Remove the Man

remove

A little over two weeks ago Washington state Governor Jay Inslee signed off on the final installment of a six-year effort to make language in the state’s copious laws gender-neutral. The sponsor of the bill, Senator Jeannie Kohl-Welles’ (hyphenated surname noted) reasoning for initiating the six-year endeavor was,

“It brings us to modern times, to contemporary times, why should we have in statute anything that could be viewed as biased or stereotypical or reflecting any discrimination?”

Thus words such as ‘freshmen’, ‘fireman’, ‘fisherman’ and even ‘penmanship’ are neutralized to ‘first year student’, ‘fireperson’, ‘fisher’ and ‘writing skill’. Perhaps the easiest way to grasp the process the committee used in their six-year effort is to presume that any noun or verb with the successive letters of ‘m-a-n’ in its syntax was replaced with ‘person’ or a substitution for a term that excluded the offending ‘m-a-n’ letters.

This hasn’t been the only effort to geld the English language under the guise of a want for avoiding legal repercussions. The University of North Carolina has initiated a similar effort in their school’s by-laws. Kent Law, Marquette and virtually every state college in the union, while not mandating the ‘manless’ language, has made efforts to encourage linguistic androgyny.

The Washington state initiative is really just the next predictable progression in this gelding, however the six-year effort represents something more endemically hostile; the Feminine Imperative, in its unconsolable insecurity, would reengineer the very language society uses in order to feel more secure.

Now granted, this is English, the second most commonly spoken language in the world, but in order to fully appreciate the scope of the Feminine Imperative and the lengths to which it will go unhindered to assuage the need for feminine-security, a red-pill man has to recognize the importance language represents to the human race as well as the removal of male, not masculine, influence from that language.

In all Latin-based languages there are gender associations with definitive articles. Nouns (and many adjectives) are specifically feminine or masculine as part of their intrinsic qualities. In Spanish ‘La Casa’, the home, is a feminine association. ‘El Toro’, the bull, is a masculine association. Anyone with even a rudimentary grasp of a Latin-based language understands that millennia ago the Latin culture found gender differentiation so important that it attached gender associations to the words, written and spoken, that represented the ideas and articles each word meant.

This might seem like a remedial review of language and society, but it’s important to understand what it is the Feminine Imperative hopes to undo, and the magnitude of its insecurities. The six-year effort of gender-abridgment in the Washington state law is really an illustration of the lengths to which the Feminine Imperative would reengineer society; from the very foundations of human communication, language, by eliminating masculine associations with any article or quality. The Feminine Imperative, that is dependent upon men being Men when convenient, simultaneously makes herculean efforts to remove men from its idealized environment and society.

Be a Man

There used to be a time when some cultures had a rite of passage into manhood or a passing into adult responsibility and masculine respect. In Latin cultures a young woman becomes a woman on here quinceñera – her fifteenth birthday. Jewish boys have a Bar Mitzvah, certain Native American tribes had similar traditions, etc. I think that if there’s a modern social complaint about men remaining perpetually juvenile this is the root of it – we don’t respect Manhood enough to define what’s expected and when that adult, masculine respect is due.

A lot has been written on this blog and many others about the ceaseless efforts of the feminine to marginalize and ridicule anything masculine. It’s easy to find consistent examples of this in the past 50 years of popular media, movies, TV sit-coms, music, etc. While masculinity is ridiculed, there’s more to it than this. It’s not simple masculine ridicule, because the same masculine attributes and qualities that make women ‘strong’ are the same that make men strong. The difference is in the application – it wasn’t enough to implant the seeds of masculine self-doubt into men, the Feminine Imperative had to make men, not necessarily masculinity, the problem to be solved.

In all of the examples of masculine gender reversal in popular culture, men are the unique problem, to which only women have the resources, wisdom and intuition to correct. The men of today are characterized as the Lucy Ricardos of the 50’s, requiring women’s guidance to avoid, often mutually destructive, disasters. However, the key to solving those problems, characterized as uniquely male, still require masculine-associated, mindsets, skills and applications.

Guys vs. Men

I was participating in a conversation just recently with a young woman of 26 and a young man of 18. The conversation itself wasn’t important, but at one point the young man referred to himself as a ‘Man’. He said something to the effect of, “Well I’m a man, and men do,..” At the word ‘man’ she cut him off with the unconscious snigger that’s resulted from years of feminine ridicule conditioning. Just the mention of a man self-referencing as a “man” is enough to inspire feminine ridicule. It’s laughable for a man to consider himself a man.

This exchange got me to wondering about the turning point at which I began to self-reference as a “Man”. In the face of a constant conditioned ridicule, it’s almost an uncomfortable recognition to distinguish yourself as a Man. It’s too easy to just think of yourself as a ‘guy’ and never be so presumptuous as to insist upon your manhood. In girl-world, to claim to be a Man is to admit to arrogance – it’s to embrace a flawed nature.

It’s important to note here that in embracing your status as a Man, instead of ‘just a guy’, you are passing a meta-shit test. By embracing self-referenced manhood, you are rejecting what a world aligned against you would like you to believe about yourself. You’re endorsing yourself as a Man with self-assurance despite the self-doubt the Feminine Imperative relies upon men believing about themselves, masculinity and the dubious state of manhood as a whole. By flagrantly referring to yourself as a Man you are passing the meta-shit test – you’re overtly stating you’re a Man, but you you’re covertly stating “I Just Get It.”

Remove the Man

As I addressed earlier, the Feminine Imperative perceives your Manhood as a Threat. By endorsing yourself as a Man, on some level, whether you’re cognizant of it or not, you’re alluding that you have an inkling of your own personal value as a Man. You’re expressing  a self-awareness that is both attractive and terrorizing for women, but due to the constant influence of feminine primacy you’re perceived as arrogant, self-serving and prideful. Even in the most innocuous context, insisting upon your status as a Man is inherently sexist to a world defined by the Feminine Imperative.

But the imperative needs masculinity. To insure its (temporary) satisfaction of security a masculine element is required. Strength, confidence, determination, a capacity for risk taking, dominance and the comfort that women naturally derive from those masculine attributes are necessities of a healthy, secure, existence for women and the feminine.

However, brutish, ridiculous and stupid men can’t be trusted to universally provide this masculine security that every woman deserves irrespective of attractiveness or merit according to the Feminine Imperative. So Men must be removed from masculinity.

No longer are Men allowed a monopoly on masculinity. Domineering women as a default status in heterosexual relationships pushes masculinity into her domain. Dominant masculine partners in sexually fluid relationships are similarly, unironically, re-characterized.

These are the easy examples. Volumes have been written in the manopshere about how feminine-primary government assumes the masculine providership role in modern relationships, thus freeing an already unhindered hypergamy even more so, but the effort to remove the Man goes far beyond this obvious institution. The fundamental restructuring of gender reference in our very language – as illustrated by the Washington state legislature – attempts to, literally, remove the Man from the equation.

Masculine Security

I can remember an instance at a former workplace where some coworkers were organizing a team to run in a Breast Cancer awareness walk/run. At one point a particularly mangina coworker suggested we all wear the prerequisite pink color at the event, and needless to say I arrived in a black T-Shirt amongst a sea of pink. The predictable accusation of my sexual security came up: “What, aren’t you secure enough in your manhood to wear pink?…herp..derp!” to which I answered “I’m secure enough in my Manhood not to wear pink.”

What the mangina was obliviously parroting back is the same social tool that’s been used by the Feminine Imperative for the past 60 years; inspire self-doubt in male-specific masculinity. By making compliance with the Feminine Imperative a qualification of masculinity, men assign the power to define masculinity to the Feminine Imperative. My answer to him was simply taking that power of definition back into a male-controlled frame – “I’ll tell you what manhood is, your grasp of manhood doesn’t qualify you to tell me.”

This power of defining the masculine isn’t limited just to snarky, subconscious referencing; it’s simply one aspect of a greater effort to remove men from masculinity. While the efforts of certain women bloggers and psychologists (both within and without the manosphere) to build better betas seems ennobling to white knights, the unifying purpose behind their efforts is really one of portioning or rationing masculine authority to men in as convenient a way as would satisfy their immediate needs for those masculine aspects. Be Alpha as needed, but beta for the greater part so as to allow for fem-masculine dominance and primacy.

I’ve explained this previously as the Male Catch 22, but it’s important to understand that this Catch isn’t some unfortunate byproduct of male inheritance; it’s a careful, calculated feminine social dynamic with the latent purpose of making men accountable for masculine responsibilities while simultaneously making them shamed and guilty of ‘male privilege’ when that masculinity conflicts with the dictates of the Feminine Imperative. That’s the crux of the dynamic, but the mechanics of it are still rooted in specifically male masculine self-doubt.

For the Feminine Imperative to sustain itself men can never be trusted with masculinity, solution: remove men from being the definers of masculinity and apportion them only enough authority of it that would benefit the Feminine Imperative as necessary.


82 responses to “Remove the Man

  • Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c)

    When I was 13 my faat, ugly, femanazi english teacher told my I must use gender neutral language. So where I saw person I said and wrote per-child because per-“son” was obviously gendered.

    She got “upset” so a number of my classmates followed suit because gender neutral language obviously extends to “son”.

    Therefore a woman becomes wo-per-child and we started calling the female teachers wo-per-children! LOL!!

    I think all men should refer to women as woperchildren to make sure we do NOT OFFEND THEM!!

  • Marteltel

    It was a quick and simple idea, but the Private Man recently had a good idea on taking back a small part of the language:

    http://theprivateman.wordpress.com/2013/04/26/between-the-genders-changing-the-vocabulary/

    Language is beyond fundamental, and Orwell correctly observed that it shapes your very ability to think.

    I’ll be damned if I can find it, but I also remember a video in which it pointed out how every newscast referring to a tragedy identified “women” and “childre”, but men were always “miners”, “soldiers”, etc.

  • anonymous

    I think a less diplomatic answer would be “By your logic you should be going out naked in public with a dildo up your arse. Unless you’re not secure enough in your manhood”

  • boxsterpaul

    The FI technique described is an attempt at shaming you into submission to a point of view. Shaming is the feminine technique of parenting, a violation of cultural or social values. Guilt based parenting is that of an Alpha male, a violation of ones own internal values.

    This starts at a young age, and continues to the point of creating the perfect beta. Even men in my social circle that I thought of as Alpha, come with this shaming.

    Which leads us to this……..

    http://feministbecause.tumblr.com/post/14155672352

  • bobsutan

    Soooo….what happens to words like FEMinism? That’s clearly a gendered word, so that too should be banned, right? Right? Yeah, I’m not holding my breath.

  • bobsutan

    @ Marteltel

    There’s a video series on youtube called “misandry in the media”. Check it out. I think episode 18 discusses the issue you mention. The video series by manwomanmyth also touches on this. In fact it may be the source material for the misandry in the media series.

  • dragnet

    “ I think that if there’s a modern social complaint about men remaining perpetually juvenile this is the root of it – we don’t respect Manhood enough to define what’s expected and when that adult, masculine respect is due.”

    Yes, but it’s worth pointing out that part of the reason we don’t define the parameters of masculinity is because it is in the interest of the feminine imperative that the definition remain as fluid as possible. The feminine imperative has different needs at different times—some of which are completely contradictory. Defining set rules for acquiring masculine respect would necessarily constrain the freedom of women to behave toward men according to their whims at all times. They would have to observe those particular norms regarding male respect which would, clearly, amount to intolerable oppression.

    A lot of meat in this post—excellent stuff.

  • Mark Minter

    @Martel

    That video you are referring to is:

    “Men don’t exist”

  • Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c)

    Hi Rollo,
    the idea that men need to think about is “can a free man be told what he can and can not say?”

    The rather obvious answer is no, right? So if this legislation is telling “persons” what they can and can not say then what is this thing called a “person”? It is, in fact, a legal entity.

    I rescinded my consent to be governed and therefore legislation like this does not apply to me. I have proven this and tried to tell men the good news but they do not want to listen. You might want to watch this.

  • rivsdiary

    beautifully written essay, but in my opinion, too many of the great minds here in the manosphere are repeating the same message, and not asking enough, how do we spread the message?

    for example, almost all of us use pseudonyms, will any one of us post this essay on our actual, real life facebook account?

  • Case

    I went to get dinner with one of my young sons the other day at a sports bar. On one of the televisions there was a predictable commercial with some manly looking dudes playing volleyball, then the girls show up and trounce them. Shock! Who thought of that? How clever!

    Anyway, I notice my son noticing this commercial from among the four TV options posted up and I ask him about it.

    “What was that commercial?”

    “Some people playing volleyball.”

    “Who was playing”

    “Boys against girls” (his exact answer, that simple, that direct, that immediate, no prompting)

    “Who won?”

    “The girls”

    “Does that always happen.”

    …then it let loose … it was amazing

    “NO! Why do they ALWAYS do that? Why do they **always** show girls beating boys?”

    “I don’t know … but girls DON’T always beat boys”

    … at this point he interrupts me and starts talking about an argument he had with a girl at school because she has something that says “anything boys can do girls can do better” …

    All this in the last 4 lines is happening at the same time … I notice as I was saying, “but girls DON’T always beat boys” that a woman sitting nearby behind my son has overheard this and is looking my way, I see too interestingly she appears to be there with two daughters and with two grown men – fairly manly looking men as it were – but she is now eyeing me with rapt disapproval.

    I allowed my son to finish his point and then I said louder, glancing to make eye contact with the woman as I said this with enough force so that she could clearly hear me:

    “Do you need to make other people feel bad so you can feel good?”

    “No.”

    “Well, you are RIGHT about her shirt. Because there is NO OTHER REASON to put that on her shirt, other than to make boys feel bad so that she can feel good…it’s as if girls NEED boys to feel bad so they can feel good”.

    The eavesdropping women’s face flushed and she looked away. I could tell she was listening to the rest of the conversation and appeared to shift in her chair several times as if greatly uncomfortable, but she didn’t look our way again.

  • Martel

    @ Mark: thank you

    @ rivsdiary: I agree about spreading the message, but I don’t think real names are essential to that at this point. I doubt Rollo, Roissy, etc. would be having more impact if we could find them in the phonebook. And some are using real names, i.e. Roosh, Aaron Clary, etc.

    @ case: Beautiful!

  • Stingray

    Case,

    I would wager your son remember that conversation for the rest of his life, mainly because you made an example of that woman.

  • Different T

    @Rollo

    Wonderful article.

    @Peter-Andrew

    LOL.

  • Walt

    I guess political election entitles the elected to bugger the language at will. They have a mandate — I mean a persondate.

  • Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c)

    rivsdiary
    “but in my opinion, too many of the great minds here in the manosphere are repeating the same message, and not asking enough, how do we spread the message?”

    The issue is not actually “spreading the message”. The issue is that men in the man-o-sphere are repeating the SYMPTOMS of the problem endlessly and not addressing the REMEDY to their problems which was PROVEN THREE YEARS AGO.

    If men would STOP TALKING and START LISTENING then they would hear the REMEDY. But since men will not STOP TALKING the cacophony that has been created means the REMEDY is drowned out by endless repetition of the SYMPTOMS and PROBLEMS.

    I tried breaking through all that cacophony and it can’t be done. Men will simply endlessly talk to each other about their PROBLEMS because they DO NOT WANT TO SOLVE THEM.

    That is why I justifiably call men “stupid dumb animals” and “useless eaters”…and some men are starting to realise the TRUTH of those statements now.

  • anotheronetakesthepill

    Look in one of the most feminized countries (and proud of their gender equity) of the world: Sweden

    The minister (a woman) says among other interesting things (after years of demoting men in schools)

    “We need more man in preschool”,”I imagine a national strategy to increase the proportion of men in preschool”, “Women are not men. Yet the individual is always first”

    I liked how one commenter said: “Wow. Women are not men. Is that allowed to be said in the Gender-Church?”

    http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&eotf=1&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dn.se%2Fnyheter%2Fsverige%2Fefterlyses-fler-man-i-forskolan&act=url

  • Djeed

    Rollo, it is “quinceañera”. Typo there.

  • Xenon

    Your mention of the breast cancer awareness reminds me of the NFL during Breast Cancer awareness week/month (however long it is). Why can’t they do something for men like Prostate Cancer awareness? I mean, it’s a male sport…no women play football. EVERY player has something pink on in one of the most visible sports in North America.

  • Johnycomelately

    I don’t know how valid this is (psych is not my domain) but I recall reading somewhere that the mind doesn’t grasp injunctions or negatives well.

    Apprently negative injunctions like ‘quit smoking’ simply don’t work, the mind registers the noun but not the verb.

    I see the fem imperative in the same vein, the more they press the less effective they will become, after all they are getting the most backlash during a time they are pressing the hardest.

  • mmaier2112

    Yeah, I think I’m going to get obnoxious dismissing idiots this year when Breast Cancer Awareness Month comes around. I’m beyond tired of folks that scoff at looking at iodine levels or thermal imagining for breast cancer detection BUT think wearing pink accomplishes something!

    Oh, and squishing their boobs and irradiating them. Can’t forget that! Doctors make money off that, after all. Huh… traumatizing tissue and zapping it with radiation… that must do something good!

  • Keanu

    When I was studying abroad in Barcelona I took an entire class called “The sexism of the Spanish Language.” So glad I paid 35k a year for that. Thank you liberal arts degree for giving me something to be pissed about

  • The Lone Planet

    Newspeak.

  • Keanu

    @rivsdiary-

    I agree with the fact that the manosphere needs to become more marketable and reach out to the mainstream. It’s an idea I’ve been wrestling with for some time now. Read a good quote in a post on Bold and Determined recently that got me thinking:

    “Losers whine, winners act.”

    Not that all of the manosphere is whining. Especially Rollo’s stuff is important to deconstruct the fem imperative. It’s not whining, it’s learning. But at a certain point, stuff does become repetitive and require action. This is why I haven’t posted on my blog in a couple of weeks, I’ve been figuring out what the next, actionable step is. Some of the lower quality blogs tend to be a bit repetitive, although I do believe their blogs are good tools for selfishly improving one’s own intellectual understanding of feminism and it’s effects, among other things.

  • Höllenhund

    This is one main reason why women deeply resented the bygone Western patriarchy. In a patriarchy it’s older men who have the power to grant or withdraw the social status of young men. If older men agreed that a certain young man deserved social status for whatever reason (bravery, honor, work ethic), then that was it – society as a whole had to accept that. No woman had the power to strip him of that status on grounds that he’s not hot enough.

    Women prefer a social system where all men’s social status is only dependent on women’s whims. As far as women are concerned, a man’s non-sexual accomplishments in life mean nothing if some woman doesn’t approve them in one way or another. And women only accept such accomplishments as worthy if at least one woman directly benefits from them in one way or another.

  • Mark Minter

    Saint Peter went before God and he said,

    “God, the women have penis envy. And they are angry. That are angry that a penis is so much more attractive than a vagina. But they are mostly angry that a penis is such a true and perfect indicator of sexual arousal, that once the penis is long and hard, then enjoyment of sex is almost a given for men. The women have no idea if they are aroused or when they are aroused, and there is nothing about the female anatomy that guarantees the woman will enjoy sex. Some never have orgasms and other never have them during the act of intercourse. The clitoris is short and stubby, veiled behind a hood, too far removed from the opening of the vagina to be affected by the act of intercourse.”

    And God asked “What do they want?”

    And Peter replied, “In, short the women are clamoring for something long and hard on them.”

    God clarified “They want something long and hard on them?”

    Peter affirmed “Yes, something long and hard”.

    And thought for a second and there was a “poof” and smoke filled the air.

    When it cleared, there was a book with a title,

    “Algebra II”

  • chris

    ““What, aren’t you secure enough in your manhood to wear pink?…herp..derp!” ”

    One cannot prove their manhood by acting like a woman.

  • Mark Minter

    While I am on the Algebra theme, here is a proof that WOMEN ARE EVIL

    First we state that women require time and money:

    (1) women = time x money

    From the axiom

    (2) time = money

    So by substituting (2) in (1) we have

    (3) women = money x money or women=(money) **2 “money squared”

    and because “Money is the root of all evil”

    (4) money = evil **1/2 “square root”

    Since the square of two square roots of same value is equal to the value, then from (4) we can substitute (3) and we have the final result

    (5) women=evil

  • itsme

    @case

    good job. how did the men react, though?

  • Alden

    Has anyone heard of feminist womyn changing their last names if they end in “son” yet? It seems logical on their current trajectory. For instance…

    Williamson = Williamsdaughter
    Henderson = Henderperson (better but it still ends in “son”)
    Johnson = lost cause, too Patriarchal to redeem due to penis connotations

  • Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c)

    Alden,
    I made a comment above about “son” being changed to “child”..such that woman would become wo-per-child. And I think that is what we should call women…wo-per-children.

  • Fred Flange, Himself

    Some languages do just that out of tradition. In Icelandic, the singer Bjork’s last name is Gudmunsdottir (daughter of Gudmun); had she been a boy, her surname would be Gudmundsen. Russian, too, uses the traditional patronymic (middle name) as a gender ID; son of Ivan would be Ivanovich; daughter would be Ivana.

    There was a dopey gender politics essay in the NY Times Mag back in the 70’s argiung for a new English sex-neutral replacement for MANkind; their idea was Genkind, which got nowhere after being severely laughed at. (“Humankind”, a term coined by Jimmy Carter, wasn’t good enough for them; it still had MAN in it).

  • sunshinemary

    I remember having to read a novel for a Women’s Lit class in college (don’t judge, we were required to take a Women’s Studies or AA Studies class) which used the made-up pronoun per in place of either his or her. Perhaps Senator Kohl-Welles can squeeze another six years of funding out of the state coffers to try to institute the usage of per in all future government documents.

  • derthal

    Society is far too productive these days, people haven’t concerned with real surviving any more thus naturally gender roles lost its economical sense. There is no demand for such number of men existing today, there is huge demand for worker bees.

    Nothing will change until real economical collapse or great disaster.

  • Alden

    Peter-Andrew,

    I looked over all the posts in the thread to see if anyone mentioned this and somehow missed the very first. “Woperchild” has an undeniable ring to it.

  • jack

    Rollo, you are dense and annoying with your constant use of the ridiculous term “feminine imperative”. The term you should be using is “The Left”.

    Feminism is just one sub-ideology of Leftism, the ruling ideological paradigm of our era. And Leftism is the cultural, political, and social manifestation of post-modern philosophy. This is deeper than just feminism. This is about applied epistemology.

    But you ManoSphere bloggers can only sing one tune.

  • Senior Beta

    Jesus, Minter where do you get your material? Were you a math major at UT?

  • Nergal

    “Thus words such as ‘freshmen’, ‘fireman’, ‘fisherman’ and even ‘penmanship’ are neutralized to ‘first year student’, ‘fireperson’, ‘fisher’ and ‘writing skill’. Perhaps the easiest way to grasp the process the committee used in their six-year effort is to presume that any noun or verb with the successive letters of ‘m-a-n’ in its syntax was replaced with ‘person’ or a substitution for a term that excluded the offending ‘m-a-n’ letters.”

    Next effort, get rid of the “appalling sexism” in science. “AdaMANtium”?

    Not cool. From now on,it’s “adapersontium”?

    Aluminum? That’s one letter off from being “Alu-I’m-gonna-rape-you-um”. NOT cool.

  • ~gwen

    This post is brilliant and something I wish all men (and women) would read. That nonsense in Washington made my stomach churn. Even the talking heads on the news had to shake their heads in disbelief (penmanship had to be changed? really?) The extent our culture is going to devalue men is ridiculous. I’m a woman and it disgusts me. You put into words something that I’ve had difficulty articulating in conversations with others…namely the way our society does not allow men to define masculinity and they are, in fact, ridiculed for attempting to do so, accused of being uncomfortable in their masculinity (as defined by women and their White Knights). I may be in the minority as a woman who does feel that men are owed a deep respect for being the primary protectors and providers and builders, etc., but at the very least men are owed respect as human beings. Everyday, we are inundated with messages that men are inept, incompetent, stupid, inferior to women in every way (see just about every commercial in recent history which sees fit to mock fathers and husbands and present women as the superior and wiser gender that simply tolerates the boorish, ridiculous men). I do my part to call this blatant manipulation to the attention of others but people are just so blind to what’s happening. I seriously fear for my son’s future in this misandrist culture. Thanks for being a voice of reason in a society gone completely mad.

  • Different T

    @~gwen

    Do you believe in equality?

  • Not Carrie Bradshaw

    Yeah – it means changing all surnames as well – you know, from Johnson to Johndaughter or Johnchild. Thompson to Thompdaughter or Thompchild. Akerman to Akerwoman or Akerperson. Freeman to Freewoman or Freeperson.

  • FuriousFerret

    I think another aspect to add would be the notion by our society that masculinity is behavior of the lower class. Masculine behavior is written off as being befitting of uneducated racist rednecks. By associating traditional manly values to people of low social status they control a huge number of people with positions of social prestige into accepting their behavioral standards.

    “You don’t want to seem like you’re stupid hick do you?” is basically the lure that they use to keep people from deviating from their beliefs. If you can link your oppositions viewpoints to something seen as negative, then you’re ahead in the propaganda war.

    The fact is that the feminism is disease that preys on the middle class plus. People that are in the lower classes aren’t as educated so they don’t get indoctrinated by the cathedral. Plus they don’t have the luxury of participating in stupid ideals that don’t apply to their immediate survival. They do what works to get by. How many feminists are there in Somalia?

    Another concept that I see in our society is that it’s ok to be masculine if you earn it through some means. If you’re a sports star, then it’s cool to act like a man. If you’re a movie star, then it’s ok to be suave. Maybe the instructions aren’t outright given, but the implicit permission is there.

  • Mr.MagNIFicent1

    So, Jack…whence “the left”? Is “the left” some kind of sub-ideology? I think it is.

  • Mark

    Women are herd animals who must follow the herd. They live within it and derive status from it. Feminism is herd-approved so women follow it. But men do not herd.

    Feminism seeks supremacy, blamelessness, conformity, and resource independence. Above all, compliance. But men hold the keys and men do not herd.

    Men must be brought to heel and placed under hoof. Subordinated to the herd, and assimilated by it. They must meet social approval, shed all that is male, and become one of the guys. But men do not herd.

    Guys may herd but men do not. This is why herd-wide shaming, ceaseless emasculation, and government coercion are essential (but limited) implements of female supremacists.

    Even though the nasty little ones may tap their feet and wiggle their fists in anger, they cannot coerce everything. They cannot shame, control, and mute all men. Nor can they prevent derision and ridicule. They may write the rules of their game but cannot force men to play.

    So, when the herd says “Ms”, I say “Miss.”
    The herd says “Ms”, I say “Mrs.”
    The herd says “humankind”, I say “mankind.”
    The herd demands a ring on it, yea I pump it and dump it.
    They push for commitment, nay I go my own way.
    They wail for a “man-up” while I enjoy the decline.

    It’s like jiu-jitsu all over again.

    If a woman wants to play for real, she’ll have to join my own herd, on my terms; and play by my rules, on my own turf. My turf is Outside the Anglosphere and Outside of Europe.

    If a fifth of us do likewise, their power is gone.

  • Gilligan

    Well, first and foremost this is a political stunt designed to get votes. In it of itself it’s fairly harmless if not downright stupid, but the intent is disturbing. The problem is most men are too busy with their family, careers or lives to take much notice of this type of thing. After all,
    If your life is good, stuff like this is just silly, right? And, if your struggling with the aforementioned, you just don’t have the time. However, the endless whining from women – particularly white, US women – just gets louder and louder with a muted response from men.

    I agree with an earlier post. Lots of complaining on these boards, but I don’t see much action. Maybe some thought and energy needs to be put into that?

  • Ton

    Regarding the evesdropper, I would have looked at the dudes with her and tell them to check their woman. Dealing with women on these things ars pointless. The key is to shame the men for being womanish

  • Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c)

    “Gilligan May 8th, 2013 at 11:27 pm
    Lots of complaining on these boards, but I don’t see much action. Maybe some thought and energy needs to be put into that?”

    Gilligan ,
    comments like this from men REALLY piss me off. The thought and energy WAS put into that…BY ME. In 2008/09.

    On 2009-11-26 I walked into the Australian Federal Magistrates Courts and PROVED THE REMEDY I DEVELOPED. There is not ONE single blogger in the MRA world who does not know about the video I took of that meeting and posted to YT.

    NOT ONE.

    I then released my first book in October 2010 that is the detailed step by step guide to living free in the femnazi world. I was my own guinea pig. I have PROVEN this works in THREE COUNTRIES…PERSONALLY.

    And how did the man-o-sphere react to PROOF OF A REMEDY? Well they HATED ON ME AND SUPPRESSED THE NEWS. That is how they responded. As Zed puts it “the men formed a circular firing squad and executed me”….so as to continue to be able to claim “Gee, I have never seen a remedy for my problem so I can still complain about it”.

    By the way? I RISKED MY LIFE to test this remedy. Many of my colleagues were THROWN IN JAIL testing and learning how this works so we could bring it to men where it would be safe to use. One of my mates was thrown in jail EIGHT TIMES, another SIX TIMES. All in an effort to figure out how the system really works.

    In 2012 I brought out my second FREE ebook. Again. What did men do? They SUPPRESSED IT VICIOUSLY.

    So now I take a different tack. I call you men the “stupid dumb animals” and “useless eaters” you are. I denounce you. I say you have persuaded me that the Illuminati is right and you SHOULD be killed off.

    Why? Since Living Free in the Femnazi World was released in 2010 how many blog articles have been written by men about “the problem of feminism”? 10,000? 20,000? 30,000?

    How much time and energy have men spent in talking about “the prolems of feminism and family courts”? How many men have killed themselves? Thomas Ball at the top of that list. Now Earl Silverman?

    And how many bloggers have written a critique of “Living Free in the Femnazi World”?

    NONE….NOT EVEN ONE.

    The reason you have not “heard about a remedy” is men have their fingers in their ears, blindfolds on and singing “la-la-la-la-la”. THAT is why you have not heard of a remedy. There is not a single blogger in the MRA or fathers rights world who does NOT know who I am.

    THREE AND A HALF YEARS after I PROVED IN COURT THE REMEDY I am still seeing comments like yours.

    Men are UN-HELP-ABLE. They show no appreciation and no respect for what I have done, nor any other men who are my colleagues. So now I demand payment for what I have already done before I will even TALK to a man. They have to LEARN TO APPRECIATE AND RESPECT a man who has laboured for THEIR BENEFIT. Apparently their fathers did not teach them this.

    Here is the entry point for all the work I have done. If you want to “thank” me? peter.nolan.paypal@peternolan.com. Show me how much it is worth TO YOU to have a book that shows you how to live free in the femnazi world. If you pay me nothing? Then all my work and all my risk and all my experience is worth NOTHING to you.

    Just by the way? How many men have paid me for what I have done? So far SIX. So you men do NOT VALUE being given a path to living free in the femnazi world which is why I commercialised my services via the Mens Business Association. Men do not value what they do not pay for.

  • Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c)

    “Ton
    May 8th, 2013 at 11:46 pm
    The key is to shame the men for being womanish”

    No. The key is for men to get off their fat arses and DO SOMETHING. And that something is join the mens business association, rescind your consent to be governed, move your assets to where they can not be stolen and set up your own business to produce an income that is not able to be blocked by the criminals in guvment.

    THAT is what I advise men to do. And if men choose not to do this? If they CHOOSE to remain slaves to their guvments, subject to legislation? They deserve everything that comes their way for being such a bunch of gutless cowards.

    I have been at this FIVE YEARS. Men are UN-HELP-ABLE. They are stupid and ignorant and arrogant about their stupidity and ignorance. THAT is how men in the west REALLY are.

    It is always “someone else must do something, Me? No, there is nothing I am willing to do…nothing at all…some other man must solve my problems for me because I was raised by a woman and I can not think for myself or act of my own volition.”

    The starting point is here. Your are welcome.

  • Höllenhund

    „Lots of complaining on these boards, but I don’t see much action. Maybe some thought and energy needs to be put into that?”

    Such arguments are a gimmick and nothing more. Don’t fall from them.
    Let’s suppose that some MRA groups launch some sort of political campaign. You can safely bet that the first group of people to dole out snark and criticism to them won’t be the feminists or the tradcons – it’ll be exactly the group that complained about the MRM not doing any real action. Feminists, as usual ,will just go into a rage without offering any tangible criticism, but attention-seeking smartasses like Roosh, Matt Forney, Simon Grey and their ilk will immediately shit on the MRM in their usual style.

    „Did you idiots think this will actually work?!”
    „You just come across as whiners this way! It alienates potential supporters.”
    „You should’ve addressed a different issue instead!”
    „Can’t you offer better solutions? This is crap!”
    „You have to do more to compromise. Can’t you see that you’re politically weak?”

    And so on. That’s what they’ll say.

    There are two things you need to understand. These jackasses don’t want the MRM to succeed at anything. They just want it to give something to criticize. Otherwise they don’t give a damn. They laugh at the threat of false rape accusations and other legal shit because they actually believe that tight Game protects them from everything. Plus they despise betas anyway, so they just don’t care. So whatever statement they make about the MRM cannot be taken seriously.

    Another thing you need to understand is that they aren’t any political solutions to men’s problems, no matter what they are. For women, the personal is political – in other words, women have traditionally banded together to demand systemic (legal and political) solutions to their personal problems with men („he won’t commit” and other BS). For men, the political is personal – in other words, a man must find personal solutions to the challenges that political changes bring. That’s a crucial difference.

    At the end of the day, it isn’t organized action that benefits free men. Free men’s best allies are actually feminists and women, because the more idiocy they say and do, the more men they convince to free themselves and abandon the servitude that society wants to shove onto them. The anti-male laws of today are just the beginning – there’s more to come. You can count on that. Paternity testing will pretty much become impossible. Cohabitation will be turned into another justification for mandatory resource transfer from men to women. Rape laws will become even more ridiculous, taxes on men’s income will be raised and so on. Women and white knights won’t oppose any of this in any way, and the number of MGTOW will explode. This rotten, unsalvageable „civilization” is digging its own grave. And that is good.

  • Wilf

    Removing the B-O-Y:

    http://ca.shine.yahoo.com/blogs/parenting/-two-boys-suspended-for-pointing-pencils-like-guns-165811733.html

    Unbelievable. Suspended from school for just being little boys.

  • Baldur Ás

    Gender neutrality of firemen? Policemen? Fishermen?

    Hahahahahahahahaha!

    In Old English the word man refers to men, women and children.

    As in human.

    Human.

    Sorry.

    Huperson.

  • Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c)

    “Gilligan May 8th, 2013 at 11:27 pm
    Lots of complaining on these boards, but I don’t see much action. Maybe some thought and energy needs to be put into that?”

    See Gilligan? When a man presents the REMEDY to all these problems men will not even TALK about it.

    Indeed men will talk about ANYTHING BUT THE REMEDY. Because if they actually admitted there was a REMEDY they might actually have to stop complaining! LOL!!

    MEN ARE UN-HELP-ABLE.

  • ~gwen

    @Different T

    You ask – Do I believe in equality? If we are talking about equality in the sense of worth, then yes I believe in equality in that all people, male or female, are equal in worth. However, if you are referring to equality as far as gender dynamics and the holding of authority in society and relationships are concerned, then I categorically do not believe in equality. Men, for so many reasons, are simply better leaders than women. And despite what women may say or think they feel, I believe that, subconsciously, women desire men to lead, guide and even correct them. I believe that women are innately submissive and function best when under authority and I believe that society and the family unit functions best when men hold that authority. My opinion is highly unpopular with my girlfriends, to say the least : ) But once I get past the initial resistance with the women I have spoken to on this subject, and have really gotten them to examine their behavior and emotions, most have reluctantly agreed with me on this issue. It’s a bitter pill to swallow. It wasn’t easy for me to come to terms with my own nature and the limitations of my gender, to accept that I, in essence, need to be dominated by a man to be happy and fulfilled, but I have and I’m much happier for it. I hope that answers your question! : )

  • Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c)

    Gwen,

    ” I believe in equality in that all people, male or female, are equal in worth.”

    Prove it.

  • Mr.MagNIFicent1

    I’m equal to Marky Zuckerburgz! Awesome!

    A pear-shaped, tatted-up Nintendo-head welfare juggalo is equal to whom?

  • ~gwen

    @Peter Andrew – I’m not really sure that I could prove what I believe in a written forum such as this. May I ask why you are asking me to do so? I can only assume that you are skeptical, which is curious. Why would I profess that if I do not, in fact, hold this belief?

  • Case

    Rollo, OT question but I would be interested if you have a view on it.

    Do you have any word or advise or anything to offer a woman who perceives herself to be facing the wall and who is having a hard time with it? Emphasized nuances: perceives herself to be facing, not yet objectively over, and having a hard time with it not absorbed in suffering over it. Is there anything to offer such a soul?

  • Case

    @Stingray, thx I hope he does.

    @Itsme, they were ooblivious. Why would two men be eavesdropping in a private conversation between a man and his son. They obviously were enjoying conversation about something else.

    @Peter Nolan, re:
    “So now I take a different tack. I call you men the ‘stupid dumb animals’ and ‘useless eaters’ you are. I denounce you. I say you have persuaded me that the Illuminati is right and you SHOULD be killed off”

    …ahhhh, so I can totally see that you really are motivated by how you care about me and my sons and men and people and you have our best interests at heart and that totally moves me to think that I should recognize you as the leader you are drop all my contacts and connections and community and up and follow you.

    @Jack
    Rollo has obviously been at this longer than you and he has something to teach. Collect your disability check moan about hard currency and capital you dont even have elsewhere ask if you know even one Capitalist (big C not that you would understand the difference) who knows your name let alone gives a shit about you and shut the fuck up.

  • Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c)

    ~gwen

    May 10th, 2013 at 6:54 pm
    @Peter Andrew – I’m not really sure that I could prove what I believe in a written forum such as this. May I ask why you are asking me to do so? I can only assume that you are skeptical, which is curious. Why would I profess that if I do not, in fact, hold this belief?

    Gwen. I am not questioning that you are so stupid that you believe all people are of equal worth. I am quite willing to concede you are that stupid. You are a woman. Women will believe any garbage fed to them like “a woman can do anything a man can do”.

    I asked you to prove “all people, male or female, are equal in worth”.

    For example. I raised a family of 6 and was the sole income earner for 16 years of an 18 year marriage. I was highly respected in my family and social circles. I constantly helped out other people. Since divorce I have dedicated myself to ending the tyranny of the family law courts and stopping WW III from happening if at all possible.

    Adolph Hitler, Joseph Stalin and Mao Tse Tung murdered tens of millions of people each.

    Since I am “equal in worth” to these men as far as you are concerned? Why would I bother being a “good man” any more?

    Go ahead. Explain yourself that you claim good men who raise children and work hard to be of benefit to their community are of the same value as men to commit genocide and mass murder and start huge wars.

    I would like to see how you justify holding this belief.

  • Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c)

    Case

    “@Peter Nolan, re:
    “So now I take a different tack. I call you men the ‘stupid dumb animals’ and ‘useless eaters’ you are. I denounce you. I say you have persuaded me that the Illuminati is right and you SHOULD be killed off””

    Do you know that legislation is not law and you can rescind your consent to be governed? Do you know that alimony and child support are voluntary payments? Do you know that children can be retrieved from an ex wife in a very simple procedure that takes about 6 weeks?

    Do you know there is a relatively straight forward procedure to remove yourself from the control grid of the legal system? Do you know all this stuff is FREE and published?

    Einstein said “condemnation without investigation is the height of ignorance”. He was talking about you.

    Men are UN-HELP-ABLE. You sit on blogs moaning about “feminism” but when presented with a REMEDY you will attack the man who presented it because men would MUCH rather live in slavery than live in freedom.

    I put a video up about this yesterday. If you are NOT a “stupid dumb animal”? Try answering the yes/no questions I just asked you. You might want to provide to other readers some evidence of what you have done to help other men too. Show us YOUR track record and efforts.

  • Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c)

    Baldur Ás

    Sorry.
    Huperson.

    No….son is gendered…it has to be hu-per-child…just like I suggest wo-per-child should be used for women. “men” is gendered. woperson is gendered. So woperchild it must be.

  • ~gwen

    @ Peter Andrew – I cannot and will not argue with your logic. I am a woman so my ability to reason is greatly limited by my tendency to attach emotion to everything. What you said makes a lot of sense and I thank you for offering a different perspective. I may just be a “stupid” woman, but I do believe I am designed to serve a purpose, just as you, as a man, are designed to serve a purpose. Obviously, based on your self-description, you are a man who is of more worth than a man who is a perpetrator of genocide. That is an easy conclusion to draw. But what about comparing a man who works hard to provide for and lead a family and a woman who works hard to take care of her home, her husband and her children? My point was that both contributions are valuable. The roles of the man and woman in this scenario are different but of equal worth in ensuring a positive and healthy outcome for a family. That is all I was trying to say. I realize that as a woman commenting on a male dominated forum my comments will be met with a certain level of skepticism and will be open to ridicule, and rightly so. As I stated above, I acknowledge that my capacity to apply reason and logic is limited because I am a woman. That is why I read blogs such as this one, written and contributed to by men, in order to gain a better and more accurate perspective when it comes to gender issues. I try to overcome my feminine tendency to allow emotion to cloud my judgment but it is an uphill battle. I do want to say, though, that I do not hold the preposterous belief that “a woman can do anything a man can do.” There are very few things, if any at all, that a woman can do as well as a man. There are even less things that a woman can do better than a man. Thank you again for your thoughtful and enlightening response.

  • Different T

    @~gwen

    This society is highly heterogeneous regarding its processes for valuation. Using comparative terms (including “equal”) opens a number of solipsistic mazes and is inadvisable if you are not adept at navigating them (it appears you are not and are aware of this).

    As an example, it took you two lengthy posts to respond in a somewhat coherent fashion to the question “do you believe in equality?”

    “My point was that both contributions are valuable. The roles of the man and woman in this scenario are different but of [omitted] worth in ensuring a positive and healthy outcome for a family. That is all I was trying to say.”

    Stick to the principle (the roles of the man and woman in this scenario are different but of [omitted] worth in ensuring a positive and healthy outcome for a family) and avoid the involvement of solipsistic rationalizations. It is likely to strengthen your position.

  • ( @ Y @ )

    Sheesh, some of you guys need to relax the kung fu grip a bit. This Gwen seems like she “gets it” as far as a woman can grasp “getting it”,which is rare as hens teeth for a woman to even admit to herself let alone out loud. She’s not a bad egg.

    Rollo, outstanding post. Some of the posts I’ve seen around the manosphere lead me to believe these really are the great books of our time.

  • ( @ Y @ )

    Tsk my apologies “Some of you MEN”.

    That guy shit really does go deep.

  • Anonymoose

    ~gwen,

    Your ability to reason is impressive, and your heart is in the right place (you are even kind and polite to those who don’t deserve it).

    My only suggestion regarding discussions would be to define your terms. For example, your usage was clear to me from your context, but “equality” has been used to mean so many different things, that people can misinterpret your words, intentionally as well as unintentionally.

    You might also like to visit sunshinemaryandthedragon.wordpress.com, since you seem like kindred spirits. She is also trying very hard to gain understanding, so that she can become both a better woman and a better person.

    That is a Christian blog, but she has many non-believers as readers and commenters. Her readers (male and female) will give you precise explanations when they think that you are wrong, but you will be valued, and never gratuitously attacked.

    Best wishes.

  • Janitor

    @ Peter (C:\)

    Perhaps you should start by proving that your “remedy” is more than magical thinking.

    It seems to be the claim that pointing out loopholes and inconsistencies will somehow cause those who make and enforce rules to enforce these rules against themselves, instead of just making more and different rules, if they pay any attention at all.

    You state: “Do you know that alimony and child support are voluntary payments? Do you know that children can be retrieved from an ex wife in a very simple procedure that takes about 6 weeks?”

    So then you should have no problem with providing specific examples (with names, locations, dates and so on, since this would be in the public record) of instances where this was done successfully, with references to documentation that we can verify independently, right?

    You state: “Men are UN-HELP-ABLE. They show no appreciation and no respect for what I have done, nor any other men who are my colleagues. So now I demand payment for what I have already done before I will even TALK to a man. They have to LEARN TO APPRECIATE AND RESPECT a man who has laboured for THEIR BENEFIT. Apparently their fathers did not teach them this. … Just by the way? How many men have paid me for what I have done? So far SIX.”

    But what about all of the “deadbeat dads” whom you have rescued from jail, and then presented with the children that you have retrieved from their ex wives? Surely they should have been at the top of the list of men who deserved help, and you must have helped them (right?), considering how vigorously you have been patting yourself on the back!

  • ~gwen

    @Anonymous – thank you for your kind words. I have a pretty thick skin so I’m not offended by criticism. Criticism, even harshly given, is necessary for self-examination. I have much to learn and very little to teach, which is why I rarely comment. I will visit the blog you suggested. Thank you : )

  • ospurt

    Talking about removing the man…in going to the cinema this weekend I was given a rather long pre-movie promo for “The Fosters” which is an ABC Family show about lesbian women who are raising a mix of biogical, adoptive and foster children in a heroic home where one “parent” is a police officer and teased story lines include how awful the biological parents are and how the kids are dealing with drugs,sex and delinquency.

    Not a man in sight. Welcome to the new vision if family per popular culture. Makes the “Brady Bunch” or “8 is Enough” seem idyllic snapshots of “conservative” families.

  • Almacantar

    I’ve got to see this dynamic play out in real time since I started growing out my beard several months ago. Guys I meet are universally positive and rally around it as a symbol of manliness while girls, with a few notable exceptions, shit test me like crazy and try to get me to shave it.

    I admit to having had considerable skepticism about the existence of the female imperative but seeing how polarizing an overt symbol of masculinity, even one like a beard or mustache that’s been largely reduced to a caricature, is among the general population has been eye-opening to say the least. Good post Rollo.

  • Mark Minter

    A man hears from his doctor that he has only half a year to live. The doctor advises him to marry Susan Walsh, have sex with her every night, and read her blog, “Hooking Up Smart” every day, including all the comments, especially her replies.

    The man asks: “will this cure my illness?”

    The doctor answered, “No, but the half year will seem pretty long.”

  • Do cop glocks come in hot pink? | Malum Prohibitum Masculinity

    […] One of Tomassi’s recent posts over at The Rational Male discusses the changes in language that the feminine imperative has been […]

  • Massimo

    I want to thank you so much for having the honesty to create this blog. i am a woman and the mother of boys. i have always felt a pain knowing that they live in a world where they will probably never be allowed to be themselves. I have been ridiculed and dismissed by many people both Male and Female when i try to explain how i feel. i am not as able as you to put it into words but i will try. And if this comment is deleted due to being seen as some lunatic ramble then i understand completely.
    I heard a woman joke about how she didn’t need a Man because “she had a vibrator and knew how to use a lawnmower”. I have never come so close to punching someone. This ignorance burned me inside. How dare she. I know it was meant to be funny but the hidden truth is that allot of people actually believe that. Ok so i get that some women don’t need men to function in their daily lives but the thought of no men? That is scary.
    Imagine a world of only females. Truly, just think for a moment. For starters it would be a dull place if the existence of the Male form was never to be seen. What if the strength, beauty and wisdom of great Men were denied us? There are many, many traits that would be missed if the world was deprived of such a magnificent creature as the Human Male.
    As i watch my boys try to exist in this world where the Male of our species is constantly being degraded and undermined i fear that the true concept of Masculinity will become obsolete. It pains me to live in a world where our Men are fighting a constant battle to justify their existence. As if the very fact that they are Male is a dark blemish that should be corrected.
    How did we get here, how did the tables get turned so terribly? I’ll admit, throughout history Women have been depicted as the ones who have been the weaker sex, easily repressed and abused, Discouraged from being outspoken or assertive. But Women always knew their place. Always had a place, whether it be under the control or protection of a male or speaking up for feminism. How did we reverse that role so easily. Who decided that in order for Women to be strong Men must be weak? Is there no equality? Or is that an irrelevant casualty of female assertiveness?
    Tell me if i am wrong but it seems as if by Women standing up and taking their place in this world Men have had theirs ripped away from them. How do i teach my boys to stand up for themselves without being accused of bullying? How to i teach them to be kind and thoughtful without being a sook? If a Men shows creativity or compassion for another Man “he must be Gay” god forbid. If he shows anger or rage he must be violent by nature. If he opens a door for someone he is a chauvinist. If he doesn’t he is rude. Is it any wonder there is so much confusion?
    In a perfect world Men and Women would be appreciated for their differences and similarities and would be allowed to live, love and care without judgement.

  • Chadd

    I am a man. A brute if you will. Full of caveman goodness. Grrrr.

  • Gosh, Bitches SURE LOVE Reading about Themselves! ^_^ | Show Me

    […] Capable of Empathizing with Men * Man is Superior to Woman * Male and Female: Equal but Different * Feminists wish to Remove the Man * Marxist Dogma in Feminist Studies * Male Earning Power as it relates to Alphas * A Guide to […]

  • Feel Like a Wimp? Resources A.The Rationale Male & B. Victor Pride’s “Boot Camp of Ass Kicking and Manliness” Changes Things

    […] says has suddenly become one of the most popular blogs in the world. Nice. Rollo Tomassi over at The Rational Male knows his stuff. Congratulations to […]

  • idiotwriter

    When are we going to get the balance right? Never going to happen – it will keep swinging. On all levels of discrimination, if we could only learn to respect each others differences – Meet each other half way. We may get somewhere then. Seems selfish needs and ideals are just human nature – and they ooze out everywhere.

  • The Brand of Independence |

    […] to achieve its vaunted social equalism between the sexes. What feminine independence truly means is removing the man – independence from men. Feminine independence’s idealized state is one where women are […]

  • Secret of the Sperm Bank |

    […] and normalized that laid bare feminism latent purpose – strong independent women® could remove the man from the equation of effecting an optimal hypergamy, while at the same time effecting future […]

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

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 5,324 other followers

%d bloggers like this: