can be scary to embrace the real world, where everyone’s not neatly divided into types, but I assure you that it can also be rewarding.

    Like

  171. mamaziller November 6, 2014 at 06:34 #

    yes!! and thanks for your comment and for reading. i didn’t see this comment until now. I will now look at your blog. 🙂

    Like

  172. mamaziller November 6, 2014 at 06:37 #

    clearing you are fucking them either. the women worth there salt who actually like nice guys (i only like nice guys) would NEVER fuck a guy who thought of women the way you do.

    Like

  173. mamaziller November 6, 2014 at 06:39 #

    ARENT.. as in you have met a woman who likes nice guys because you are not a nice guy!

    Like

  174. Dave November 7, 2014 at 22:28 #

    JB this post is pure gold. You express this issue so very well. Thank you.

    Liked by 1 person

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. A few thoughts about traditionalism and adults who depend on other adults | Manosphere.com - October 28, 2014

    […] A few thoughts about traditionalism and adults who depend on other adults […]

    Like

  2. Janet Bloomfield A few thoughts about traditionalism and… | Honor Dads - October 29, 2014

    […] Janet Bloomfield: A few thoughts about traditionalism and adults who depend on other adults […]

    Like

  3. Should Stay-at-Home Parents Get Wages for Housework? - Omaha Sun Times - April 6, 2015

    […] for instance, the recently self-doxxed founder of the #WomenAgainstFeminism hashtag, outlines in a blog post how her dissatisfying experience in labor markets and decision to become a stay-at-home mother […]

    Like

  4. Should Stay-at-Home Parents Get Wages for Housework? - LiberalVoiceLiberalVoice — Your source for everything about liberals and progressives! — News and tweets about everything liberals and progressives - April 6, 2015

    […] for instance, the recently self-doxxed founder of the #WomenAgainstFeminism hashtag, outlines in a blog post how her dissatisfying experience in labor markets and decision to become a stay-at-home mother […]

    Like

  5. Should Stay-at-Home Parents Get Wages for Housework? | milistam947 - April 6, 2015

    […] for instance, the recently self-doxxed founder of the #WomenAgainstFeminism hashtag, outlines in a blog post how her dissatisfying experience in labor markets and decision to become a stay-at-home mother […]

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: