Archive | Men RSS feed for this section

Undoing most of the damage wrought by feminism in one simple step

22 Jan


For the past two years, I have been unpacking the racist, classist, misogynist bullshit that is feminism, and exploring the ways that sexism harms men and boys – and always in the back of my mind is the whisper what do we do about this?

Watching President’s Obama’s SOTU address was an incredibly frustrating experience as he ignored all the key issues and proposed massive spending campaigns that effectively pour more fuel on the fire when we are trying to put the damn fire out! The one that struck me in particular was his suggestion that community college tuition be reduced to zero, and I was left shaking my head that the goddamn President of the most successful capitalist, free market economy in history does not appear to understand how markets function.

Here’s his idea: the markets have set community college tuition at $3800/yr. That is what students are able to pay. Go over that amount, and you eliminate most of your applicants. Some colleges can afford to do that, most cannot. They must price their product at the market rate. This is how markets work. President Obama wants to grant all qualified applicants $3800/yr, effectively reducing tuition to zero.


With all due respect, Mr. President, are you fucking retarded?

Students still have the $3800 they intended to spend on tuition. Do you seriously think colleges are just going to let that $3800 waltz into the nearest Apple Store? No, they are not. Colleges will respond rationally and double their tuition fees. Now they get $3800 from the students (who have already indicated via the market they are willing to pay that) and the $3800 from the government.

Brilliant use of money. Idiots.

All of this led to me to thinking that we already spend a shitload of money on education, but it’s the wrong education that prepares even those students who manage to drag their bored asses through it nothing of value they can trade in the free market. A high school diploma is about as useful as toilet paper, unless you use it to go on to higher education. But why is higher education even necessary? Instead of boring the fuck out of the majority of students for 4 years studying utterly useless crap like Urban Geography and Poetry and Sociology, why are we not offering emerging adults some real choices and real skills that will graduate them into paid employment?

Why do we not have trade schools beginning in Grade 10?

The US has a looming skilled trades shortage. Plenty of other countries around the world treat 15 year olds as emerging adults perfectly capable of making rational, practical decisions about their futures. We know beyond all shadow of a doubt that schools are designed to meet the needs of abstract, esoterically inclined “book-learners”, and do almost nothing to address the needs of restless, hands-on, objective, kinetic learners who want to do something and not sit on their asses discussing the theory behind the action.

Who are these students?



Predominantly young men.

And then it clicked. Quite some time ago, I read a book called Click: When We Knew We Were Feminists, which is essentially a bunch of whiny white women describing the moment they understood the power inherent in perpetual victimhood. Thinking through the issue of trade schools, I am kind of left in awe of how simple and how devastatingly effective the feminist program to destroy masculinity and manhood has been.


Destroy the trades.

The university bound, Ivy League men won’t be affected, but the vast majority of working class and lower income men will be reduced to social flotsam. Brilliant, except for that whole we need electricians and plumbers and surveyors problem but feminists are not really known for logic or consequences, are they?

Prior to 1984, it was possible for a student to graduate from high school fully prepared to enter into an apprentice trade, which meant graduating into paid employment. The Aviation Highschool in New York, for example, supplies 12% of the entire world’s aircraft workers! One high school! That high school is still up and running and educates over 2000 students per year, but if you are not in Queens, you are shit out of luck.

Enter the “social progressives” in the 1960’s, especially John Dewey, and the dismantling of an educational system that served primarily low income and working class men was underway, for their own good, dontcha know? Step by step, the progressives began taking apart the very mechanism that promoted a meritocratic, democratic and economically stable society. The feminists got wind of this and leapt on board with excitement and visions of female domination. If schools, especially high schools, could be transformed into institutions that benefited women primarily, women would take over the labor market and force the non-socially valuable (ie: not wealthy) men into a subservient role in society. If young men could be deprived of the means of matching their interests and talents to real skills, they would increasingly drop out, turn to underground economic activities to survive and be subsequently incarcerated en masse.

One group of men in particular.

The scary ones.

The black ones.

By destroying  young men’s opportunity to join the legitimate labor market, feminists and social progressives simultaneously destroyed the nuclear family (the majority of men could no longer provide for their families), created the welfare state and gave themselves paper shuffling, bullshit jobs to administer the whole deal.

You have to admit, it was rather clever. Did feminists and social progressives fully realize the consequences of these actions? I’m guessing at the very highest levels of decision-making, you’re damn right they did. They pedalled this malevolence to the masses by framing it as “social justice” – It’s not fair that lower income men should graduate as electricians and plumbers while upper income men go on to be doctors and lawyers! Everyone can be a doctor or a lawyer! The less intellectually adept feminists and social justice warriors bought it hook line and sinker and the vocational educational system was pretty much destroyed by the end of the 1980s.

Mission accomplished. Guess what? All those low and working class young men didn’t put their nose to the arty-farty grindstone and become doctors and lawyers, except for the ones who would have done so anyways. They sat through a few years of “education” that made zero efforts to capture their talents, skills or interests and in fact blamed them for the failures of the system. Those brown and black lower income students in particular were characterized as unmotivated, dull, lazy, immature and possibly even inherently prone to violence and brute stupidity.

Vocational high schools are seeing a resurgence in some states that have cast off the bullshit “social justice” narrative. “In Massachusetts,  in 2013, the graduation rate at regional vocational high schools was 95 percent. At traditional high schools, the graduation rate was 86 percent,” writes Emily Hanford of American Radio Works.

Imagine vocational high schools rolled out nationwide. Take all those community college courses Obama wants to make “free” and run them in high schools which are already free (in the sense that all taxpayers finance them, not individual consumers). The idea that emerging adults are too stupid to make rational life choices is garbage. The opposition to vocational high schools comes from feminists who decry the fact that mostly young men choose to take advantage of them.

No one and nothing is keeping young women out. They are simply not interested.

Who is going to teach these trades courses? Social progressives and feminists maneuvered the school system so that essentially only middle class (mostly women) could get teaching jobs. The requirements to be a teacher slowly advanced from a post high school training course to a 5 year university degree, which has the dual effect of making sure that low and working class students are never taught by someone who has lived their lives and shared their experiences, and created a sweet job with summers off (gotta bring in that wheat crop and harvest those potatoes, amirite?) for middle class men and women. 2% of teachers in America are black men.


Switch to vocational schools and suddenly most of those jobs will go to working class men with experience in their fields. Can women teach vocational school courses? Of course they can. Are you an HVAC? Great. You’re hired.

Imagine the impact of restoring skills-based learning in lower and working class communities, especially black communities. You’re 15 years old, high school is boring as shit, and even if you finish you’ll be lucky to work at McDonald’s with no hope of advancement. You can make $300/week spotting for drug gangs. Hobson’s Choice.




Bring in the vocational skills school. Now you’re 15 years old and you don’t sit in chair on your ass all day reading books. You are in a workshop, a welding lab, an air-conditioning unit and you are learning skills that will pay you an above average wage when you graduate. You will be able to support a family, should you choose to do so. You can take advanced training at any stage of your career and add corollary skills as you see fit. You get a well-paid summer job. You are working. Doing something meaningful. Your skills are highly sought after. You are admired, valued and companies will compete for your talents. What does that drug gang have to offer you? The complete destruction of all of that.

No thanks.

Nothing stops a bullet like a job, as the saying goes.

Obama almost has it almost right. Close but no cigar. A return to vocational high schools will be strongly, desperately resisted by feminists, mark my words. Because at the very heart of that restoration is a very simple idea: men have worth. Vocational high schools treat all men (and the few women who are interested) as intelligent, ambitious, talented, driven, capable and valuable human beings not to be squandered to mistaken ideas about social justice.  This isn’t about economic worth. That is merely a side effect. It begins with the idea that men have worth as human beings. Instilling that sense of worth by providing men with a real opportunity to discover their own worth and translate that into economic market value as they see fit is the result of treating men, especially low income and working class men as inherently valuable human beings.

The reverberations in the black community will be profound indeed. Find me a progressive or a feminist who claims that low income black men are intelligent, ambitious, talented, driven, capable and valuable human beings.

Want to find out just how true that is?

Bring back vocational high schools.




Lots of love,


Cooking for single guys on a budget

19 Jan



Yeah, sure, single ladies on a budget can use this book too, but much in the spirit of Thug Kitchen, I am helping a friend collect recipes aimed at single men specifically, on a budget.


Here is the basic premise of the book: simple recipes, simple ingredients, no special tools.  Picture a guy who has been on his feet all day, coming home to a small apartment, wanting dinner. He doesn’t have a ton of money to spend, he’s tired and he just wants something fast, cheap and ideally, healthy.


Readers, any suggestions for me? I’ve submitted hummus, which is incredibly easy to make and tastes amazing! A can of chick peas, some garlic and lemon juice. Mush it up with a fork. Eat with pitas or just eat out of the bowl.


Cheap, fast, delicious, nutritious.


There are tons of great resources out there when it comes to cooking on a budget and cooking for one, but there is nothing better than the voice of experience saying “this recipe really is the bomb” – what is your favorite cheap, fast meal that you think most guys would like?


Thank you in advance for your suggestions!


Lots of love,





Women don’t own sex, the virtues of porn and conscious masculinity – hanging out with author Peter Lloyd

17 Jan


Peter Lloyd walks into the newsroom at the Daily Mail and sees Liz Jones (I Stole My Husband’s Sperm And Tried to Trick Him Into Pregnancy), Shona Sibary (I Would Rather Mop Than Have Sex With My Husband), Samantha Brick (Don’t Hate Me Because I’m Beautiful) and Esther Walker (I Wish My Baby Wasn’t A Beastly Boy) and remarkably, does not run screaming in the other direction. Instead, Lloyd complains to an editor that one of his female colleagues (he doesn’t say whom) is just a tad sexist against men in her writing.

And thus his first column on men’s issues was born.

Lloyd’s book Stand By Your Manhood takes the same fearless, uncompromising stance against sexism as his regular pieces in the Daily Mail and does so in a way that is both empowering and humorous. Lloyd openly and enthusiastically declares his admiration for men and masculinity, writing “men are bloody brilliant.” The book never descends into self-pitying or shaming tactics as he takes on key issues facing men and manhood. All too often, men’s issues are framed in the mainstream media as something men have done to themselves, or something they could address if they would just “man up,” if they are addressed at all. Lloyd refuses to cast men as pathetic wimps, and his entire book is a call to arms for men to celebrate, acknowledge, and take pride in themselves as men.

A master of the neologism, Lloyd coins some hilarious terms including Gal-qaeda and She-hadists to describe radical feminists. There are several others that left me giggling even as the topics at hand were dead serious. Lloyd backs up his explorations of issues such as pornography and sexuality, parenthood and marriage, body image and double standards with readily understandable data, sources, and interviews with practitioners in the field, many of whom will be known to regular readers of AVfM. I was taken aback by some of his findings, which increased my own knowledge of just how much sexism and control men are subject to. Before reading this book, I was not aware that men need their wives’s written permission to have a vasectomy! “His body, my choice?” Double standards indeed.

When it comes to male sexuality, Lloyd insists that “women do not own sex” and points to the infantilizing assumptions behind things like “ban the lad mags” campaigns. Male sexuality is a force that belongs to men, and men “do not need permission to consume something legal [explicit photos of women in magazines].” Women readers may squirm a bit as Lloyd interviews some of the women who both produced and posed for explicit photographs, as both groups of women identify other women as the main source of sexism and bigotry.

Bitches be jealous, not to put too fine a point on it.

No doubt, Lloyd will be accused of misogyny for writing about women in a less that one hundred percent flattering light. Lloyd is ruthlessly logical when it comes to women’s hypocrisy on certain issues, and pointing out that women have a few flaws is not misogyny. It is very clear that Lloyd is not under any influence and does not seek to appease or appeal to women, but rather demands they act like equals, respected because they have shown themselves worthy of respect. There is an eye-opening exploration of gay men’s sexuality and how it is subject to fewer constraints and rules precisely because it does not seek to appeal to women. Lloyd balances the need to for men to be free of women’s toxic influence, which aligns with Men Going Their Own Way (MGTOW) quite nicely, but rather than eschew women altogether, he suggests that men embrace themselves as fully human and let women learn to cope with that. Or not.

For me, the most interesting part of Lloyd’s book is his section on marriage, which he calls the Fraud of the Rings. Lloyd details all the ways in which current laws permit the exploitation of men through the marriage contract. Once again, my own knowledge was expanded as I learned that men can be held financially responsible for women through the simple act of becoming engaged to one. The contract need not even be signed to be enforced. The topic of marriage leads naturally into the twin subjects of parenthood and divorce, and Lloyd explores how sexist assumptions about men have led to skewed laws that favor women to a ridiculous degree. He points out that children who grow up without a father figure, both boys and girls, adopt toxic versions of masculinity and femininity in response to the “hole in their soul.”  The chapter is a sobering read and should be required for any man even considering marriage. Lloyd also offers some solid precautions for men who choose to go the marriage way.

In a section appropriately called Bullshit, Lloyd takes on “The Patriarchy,” “independent women,” video games, war, the wage gap, and the concept of being a “real man.” With razor sharp wit, biting sarcasm, and solid evidence, he addresses each topic, encouraging men to take pride in themselves and refuse the demand that they must change to accommodate a “new world order.” He advocates for “conscious masculinity” that interrogates, investigates and ultimately celebrates men and masculinity, in all of its many manifestations. There are indeed many ways to be a man, and the real takeaway from this book is that “fucking up is a human trait, not a male defect.”

Ultimately Lloyd has written a book that celebrates men as human beings, capable of the full range of human emotion and behaviors, both the good and the bad. Being human takes nothing away from being men, and Lloyd’s call to men is to take both comfort and pride in being men. “Men are brilliant,” and it’s time to applaud that openly and energetically.

Stand By Your Manhood is a standing ovation for men.

The book is available for sale here, and has been chosen as the Daily Mail’s Book of the Week.

Please join me on the Suck It Up Buttercup Hangout this Saturday at 3PM EST, where I will be interviewing Peter Lloyd, discussing the book and his ideas in more detail.


[Ed. Note: this review originally appeared at AVfM]

%d bloggers like this: