The Brand of Independence

independence

The archetype of the Strong Independent Woman® has been culturally reinforced over the last half century in virtually every imaginable media. Whether it’s Disney’s capable Princesses ready to save themselves from certain doom – as well as their quirky, hapless but handsome male heroes – or the now clichéd ‘tough bitch’ of action movies and video game protagonists who measures herself by how well she can kick ass and /or swear as the culturally contextual equal of “any man”. Her template-crafted character is strong, confident, measuredly aggressive, decisive (but usually only when shit gets serious so as to prove to the audience she’s ‘digging deep within herself to discover her yet unrealized resolve), judicious, loving to those loyal or dependent on her (immediate family, children and female friends), capable of solving problems with little more than the feminine intuition men magically lack – but above all, she’s independent.

As this cultural archetype is broadcast to society at large, the want then is to find parallels of this Strong Independent Woman® in the ‘real’ world. The media character is only marginally believable now thanks to endless revisions and replications, so we look for the examples of independent women equalling and exceeding the, paltry-by-comparison, achievements of the unenlightened ignorance of their male “oppressors.” High ranking company CEOs are usually the first rock star independent women to nominally shine (often undeservedly) in such a role, but then, by order of degrees, we can move down the economic social strata and cherry-pick or conveniently create the match of any mediocre man. As most men are, or have been conditioned Betas it’s not too difficult.

It really is the End of Men you see. You’re no longer necessary because, well now, there is nothing men can collectively and uniformly do that women cannot find some individual example of matching and / or exceeding. Women don’t need men anymore, they’re independent.

The Branding

If there’s one thing I know, it’s branding. The Strong Independent Woman® caricature has generously earned it’s registered trademark. I sometimes use that ® to emphasize a particularly long-evolved meme; social conventions so embedded into our cultural fabric that they literally have become their own brand. The Strong Independent Woman® is actually one the best examples of this branding. However, to really understand the gravity of so long a cultural branding, you must go to the root of how the brand of the independent woman was originally intended to evolve by the 2nd wave cultural feminists who spawned it. In a way it’s succeeded far better than any feminist of the period really had the foresight to expect.

An Independent Woman was to be independent of men.

While a lot of feel-good aphorisms like confidence, determination, integrity, and the like became associated with this desire for independence, make no mistake, the original long-term feminist goal of fostering that independence in women was to break them off into individuated, autonomous entities from men. That individuation needed to be as positive and attractive to women as possible, so a social pairing of that independence from men, with a sense of strength and respectability, had to be nurtured over time.

Since the beginnings of the sexual revolution, women were acculturated to believe they could ‘have it all’, career, family, a husband (of her optimal hypergamous choosing) and, if she were influential enough, leave some indelible mark on society to be remembered by for posterity. To achieve this she’d need to be an autonomous agent, strong, and above all independent of men. Women would embody and perfect the maverick individualism that men seemed to enjoy throughout history. If she couldn’t manifest ‘having it all’ then she was still, by male force or by personal choice, not independent enough to realize it. Of course, the irony of all this can be found in the marriages of virtually every ‘high profile’ feminist luminary of the time (all the way up to our current time) to the very powerful and influential types of men their stated independence was to emancipate all women from in order to truly be independent.

The Case Against Male Self-Esteem

Matt Forney’s lightning rod post, The Case Against Female Self-Esteem drew a frenzy of internet hate, but at the core of that post was a question that Strong Independent Women® and their male identifiers don’t like be confronted with; do they truly want independence from men? Do the men they want to be independent from even exist, or are they conveniently useful archetypes; vaudevillian chauvinist cartoons from the 50’s, planted in their heads, courtesy of the feminine imperative?

While I can’t endorse a message that would diminish anyone’s self-esteem, male or female, Matt’s post, even so much as suggesting the idea of limiting female self-esteem, uncomfortably turns a cultural mirror back on over 50 years feminist and feminized social engineering. For over the past 50 years the case against male self-esteem, with the latent purpose of emancipating women from dependence on men, began in earnest — not with some anger inducing blog post, but as a progressive social engineering that would run the course of decades to effectively erase men’s inconvenient masculine identity, or even memory of what that identity ever meant to men. The case against male self-esteem has been the social undercurrent of popular culture since the early 1960’s.

I think it’s important for red pill men to internalize the popular idea of feminine independence. The true message that the Strong Independent Woman® brand embodies is independence from you, a man.

Its latent purpose isn’t the actual empowerment of women, or efforts to bolster self-esteem, strength (for whatever loose definition seems convenient), confidence or any other esoteric quality that might flatter a feminine ego. Its purpose isn’t to foster financial or economic independence (as evidenced by ever evolving fem-centric laws, educational and financial handicaps), or religious social parity, or even efforts 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 autonomous, self-contained, self-sufficient and self-perpetuating single-gender entities.

If that revelation seems aggrandized and over the top, it should. It’s extreme, because the purpose itself is extreme. When you consider that the sexes have coexisted in relative gender complementarity, to produce our very proliferate species, for a hundred thousand years, the idea and implementation of separating the sexes into independent and solitary entities is extreme. Obviously effecting this independence is an impossibility for a race of social animals like human beings. We’ve relied on cooperative efforts since our tribal beginnings and the species-beneficial psychological hardwiring of that cooperation is one trait that made us so successful in adapting to changing, dangerous, environments.

For most manosphere readers (especially MRAs) I don’t think I need to illustrate the many manifest ways that women are dependent upon the men; if not men’s generated resources and provisioning, then certainly their parental investment, companionship, emotional and sexual interest. We’re better together than we’ve ever been apart – even when the ugly mechanics of hypergamy, or male aggression, or any number of negatively perceived gender dynamics prove useful survival traits for us, there is no true independence between the sexes. There is interdependence.

This is what equalism makes a mockery of. In its striving for a homogenous goal-state of androgynous gender-parity it fails to account for where the species-success that the complementarity of the past 30,000 years has brought us. From a heroic male perspective we generally accept that no man is an island, but feminism and equalism disagree – a Strong Independent Woman® is an island,..or she will be just as soon as a man gives her her due to become so.

4 2 votes
Article Rating

Published by Rollo Tomassi

Author of The Rational Male and The Rational Male, Preventive Medicine

Speak your mind

334 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
gregg
gregg
7 years ago

Feminism and women are stealing the identity of a man? What is this ..ehm…”masculinity”? Maculine “identity” and sense of woth is so pathetically linked to beinh recognized by women, that there is nothing to steal at all. Women are not robbing men of their “identity”, no one can rob you of something you never had in the first place. Happiness of man is the happiness of a slave. If woman recognizes him and allows him to SLAVE and sacrifice for her, than…welll..he feeels masculine and he is happy. What is happening now is that those MASTERS of men are telling… Read more »

TarzanWannaBe
TarzanWannaBe
7 years ago

Gregg, how cool. I see how you start with a completely mistaken (false?) premise. Once that’s outta the way, you go on to say whatever f-ed ideas you can imagine. I’m impressed and will adoprt your device the next time I see something that doesn’t suit me. Well done & Noted! I thank you.

earl
earl
7 years ago

“The true message that the Strong Independent Woman® brand embodies is independence from you, a man.”

And men should not beat themselves up…or do the worst thing they can do and take their lives because of it. If she wants to seperate herself from her biological imperitive…that is her choice. Normal men need to know they didn’t start this war and it isn’t their fault women are this way.

c2w
c2w
7 years ago

Brother, I just don’t see it. You call them archetypes and that their branding is broadcast, but I never see it. I consume tons of media and interact with lots of women on a daily basis. I don’t see what you’re describing. What I see are women who gasp a bit when I enter the room. I deal with women who defer at the slightest hint of dominance. Even the lady blogs I read them shouting from the roof about feminism, but then post gossip about the latest fashion or how to cook and land a man. Have you taken… Read more »

earl
earl
7 years ago

I think it should also be asked…why are societies promoting the seperation of the genders?

Divide, conquer, and enslave everyone that isn’t “in the club” is what I’m thinking.

Johnycomelately
Johnycomelately
7 years ago

The independence meme is no different from the old soviet ‘solidarity’ meme, same play book. Control the superior ethnic group through special rights for ethnic minority oblasts, same game except its genders instead of national groups.

anonymous
7 years ago

**GREEN PILL** Women want huge sex Women are gullible Women are crazy/emotional The culture myth of monogamy, ideal partner, romance are hogwash and only serve the society’s interest of corporate slavery. Women have these sexual triggers * Confidence * Body – Athletic, Body Language, Looks … * Brain – Arts, Words … You need at-least two to get fucked. Money/Power work as a compensation factor. My best friend is born handsome and brainy. He gets approached left and right. In college I hanged out with a depressed chain smoking freak. He was skinny but could talk his way through anything.… Read more »

Tilikum
7 years ago

^^^^omega/gamma alert^^^^

Paul Moore
Paul Moore
7 years ago

I think Earl and John are on the right track here. I have always been a bit of an agnostic, but have lately begun to recognize a presence of evil in the world so pure and single minded, that I am beginning to believe in Satan. This argues for the likely existence of God, whatever face we might put on him. Evil is anti life, nihilistic,and embraces anything that discourages creation, abundance,reproduction or longevity. God wants every species to go forth and multiply. Satan wants to burn it all down. Who wants men and women to love and make a… Read more »

WG
WG
7 years ago

The separation of women from men has been going on for decades. It is part of the atomization of Western man, of European man. The goal is to separate us from God, from woman, from family, from tribe, to take from us any shred of identity and connection, the things that make us human. You can blame feminists, Satan, you can point your finger at liberals, Jews, the elite class, whatever. In time we’ll know exactly what and whom we’re dealing with, as our enemies are starting to make themselves known. Personally, until such time as it becomes acceptable and… Read more »

earl
earl
7 years ago

Endure to the end and you’ll be saved.

It would be a lot easier to give up your humanity given the circumstances…but it is very important to not do it.

sunshinemary
7 years ago

What feminine independence truly means is removing the man – independence from men. Feminine independence’s idealized state is one where women are autonomous, self-contained, self-sufficient and self-perpetuating single-gender entities. Yes, just so. The problem is that women are actually miserable when they are independent. Yet they are so committed to the idea of it (which is really just rebellion against God and Natural Law) that they’ll double down in their pursuit of even more independence, apparently believing that if women can just squash men down a little more, then we’ll finally be free and happy. Such delusion. It’s like an… Read more »

M3
M3
7 years ago

I’ve already written a few posts on how absolutely non-independant women are from men in their daily lives. There are millions of men in the background doing the things required to keep their lives functional, like creating their electricity, pumping out the petroleum for both fuel and plastics, laying down asphalt and constructing highways, mining for metals to be turned into their chic kitchen utensils, and on and on. There was a show on TLC i belive that once ran with the premise of the women going away for a week and leaving the town for just the men to… Read more »

earl
earl
7 years ago

Whomever the enemies are…they delievered quite an apple to women through feminism. It’s hard for me to process how a woman tries so hard to go against her natural desires…other than through intense brainwashing and taking chemicals to do it. Like Forney mentioned…a woman without a man is dead. I don’t want to be seperate from women…even though I may be forced to. I’ve prepared myself to be content being single should it come to that…because I can provide, protect myself, and find the right people should I need help. I can handle it. What’s sad is that I’m the… Read more »

The Latin Buddha
7 years ago

I fear you’ve already seen this but this idea of misandry was talked about in Psychology Today and brought some interesting points:

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/rethinking-men/201010/why-some-people-have-issues-men-misandry

trackback

[…] them unfairly and not letting them have any fun.  They decided they would be much happier if they escaped from the farmer altogether and went to play with the […]

Anonymous
7 years ago

I believe you are missing a point to touch at a later post. There is past social engineering, which is true. It doesn’t speak of the context that women are actually fantasizing and projecting their idealized image of a strong man who’s too busy, too important. Their self-esteem goes so high, they use career to seem above it all. Their aren’t enough men who live in such height of power for all the 30k/yr office ladies who have their BF’s change their major to help their “career”. I believe there is social indoctrination, but the “strong” women, from the poor… Read more »

Bluedog
7 years ago

You know there are so many posts lately that have been excellent but I didn’t feel I had anything to add to the discussion so have not commented. This one is just ballpark, as-in: ball-out-of-the-ballpark, ballpark. This is why Rollo is a whole head above the rest in the ‘sphere. The question is a BIOLOGICAL one. It is not a political one. It appears in many respects to be a political one and however much I respect her, SunshineMary is getting it wrong in her last post, “Why do feminists tend to be emotionally volatile, obsessive, violent, and hysterical?” …… Read more »

Peregrine John
Peregrine John
7 years ago

I think c2w (and a couple others) have come very close to something that gives the lie to the whole charade every time: Whenever you have a (fictional, let us remember) Strong, Independent character, apart from all those other traits, remember that she is always, always, always attractive. Sexy, cute, fit, or whatever, she has that first hurdle overcome before she even begins. Even the ones that women will point out aren’t supposed to be pretty are compensated by suspiciously amazing hair. (They can do this dodge because having a lush mane doesn’t matter, doncha know, I can go pixie… Read more »

livingtree2013
7 years ago

Hello again Rollo, I want to start my comment/essay (sorry, I did intend for this to be much shorter…) by saying that I always find your articles interesting and thought-provoking, and you are intelligent as all get-out. But this one in particular has really brought to mind what bothers me about the men’s rights movement. In this article in particular, you seem to be plagued with a deep-seated need to justify men’s existence in the modern world, as do most men in the “manosphere”, because you are suffering from a sense of diminished importance. I will tell you, I definitely… Read more »

earl
earl
7 years ago

“Women aren’t entirely dependent on men for their existence anymore. They don’t NEED you, but they do still WANT you, they still struggle to gain your acceptance and approval. And as they get better and stronger, they want you to be better and stronger too, which you most definitely have not done. Can you explain to me why that bothers you so much? Can’t you appreciate that it is better for everyone to be wanted rather than needed? That “need” ultimately leads to disappointment? Is it that you genuinely don’t understand what it means to be “better and stronger” in… Read more »

livingtree2013
7 years ago
Reply to  earl

I agree, Earl, but keep in mind the momentum from feminism in its origins was not to compete with men, it was to obtain equal rights and equal value for our contributions. It just worked out that way because no matter how we tried, we did not succeed in obtaining the appreciation or value we sought for our contribution to society. If you are interested, do some independent research about feminism, without the goggles of pre-judgement, and you will see what I mean. So, in order to get what WE needed, which was respect, validation, freedom, and worth for those… Read more »

livingtree2013
7 years ago
Reply to  earl

Earl, perhaps you can elaborate on this for me.

The thing I find particularly difficult to understand about men is not their need to be needed, everyone likes that. It is the need for your value to be based on something exclusionary. Why does your worth have to come from something that ONLY men do? It is the thing about men that I find most perplexing.

sunshinemary
7 years ago

I’m probably a lot more liberal leaning than most people in the manosphere would suspect I am. Well, I’ve never thought you were a conservative. Nor was I particularly surprised that you were a praise-and-worship band guitarist; those guys are well-known as Jesus-brand playahs. @ Bluedog I don’t want to get into a long convo here about me personally because Rollo’s article is excellent and that is what should be discussed. However, since you called me out by name, I will respond. THIS is why I have stridently refused to be called a red pill or manosphere blogger despite sometimes… Read more »

The Burninator
The Burninator
7 years ago

You didn’t enter the workforce to compete mano-a-mano with men. You entered the workforce and immediately demanded that the workforce divest itself of the masculinity that has been in the male workforce realm for thousands of years. You demanded immediate neutering so that you wouldn’t feeeeeel bad. Mechanics with pin up posters, take them down or be fired (nevermind that women generally are not in the garage). Men joking and cutting up each other with off color language, gone – too offensive and might hurt somebody’s feeeeeelings. Had you come in and done your job and not demanded with belligerent… Read more »

earl
earl
7 years ago

Men aren’t supposed to respect women…men are suppose to love women. Part of love is providing and protecting. Women are supposed to respect men because we have these abilities. But thanks to feminism telling them they can do the same things (plus unfair advantages women get based off their gender)…they don’t respect men anymore. Women’s main function is to birth more humans…you need to be attractive to do that. That is why looks count the most for women. The second function when the looks fade is to have skills to keep the man happy and around. They would be…raising children,… Read more »

livingtree2013
7 years ago
Reply to  earl

Honestly Earl? Do you really think genuine love can exist without mutual respect? It is basely and fundamentally impossible, in my opinion. Well, I should say, it is only possible if your sense of love is derived solely from how well fed you are and/or how physically attractive your mate is. Well, I get that I may be in the minority for thinking so, but I could never love someone who didn’t respect me. So yes, consequently, I’ve stayed single quite deliberately for a long time, even though I am physically attractive and could have married several times over. Yes,… Read more »

earl
earl
7 years ago

And if you think as a woman birthing a human is considered less worthy than making it out on your own with a career…you have your priorities backwards.

You get to build the most fascinating thing in life…a human. A man can’t even come close to building something like that.

The Burninator
The Burninator
7 years ago

@earl “plus unfair advantages women get based off their gender” Aye, that’s the elephant in the room of “independent feminist!” isn’t it? Yeah, you’re “independent and empowered!” as long as you have reams of laws and rules to give you special privilege, special advantages in promotion and special treatment in the workplace, which silence and neuter men right out the gate. Put you “independent and empowered!” broads on equal legal footing with men (hey, wait, isn’t that the entire point of the original equal rights movement?!?) and you wouldn’t last a day and a half in our workplace, or more… Read more »

Martel
7 years ago

@ livingtree: “…men did not reciprocate at all to meet, or even bother to understand, our needs. Quite the opposite in fact. So you made your own bed. Your resistance to our evolution was what fueled our resistance against you.” So the guy who slaved his life away in a coal mine all day to provide FOOD for his wife & kids failed to meet their “needs”? Since when are food, protection, and shelter not “needs”? Actually, the problem is that we met such “needs” all too well. For the modern woman, all these buildings, grocery stores, and appliances just… Read more »

earl
earl
7 years ago

The realm of competition is among men…when you have fair rules. The men with the best skills and determination naturally make it to the top based off merit. Other men follow and that is how hierarchy is established. Alphas and betas when it comes to men relating to each other works well…because alphas need betas and betas need alphas. Women are to compliment men…they were never meant to compete. Every man needs to be an alpha to a woman. Women have been given a head start over men since birth and can still barely keep above water without taking drugs,… Read more »

Martel
7 years ago

@ Burninator: It always cracks me up when I hear the long list of things that women DEPEND on from men to be “independent”.

If you’re so damn “independent” you can buy your own damn birth control.

earl
earl
7 years ago

“Since when are food, protection, and shelter not “needs”?”

Yeah…those are in my top 5 along with water and transportation.

I have no idea what constitutes a need to a woman anymore.

Chris
Chris
7 years ago

Many women – mainly those new overachiever types do not have any sense or objective understanding of environment they are in – buildings build themselves, electricity comes by itself and man who lacks some qualities ( can’t do some of those things which really makes world going ) is a man to abandon. Just watch those TV series nowadays which are about NOTHING – just about feminine mindgames. On a same time there are still those traditional women grown up in families with values – they continue so and are women to be with. Keep away from the overachiever types.… Read more »

M3
M3
7 years ago

“since the founding of America at least, socially and economically valued disproportionate to women’s.” … “The work considered “womanly” in our society still has considerably less economic value.” Because men’s roles usually placed them in harms way. Economically, putting yourself at risk pays more. Just that simple. “Strong Independent Woman meme” you are complaining about here, was to adjust the measure of importance by giving women the confidence to believe they COULD be valuable. ” Women were always told they were valuable. In fact, we are coming to see just how valuable women’s work was now in an era of… Read more »

livingtree2013
7 years ago
Reply to  M3

Wow, M3…. where do I begin? I usually find it a chore communicating on this forum because the points of view are usually very one-sided, so I genuinely appreciate that you have at least acknowledged the value of “women’s work” in the education system at least. And I think you’re right, kids today are at a significant disadvantage because they have had less nurturing at home. Your point actually serves to underscore my point quite well. I’m sure you’d defiantly disagree with me on that, but indulge me please, if you will. Women have historically been viewed as nurturers, and… Read more »

M3
M3
7 years ago

*Taking care of home and children ISN’T…

earl
earl
7 years ago

I find it amazing how men respect women’s work…when they actually do women’s work like caring for kids and keeping up the house. However women don’t respect women’s work…they have to do what a man does.

In the male-female relationship an alpha takes care of a good beta…and a beta depends on the alpha. It’s a good functioning relationship. A relationship that consists of competing to be the alpha falls apart. That is man only territory.

Martel
7 years ago

@ Earl: To the modern female, since most all primary needs have been met, they can be conveniently forgotten, leaving them free to define “needs” as “wants”. I won’t argue with livingtree that “respect, validation, freedom, and worth” are wonderful things, but they’re not NEEDS, they’re wants, or at most secondary needs. I found it interesting to note that in the same comment, livingtree claims that they “still value []our contributions to society” AND that prior to feminism “men did not reciprocate at all to meet, or even bother to understand, our needs.” Does this means she values our post-feminism… Read more »

M3
M3
7 years ago

Next time little miss independent is eating dinner with her fine cutlery, she can think on this:
http://whoism3.wordpress.com/2012/08/29/another-man-bites-the-dust-but-dont-forget-to-mention-about-women-too/

livingtree2013
7 years ago
Reply to  M3

M3, I went to your link, it was interesting and all, but let me tell you something else to help flush out the one-sidedness. I work in heavy civil as a construction manager. At least 95% of the field workers here are male, and they do work very hard and we appreciate their efforts very much, the place wouldn’t get built without them all. But I can honestly, based on our stats, say that of the men and women I work with, the men are at least 95% more likely than the women in the field to engage in risky,… Read more »

Martel
7 years ago

M3: I read your post, but the only reason women aren’t as likely to die on the job is that men have frozen them out of industries like construction. The only reason more women aren’t dying on the job is the sexual discrimination of patriarchy.

Well, maybe not.

livingtree2013l
7 years ago
Reply to  Martel

Well Martel, I do work in construction, and I do know that there is a dearth of women in the field, and I also do know that the few women who do choose it really work hard and have to seriously modify their behavior in order to not attract a whole lot of gender-based harassment. There’s not a whole lot of women want to endure that every day. I suspect its much the same as men who try to enter female-dominated terrain. I am quite sure that women in these fields can be just as derogatory to men. It takes… Read more »

M3
M3
7 years ago

I’ve been having to say this refrain quite often lately.. Feminists are the biggest misogynists on the planet! THEY -are the one’s who devalue womens work and denigrate SAHM’s to go work for ‘money’ -are the one’s one think that dressing like a woman/feminine is degrading (madonna’s opening monologue to ‘what it feels like for a girl’ / the Iggy in a dress meme -behaving as traditional women is a sign of weakness (zoey dashanel)(sp?) Feminists absolutely hate femininity and will come back at you with “Oh, and what DOES a ‘real’ woman act/behave/dress like?’ They treat femininity and female… Read more »

M3
M3
7 years ago

Martel, ya, although i don’t think it’s them frozen out. It’s 2 fold. 1. They aren’t lining up for it in droves and 2. They cannot defeat the laws of reality. Let’s assume for arguments sake every woman were instilled with the pride to go sign up and fight for the US armed forces as is their right now. Front line baby, YES WE CAN. For starters, the US armed forces would never approve, because it’s tasked with WINNING, and even if you got 500,000 willing female candidates, most would not make the requirements. Only under the affirmative action/equality standards… Read more »

Martel
7 years ago

@ M3: You seem to be implying that women aren’t just dying for the chance to crawl around in sewers and coal mines. You must be sexist. Anyhow, I worked with quite a few women in the Army. Most (not all, I concede) had no interest in doing any of the dirty work and were experts at manipulating themselves into being tasked with organizing training manuals while the men froze our asses off outside working on maintaining all of our trucks. @ Rollo: I agree that the meme they’re promoting is a form of separatism, but I’m curious if you… Read more »

Not Carrie Bradshaw
Not Carrie Bradshaw
7 years ago

Oh, the irony !!! By buying into this Strong, indepdendent meme, women are buying into a collective mindset which is totally opposite to strong and independent. Do you see what I mean ? If I’m so strong and independent, why do I have to keep being told that I’m so strong and independent ? It is as if women believe if they are told this enough, then they will actually be like this.

M3
M3
7 years ago

I’m honored you singled me out.. I’ll tackle your diatribe when i get home. Someone else might do it in the meantime. But take heart and know that while i won’t speak for every man in the sphere, i am not hearkening for women to be thrown into the kitchen barefoot and preggo without rights, or taking away any of their rights. Only that they accept the outcomes of their choices and respect mens own choices to respond to women’s choices equally. If you’re trying to characterize me as some stone age patriarch who wants women without education or rights,… Read more »

BlackPoisonSoul
7 years ago

*meow* to the tree-hugger Girl at work today wearing a t-shit from a cement company: “Rock hard in no time”. I’m busting her chops, “it’s all about the sex” – “no, it’s a cement mixing company!” – “a likely story, we’re not reading that – you can’t hide it, it’s all about the sex!” And she’s laughing her head off all the time. “What’re you doing tonight, man about the town?” “I’m gonna get into the pimpmobile, gonna cruise around looking for some hoes. Play DMX ‘What these bitches want from a nigga’ at 120-decibels.” She’s laughing her ass off… Read more »

Martel
7 years ago

@ livingtree: I don’t agree with a lot of what you said, and you’re reply was directed to M3, but I’ll still take a shot. And I do commend you for rationally replying and not merely calling us names. Part of the reason men haven’t picked up the slack in child-rearing (resulting in the lack of nurturing for kids that both you and M3 agree is important) is that although women have decided to be high-powered themselves, their desire for high-powered career men hasn’t diminished in the slightest. There are stay-at-home dads, but their disrespect isn’t limited to other males,… Read more »

Martel
7 years ago

@ livingtree: I won’t deny any discrimination, but that’s most decidedly NOT the primary reason there are so few women in construction. Generally, women simply aren’t drawn to that type of thing. Are there some? Yes, but it’s pretty rare to find women spending Saturday afternoons working on their trucks, building a patio for fun, or getting wet over a new set of power tools.

earl
earl
7 years ago

Love is an action…respect is the reaction.

Mutual respect is just sitting around basking in the abilities of one another…with no real active agent. Sounds pretty boring to me.

I love women because of who they are…not what they can do. I find it admirable they have learned skills…but if they aren’t attractive or feminine to me, I’ll forget about them quickly.

Women should respect men for what we can do for them…because it has been proven time and again (http://therationalmale.com/2013/11/13/empathy/), they don’t love men for who they are.

livingtree2013
7 years ago
Reply to  earl

@ Earl, my question still remains though – why are we supposed to think working is masculine and nurturing is feminine? Is a woman who wants a career automatically unattractive to you? I have seen so many fathers be so nurturing that it makes me cry a little inside to hear men say that they aren’t good at it. And I have seen some terrible mothers in my time, while their kids fathers sit at the sidelines feeling left out. Women are less physically capable of jobs requiring strength. I know there are other minor differences, but that’s the primary… Read more »

livingtree2013
7 years ago
Reply to  Rollo Tomassi

Rollo, I really don’t understand what those links you posted have to do with anything on this thread, including your own article. The male boss one is so easy to debunk with logic that I’m kind of embarrassed that you posted it. Anyway, as I said before, there are many women who claim the label of feminist but aren’t, who have not made any contribution to the world besides their claim to its bounty, so I am not at all surprised that there are so many who aren’t satisfied with the emptiness of the outcome. Feminism is meaningless for them.… Read more »

strauMan (@strauMan)
7 years ago

“It’s my opinion that red pill awareness needs to remain fundamentally apolitical, non-racial and non-religious because the moment you associate the red pill with any social or religious movement, you co-brand it and the validity of it will be written off along with any preconceptions associated with that specific ideology.”

Mad props, Rollo. This is refreshing to hear.

Peregrine John
Peregrine John
7 years ago

Nicely put, Earl. I might have to keep that handy. Dang useful, especially in churchian contexts. livingtree, I’m intrigued to hear honest debate between you and the locals here. Thanks for keeping your cool and actually discussing like an adult. Far too rare in this world, and that’s a fact. I have but one small quibble, a pet peeve, really, regarding an early assertion: I did not make the bed I lie in. It was inherited. I did not exist before feminism, as the 2nd wave was well underway when I was born. I bear no more responsibility for treatment… Read more »

Fred Flange, PsyChoD.
Fred Flange, PsyChoD.
7 years ago

I will take a different tack, and address living tree’s arguments from a societal angle she’s not yet confronted. Some readers of a more right-wing bent may not like the politics of what follows, but I am not writing a political essay. In this I am totally with StrongMan and his cite to Rollo above about keeping it apolitical in discussing red-pill issues. I am going to talk about how things are run. And how “independence” ® can blow back on you. Right now I am just playing ball on her progressive-ist ball-field. Note that the following does not quarrel… Read more »

livingtree2013
7 years ago

I don;t disagree with anything you’ve said so far, Fred. That’s the whole point actually – many of the so-called “rights” granted to women can, and will, be easily stripped away by those that “gave” them to us, meaning they aren’t really rights at all, they are privileges granted by our rulers. Rights are permanent, immutable. Privileges are arbitrary, and revocable, based on someone’s good will. I cannot tell you how many times I’ve had this very same discussion with men who make this very same argument, only not in the context of feminism or women’s rights – it was… Read more »

Jeremy
7 years ago

An Independent Woman was to be independent of men. That’s the core perversion, convincing millions of women of their own victimhood for being born on one side of a sexually dimorphic species. You might as well argue that queen bees are victimized and oppressed by the worker bees, it would be just as ridiculous. When you read it back it reads like something a 7 year old boy might say about girls, inferring they have cooties or something. Nature dictates capability based on your genetics, ignoring these limitations is like attempting to ignore gravity when walking off a cliff. While… Read more »

livingtree2013
7 years ago
Reply to  Jeremy

For gods sake, this is getting exhausting. Jeremy, WE DON’T THINK WE DON’T NEED MEN!!! I’m getting tired of saying that. Will someone please tell me where and how it is that you all got the idea that women are actively trying to exclude men from society (I mean, not the shitty ones)? Because I just don’t see it, anywhere, except maybe as a defense mechanism in an argument. Independence for women meant we didn’t have to tolerate abuse anymore because we had the option to leave. It meant that if you left us, we wouldn’t be completely desperate. It… Read more »

livingtree2013
7 years ago
Reply to  Rollo Tomassi

Rollo, again I respectfully disagree. That is not at all what I think. There is no such thing as a blank slate where everyone is equal, and there are absolutely no feminists who think that. Well, there might be a few, but its certainly not part of a feminist “dogma” (of which there is none) that all feminists adhere to. That is not at all what equality and independence meant. But neither is there an all-inclusive gender proclivity. That is as ridiculous as saying there is a blank slate and everyone is the same. There is no impulse being over-ridden.… Read more »

Tam the Bam
Tam the Bam
7 years ago

Ok I tried. I really did.
But I think I’m going to need a diagram for this ..
“.. rides the cock of a total cunt ..”

M3
M3
7 years ago

Livingtree2013, I can see you got your hands full fielding others so i won’t address the really long post you sent towards me and just tackle the last one. I think it would be more constructive dealing with 1 issue at a time given the circumstances. You said: “the men are at least 95% more likely than the women in the field to engage in risky, overconfident behavior that gets them injured on the job” Male dominance hierarchy’s and risky behavior were evolved because risk =reward in regards to mating. He who dares wins. It is also reflective of general… Read more »

Tam the Bam
Tam the Bam
7 years ago

“It is because women have historically been entirely dependent on men for their survival ..

Still are. For everything. That’s the actual problem.
Denial.

Morpheus
7 years ago

Feminism has never been about true equality, it’s historically and provably been about restitution and retribution. There will never be a state of feminism when women in society at large say, “Ok, thats good enough, we have what we came for.” There is no achievable goal, because when that goal is met the impetus of feminism’s power ends. Feminism can only be perpetuated indefinitely so long as a default state of victimhood is perpetuated. Since feminism is founded on the pursuit of an unattainable equalism that is in conflict with what our biologies evolved in us, feminism is assured of… Read more »

LiveFearless
7 years ago

“…and that we’re worthless except for our looks. Do you deny that it is a reasonable thing to be angry about?” Be angry at the women that brand this “looks” driven culture. The culture creators at the most popular women’s magazine in the U S (listed below) … Let the list tell you which gender is responsible for the pressure to “look” certain ways. The magazine title implies current style for women, women control its content, not men. In my work I have to “look” a certain way. Women require it. I’m not angry about having to look fit and… Read more »

livingtree2013
7 years ago
Reply to  LiveFearless

Sorry, Livefearless, I lumped you in to the statement, assuming you are male. You maybe aren’t. Not that it matters, my point is the same.

BC
BC
7 years ago

Wow, if there was ever a cluelessly green LT that needed to be fragged…

Will S.
7 years ago

“It meant that if you left us, we wouldn’t be completely desperate.”

That wasn’t the case before, for most: there were fathers, brothers, uncles, other male relatives to which women could turn; there was the church, there were charities.

But feminists didn’t want to be dependent on others, so sought emancipation for women.

Simple as that.

infowarrior1
7 years ago

“It meant that if you left us, we wouldn’t be completely desperate.”

Hasn’t happened. So how can it be demonstrated. After all it may just be your personal opinion. And not hard facts.

infowarrior1
7 years ago

@livingtree2013

Check out the rest of the manosphere. Dig through our archives. And then get back to us. You have much to learn.

Andrews
Andrews
7 years ago

“For gods sake, this is getting exhausting. Jeremy, WE DON’T THINK WE DON’T NEED MEN!!! I’m getting tired of saying that. Will someone please tell me where and how it is that you all got the idea that women are actively trying to exclude men from society (I mean, not the shitty ones)? Because I just don’t see it, anywhere, except maybe as a defense mechanism in an argument. ” In your views there is no difference between men and women. And so you don’t ‘see it’. You have disconnected man from masculinity and woman from femininity. Everything is interchangable… Read more »

earl
earl
7 years ago

“why are we supposed to think working is masculine and nurturing is feminine? Is a woman who wants a career automatically unattractive to you? ” That is how our genders were built. Certainly a man can be nuturing and a female can work because we can adapt…but that is not our wheelhouse. And I have dated career women so that isn’t a dealbreaker…but there does seem to be something missing from them. “For me anyway, respect is not given to anyone simply for existing. It is not given out for an ability or accomplishment. It is given for the effort… Read more »

gregg
gregg
7 years ago

M: Women you are baaad to us, why do you not admire us anymore? You neeed us!!!! Can´t you see? W. But…ehm..we are strong and independent now. Haven´t you noticed it already? We can do quite good without you if necessary! M: What the fuck!!!! You DO need us, you know, we made everything in this civilization for you, without us you would be lost..you should be thankful to us. W. Noo, you opressed us and now we are freee. Therefore we are living on our terms now. But if you would do this aor that, or be …such and… Read more »

earl
earl
7 years ago

Birth control is the only reason why women have any sense of “freedom”. They have been blinded as much by the world as men have been lately.

Martel
7 years ago

The only reason we’re able to delude ourselves into thinking that gender differences are “minor” today is that prior generations took such differences for granted. In prior eras, it was considered downright foolhardy to send women into combat. We just somehow knew that not only is physical strength a factor, if hundreds of women get maimed in battle that it would hinder our species from reproducing more than if it happened to men. Having dad stay at home with the kids would have meant one less spear by the other men’s side on the hunt. Gender roles are what created… Read more »

Dr. Jeremy
7 years ago

Rollo, As always, your article is insightful. I get concerned with the limit to the progress the manosphere can make, however, because I think the discussions are missing a central concept – power. The goal of this branding, social engineering, and gender-role change you identify is the redistribution of various forms of power and influence within our society. For some reason, however, much of the manosphere’s writing and discussion does not seem to include that level of analysis. This is unfortunate, as feminist and women’s discourse is often focused on redistribution of power – and quite successful as a result… Read more »

Martel
7 years ago

Rollo, I just read the post you linked and agree with what you said in it. However, I would expand your definition of “power” somewhat to be more along the lines of power=the ability to have your will be done. This includes internal power over yourself (which you call Real Power) and external power over the world around you. Obviously, mastering the former is an essential component of attaining or being able to use the latter and is therefore the focus of your post. But t seems like Dr. Jeremy’s “power” refers instead to the latter “external power”, the ability… Read more »

The Burninator
The Burninator
7 years ago

“Feminism can only be perpetuated indefinitely so long as a default state of victimhood is perpetuated. Since feminism is founded on the pursuit of an unattainable equalism that is in conflict with what our biologies evolved in us, feminism is assured of a constant victim status.” Profoundly correct, it is heartening to see others who have grasped this and are not afraid to speak it. Victimhood, perpetual thin skinned demands for conformity and compliance, never being good enough even if followed, there is absolutely no end to the demands of women cum feminism. If they have to define their rage… Read more »

Martel
7 years ago

@ Burninator: “Victimhood” is defined primarily by feelings and only remotely by one’s actual circumstance. Thus, just like you say, somebody who wants to be a victim will always be one so long as they FEEL like one. It’s the requirement that all aspects of government, culture, and personal relations depend on feminine whims. Our feminist discussion partner in one of her comments said that feminism can end when women’s achievements are valued as much as men’s. What the hell does that mean? If they’re paid “the same” but not as “respected”, we’ll still needs oodles of laws and sensitivity… Read more »

Cylux
Cylux
7 years ago

BUT, at the deepest level, the social engineering does all that to take away some of men’s political, economic, and physical power – giving it to women. Meanwhile, that social change is also protecting and supporting womens’ sexual, reproductive, and social sources of power – without any reciprocal redistribution of some of that power to men (your “feminine imperative”). I’ve heard something similar to this before, a sort of long-view look which starts with the furious religious revival of the late eighteenth century, adopted as a system by the new ruling class (many of whom were methodists, quakers, etc) developed… Read more »

Chris
Chris
7 years ago

Cylux has very good point which I have not thought of. For example take office party events in corporate world – for many cases they are dominated by women and feminine chatter even if the office atmosphere is rather masculine in usual working time.

Morpheus
Morpheus
7 years ago

I know our esteemed host doesn’t like to get political, but the victim mindset on which he has such penetrating insights regarding feminists are NOT relegated to feminists alone; they’re endemic to ALL leftist interest groups. Recognizing this doesn’t necessarily make one a conservative, libertarian, or reactionary, but it does stand in opposition to the left. And not just the feminist left, either. Regarding “politics” I’d point out that feminism, the feminine imperative, and arguably some aspects inherent to the female condition tend to lean heavily towards totalitarianism. The blogosphere is a microcosm of that. Both this blog and JFG… Read more »

Will S.
7 years ago

As usually happens, the most argumentative female has exited and not returned. Figures. We should never bother trying to change their minds.

Tam the Bam
Tam the Bam
7 years ago

Tree “Anyway, when women started valuing their higher-level needs, needs beyond sustenance that is, they left the home to work, and assumed that their “loving” husbands would have no objection to them becoming happier. Except that didn’t happen.” Because what actually happened is that the women who had never had a choice, paired with men who had equally few choices, went from bundling up sheaves after the reapers and singling turnips 10 hours a day, to putting on warps and following weaving frames up and down the mill 12 hours a day (along with their kids). And by ‘eck, they… Read more »

Aristippus
Aristippus
7 years ago

Remember that silly little “Independent Woman” song a few years ago? It would be 100 times sillier if it were a burly construction worker singing in a gruff voice, “I’m an INdependent MAN! Look at ME! I buy my own CLOTHES. I buy my own stuff. I’m an independent man! I don’t need no woman to buy me things. I’m a big kid look what I can do! I can wear big kid pants too! I’m an INdependent MAN!” The very fact that a song about an independent woman is taken seriously while the same song about an independent man… Read more »

furiousferrett
7 years ago

So basically LivingTree wants to minimize as much as possible her own gender’s unique struggles and problems through legislation and societal change. That’s it in a nutshell. She wants women to not have to compete in the traditional way of resources by getting commitment from high value men because women like her can’t. So she rigs the game for middle class + women at the expense of everybody else. It’s just complete bullshit. It would be like a guy screaming it’s unfair that I don’t get approached by hot women. This is an injustice. I demand a remedy for this… Read more »

livingtree2013
7 years ago
Reply to  furiousferrett

Again, Furiousferrett, your hostility is getting in the way of your ability to have rational discourse. Ironic, since this page is called Rationalmale. I’ve seen very little rationality here so far. But maybe rational discourse isn’t the point here, you just want to rant. I have a job, at which I use a computer intermittently. At the end of the workday, I go home, at which time I STOP PAYING ATTENTION TO A COMPUTER, AND START PAYING ATTENTION TO MY HEALTH, MY MAN, MY FRIENDS, MY FAMILY AND MY HOME. I’m not responding to you fast enough to your insults????… Read more »

DeNihilist
DeNihilist
7 years ago

let the duck explain it,

DeNihilist
DeNihilist
7 years ago

The Duck predicted this eons ago.

Tin Man
7 years ago

Actually, this is how I feel, when we get into these debates/discussion and various knitting circle chat sessions…

Willy Wonka: Once again you really shouldn’t mumble, ’cause it’s kinda starting to bum me out.

Or…

Ricky Bobby: Okay, Glenn. Everything cool that Susan said, you wrecked it.

I know we can’t legally keep the woman out of the clubhouse, but do we really need to encourage them??

Tin Man
7 years ago

Now, there is one more comment I want to make – because even even if there is a perception of something “bad” – nothing is 100% that way… We, within the US, have enjoyed being at the top of the economic food-chain, that may disappear over the next few decades, but we are still at the very top today. We would not have achieved this position without the raise of the FI – because being at the top means being a nation of consumers – and without woman, and their buying power (or utilizing the buying power of their Husband/SO/BF).… Read more »

livingtree2013
7 years ago
Reply to  Tin Man

Excellent point Tin Man, you’re entirely correct about the economic food chain and our contribution to it. Think America would be where it is today if it hadn’t been for the economic freedom of women? Not a chance. There’s yet another excellent reason to value women’s contribution equally – if you pay them better, they WILL SPEND MORE MONEY IN THE ECONOMY, and less of it will be yours. Probably unsustainable in the long run, but still…

The Burninator
The Burninator
7 years ago

If you only look in closets, then sure. The garage, the gun safe, the basement workshop, the tool shed, the computer room, these are the places where men purchase and have primary economic influence. And while I won’t deny that you’ll find the occasional $200.00 pair of shoes in a woman’s closet on occasion, I’ll counter with you’ll rarely find a firearm in a man’s gun safe less than $300.00. Marketing is clearly directed towards women now as primary purchasers, which is silly. It’s as if, somehow, if women were not around, men would not buy groceries or clothes. I… Read more »

livingtree2013
7 years ago
Reply to  The Burninator

Burninator, I doubt that Tin Man intended to say that without women spending, the country would have plummeted into financial ruin. Men have always spent lots of money, but on considerably smaller range of products in comparison to women. This is elementary stuff!

Ask any CEO of any company what would happen to their bottom line if women reduced spending…. I’m pretty sure there aren’t too many who would say they’d want that to happen, nor would very many shareholders in those companies.

trackback

[…] potentially limitless supply of willing Derb Labourers. Usually, and even though she is obviously a Strong Independent Woman, the Girl only makes use of this when she needs a Fire alarm fitted, she needs the Power Steering […]

The Burninator
The Burninator
7 years ago

As an aside, props to Rollo for keeping this place censorship free. It’s good to see feminists shot down argument by argument as opposed to seeing her disappeared by the site owner. Truth doesn’t need to hide behind censorship and pre-selecting the audience through nerd rage-bans, and Rollo recognizes this.

The young lady, it appears, has retreated in all due haste. Well done sir, well done.

Dr. Jeremy
7 years ago

@ Rollo Thank you for pointing out that past article. I have not made my way through your earlier archives, or your new book yet (congrats btw). I look forward to your further thoughts on the topic too. @ Martel Yes, I am indeed speaking about power in terms of the ability to influence the behavior of people. That can include “internal” influence over a person’s own behavior, but is usually focused more on “external” influence over the behavior of others. Although, as you and Rollo point out, it is often a good idea to develop internal power first in… Read more »

livingtree2013
7 years ago
Reply to  Dr. Jeremy

Dr. Jeremy, I enjoy your comments greatly, you seem to have a rare ability to converse intelligently even when you don’t necessarily agree with the person you’re talking with, and for that I thank you. You hit on something that is very important – women do tend to focus on the areas of the power balance where they are lacking. As do men! The comments on this article, most of Rollo’s other articles, and all but a few of the men’s rights pages I’ve read, and many MANY conversations I’ve had with male friends, prove to me that far too… Read more »

The Burninator
The Burninator
7 years ago

“Independence for women meant we didn’t have to tolerate abuse anymore because we had the option to leave. It meant that if you left us, we wouldn’t be completely desperate. It meant we didn’t have to cling to you guys for support. It meant we could make decisions about our own lives. It meant we didn’t have to be “seen and not heard”. It meant we didn’t have to be a slave to a stereotype anymore. It meant we could be self-actualizing if we wanted to. It meant we could pick and choose which man we wanted to mate with.… Read more »

livingtree2013
7 years ago
Reply to  The Burninator

Hardly, Burninator. Have you talked to any real women, maybe more than just your grandma, about how their lives were as children and young women in the 50’s? Discrimination may have been legislated away in the early 20th c, but it more than certainly was not actualized. Life in the 50’s was very very restrictive for women, but that was mostly due to family guilt, social ostracizing, and other methods of oppressing self-confidence in girls. Girls were meant to marry, that is all. Education and self-fulfillment? Have your fun right up til you marry, then forget all that fun. You… Read more »

Dr. Jeremy
7 years ago

@ Cylux Thank you for that historical social and political context. I tend to focus on the social changes happening now and the effect on power balance. It is good to remember though that what happens today is always built on a history of social change too. I will be sure to add that to my analysis. @ Will S. In my experience, the most argumentative female exits and does not return when she realizes you understand that SHE is trying to change YOUR mind. Until then, if she is unreasonable, her aim is simple – argue and work to… Read more »

livingtree2013
7 years ago
Reply to  Rollo Tomassi

Ah, I think I see a point in your comment, Rollo, that had previously escaped me. The power that men have you think is earned, whereas the power women have is inherent with their gender, not earned at all, and thus not worthy of any sort of respect (which we agree is earned). And so therefore to make it seem like a fair deal for you, you place the “attractiveness” criteria upon us, so it almost seems as if we earned the right to be the arbiters of sex in this society, but you know that even if we weren’t… Read more »

tom
tom
7 years ago

brave new world

Martel
7 years ago

@ Tin Man: I wouldn’t be surprised if much of the economic benefit you described wouldn’t be easily countered by our unsustainable consumer debt. And that’s without the massive student loan debt, much of which was spent on useless degrees for women to “find themselves” while making college more expensive for men who would actually study something useful. @ Burminator: Censorship-free is definitely best. Trolls can be annoying, but handle them correctly and they’ll usually go away of their own accord. livingtree was better than most, but she was obviously in way over her head. We can hope that in… Read more »

livingtree2013
7 years ago
Reply to  Martel

Hey, Martel, I’m not retreating. The more you guys antagonize me, the more I want to stay. If you WANT me to leave, you can just say so anytime! But I am actually enjoying the conversation, and yes I have learned things (which was my purpose for coming). I hope that, too, you have learned some things from me, but I’m not holding my breath. Here are a few things that you could learn, in response to your last post about all the dumb girls taking useless studies after having been admitted by lower standards: http://www.iza.org/conference_files/Transatlantic_2013/dickson_l8832.pdf http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/court-prepares-affirmative-action-decision-softer-standards-men-182205509.html http://people.mills.edu/spertus/Gender/pap/node7.html http://paa2010.princeton.edu/papers/100328 I… Read more »

M3
M3
7 years ago

“As an aside, props to Rollo for keeping this place censorship free. It’s good to see feminists shot down argument by argument as opposed to seeing her disappeared by the site owner.”

What? Did you think you accidentally wandered onto HUS?

The Burninator
The Burninator
7 years ago

If women stopped spending on non-female specific products then men would pick up the slack (food, clothing, furniture, etc). We enjoy eating too and most of us, contrary to the media’s attempt to paint us as brutes, do in fact enjoy a well kept house. No doubt women spend (understand, I’m not denying that), but to mark them as primary consumers to market to for everything, even extending that now to utility trucks and tools (where, sorry, they are NOT the primary spenders), is silly. Hell sister, you can’t even watch a commercial for a sporting goods store that sells… Read more »

livingtree2013
7 years ago
Reply to  The Burninator

What, you are actually BLAMING women for marketers wanting to sell their shit to us?? Wow.

I know a ton of ladies who’ve gotten into hunting, and not usually of their own accord – their husbands got them into it. So congrats to you, team!

livingtree2013
7 years ago
Reply to  Rollo Tomassi

Yah no, I’m sorry but I have to respectfully disagree with you there Rollo. If “nature” were the arbiter, the standard wouldn’t be different culture by culture.
http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/201010/the-truth-about-beauty

You want women who look trim and fit because you life in the land of plenty. As I keep reminding you.

The Burninator
The Burninator
7 years ago

Please, spare me the “We were all victims in the 50’s” caricature. Yes, I’ve spoken to women from then. They were/are well adjusted and love their husbands and certainly don’t sit around griping about how “oppressed” they were back then. You know why? Because they were not. Every single thing you gripe about was already taken care of, as already noted. I refuse, honestly, to even entertain having the same shaman totem being thrown in my face as being taken seriously. My great grandmother did quite well on her own, after her husband died when her kids were little, and… Read more »

livingtree2013
7 years ago
Reply to  The Burninator

@Burninator, thats cute that you think I’m a “young” feminist. I’m 45…
My mom was a 2nd wave feminist from the 60’s though, of the moralist variety.

I can’t wait for the insults on that one!

livingtree2013
7 years ago
Reply to  The Burninator

Besides the fact, Burn, you totally ignored the point of what I said, which was that it wasn’t a legal oppression that women in the 50s labored under, I don’t think there’s been any lack of legal freedom for women for a very long time in the free world. It was strictly social oppression. Of course I know that there was, and still are, lots of people (even women!) who love their stereotypes and love the moral guidance of the church or their peers telling them how to behave, and they will fight tooth and nail to hold onto them… Read more »

The Burninator
The Burninator
7 years ago

@M3

“What? Did you think you accidentally wandered onto HUS?”

Don’t mean to go too off topic, just curious what “HUS” means/stands for?

Martel
7 years ago

To supplement Burminator’s point, we remember only the uhappy oppressed women on the 1950’s, forgetting entirely that the majority were a hell of a lot happier than most women today. There have been women (& men) who’ve had it rough during every era of history, and the unhappy ones are those we’re inclined to emphasize. Grandma who absolutely loved staying home baking cookies has been washed down the memory hole. I obviously can’t spek for Rollo here, but in answer to your response to him, we don’t consider women de facto undeserving of respect. Nonetheless, there are ways in which… Read more »

livingtree2013
7 years ago
Reply to  Martel

Ya Martel I totally get that, and I appreciate you’ve taken the time to talk rationally with me. I wish I had the time to respond to more of your points, but most of your comments (and the comments of all the others here) are so loaded with things I’d like to talk about with you that I can only cherry-pick because, like I said – I’m working here! Answering every point you guys make would be more than a 24-hr a day job! I’m overwhelmed. If you have any specific points you’d like to talk about (calmly please!) please… Read more »

livingtree2013
7 years ago
Reply to  Rollo Tomassi

Hmm, another interesting point Rollo. I go back to my earlier point about earned respect, and I am of the opinion that ALL respect must be earned, you shouldn’t just get it because you exist. But I will argue, as a woman who has had her books carried and who has also earned real respect, that I know now that what you were trained to do was not respect women. You were trained to coddle them. I don’t know who gave you said training, but they were wrong to do so, because it is neither respectful nor does it foster… Read more »

The Burninator
The Burninator
7 years ago

False. I’m blaming feminism for creating a culture where the only ones deemed important enough to market to are women, despite all evidence that, hey, men spend big money too. And “I know a ton of ladies” doesn’t mean that they dominate a specific realm. That’s the problem here, you see it only through femi-glasses. Hunting is a male dominated milieu, regardless of how many “tons” of women you know doing it. Always has been, at least here in these united States. I can count on one hand the women hunters I know, but cannot count on all of my… Read more »

livingtree2013
7 years ago
Reply to  The Burninator

Well, whatever Burn, I think you’re just choosing to see as a negative what really isn’t. Marketers will do anything to sell more stuff.

Does having a female in a commercial selling hunting gear make men not want to buy it? No. Does it make women want to buy it? Maybe. So did it cost anything? No, it in fact increased the potential sales market simply by deviating from an established stereotype.

What company’s shareholders wouldn’t love that? And that group, not feminists, is who these companies care about appealing to.

1 2 3
334
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x
%d bloggers like this: