I found this letter being criticized over in r/feminism. It's good see that some people really get it.
shiningpearlsofsomething.blogspot.com/2012/09...
shiningpearlsofsomething.blogspot.comPosted Dec 19, 2012, 12:45 AM UTC
157292
shiningpearlsofsomething.blogspot.comRather unfortunate that the article seems to paint all women like this, but it does criticize the feminist culture of entitlement quite nicely.
34
You think the threat of family-court-imposed devastation doesn't affect all relationships? Even with "good" women?
Get real.
11
It's not unfortunate, it's necessary. Would you gable away your life savings if it meant you could win? Sure not all women are that way and whatnot, but it seems to be that enough of them match the description and the shit people are trying to avoid are life changing.
Had a kid you didn't want? Too bad.
Your wife cheated on you? Too bad.
The kid isn't yours? Too bad.
There's no incentive to risk it. At best you'll have a happy life like everyone told you that you would, at worst you'll commit suicide or spend your life in prison for "contempt of court".
4
It's not unfortunate, it's necessary.
Do I really need to point out to you why many men don't want to 'man up' and get married and have kids? You have just reduced them to walking wallets.
1
[deleted]
3
You say tomato, I say tomato....
0
Most 20-something women are like that.
4
Most of the women that I have met at college and brought up feminism with have been rather indifferent towards it or outright against it. To say that "most women are like that" suggests that you haven't met too many women, at least to me.
6
Just because they don't feel the need for "Feminism™" doesn't mean they haven't internalised the entitlement culture of modern feminism (and advertising).
2
Which college?
1
I browse my university's subreddit, so if you're that curious you can find out.
I'm also an engineer, and most of my female friends are also engineers. So perhaps being around guys all of the time has made them think like a guy [half sarcastic hypothesis/]
2
evidence?
5
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/jul/26/women-wellbeing-unhappiness
This latter is key to the work of another American psychologist, Jean Twenge, whose most recent work has been to analyse what she describes as a "narcissism epidemic" in the US that is disproportionately affecting women. Her meta-analysis covered 37,000 college students. It found that in 1982, 15% got high scores on a narcissism personality index; by 2006 it was 25% – and the largest share of this increase was women.
20
[deleted]
7
That's a really interesting article. The comments aren't bad either.
2
This is like asking for evidence that most evangelical Christians are uptight about sex. It is not a matter amenable to easy proof one way or the other.
That might make it silly for DiaboliAdvocatus to make his statement, but it makes it still sillier for you to ask for substantiating evidence.
1
pish-posh
0
This is the best thing I've read all day. Every relationship I've been in, the problems are always entitlement. I like how she calls it the Disney Princess generation, I've gotta use that.
33
An Aussie psychologist calls them the Princess Bitchface generation. Much more apt I feel.
16
Yeah, I am keeping that one too.
9
I saw some good points, but a lot of overgeneralization and oversimplification. I don't think this paints the right picture of the situation. Also :
sleeping around hurts a woman's ability to commit to marriage far more than it hurts a man's.
Come on! Let's not stoop to that level of unsubstantiated drivel! Either we fight for equal rights and the discontinuation of harmful stereotypes, or we're making our cause as unjust as modern feminism.
21
It's not unsubstantiated. There is data to show that the more sexual partners a woman has had, the greater the chances of divorce. Not so for men.
19
But the evidence is sexist!
/s
12
there is data to show that the more sexual partners a woman has had, the greater the chances of divorce
source?
6
I've seen links to the study on both dalrock and heartiste. check there?
3
thanks!
Edit So far these particular authors don't seem very credible as sources, since they are both bloggers of a particular ideological bent, rather than a more dispassionate/scientific perspective. I'll still read them since I'm interested, but I was hoping more for a link to something by a scientist/social scientist so I could examine the merits of a direct, objective, peer reviewed study on the topic.
2
It's in the comments to the article: http://socialpathology.blogspot.com.au/2010/09/sexual-partner-divorce-risk.html
Follow the link.
1
Thanks
edit This website is interesting to read, but not entirely convincing, since showing correlation (which the study appears to do) is different from demonstrating causality (which is not summarized on this website). It's too bad one has to pay for scholarly article to assess it firsthand. The website just doesn't elaborate on the study's explanation for why such a pattern exists. Saying "there is a correlation between female promiscuity and divorce, therefore female promiscuity increases the likelihood of divorce" is faulty reasoning - there's not enough info on this website alone to support that claim. It's a little like saying, "A large percentage of prisoners are black, therefore being black causes a person to be a criminal" - the conclusion doesn't automatically follow from the premise and can't be touted as fact since so many other variables are unaccounted for.
2
Given any hypothesis X, there exists data that corroborates X. That is why it is a very common occurence in science that some data set shows tenuous links between variables that are later refuted. That is just the nature of data. What counts is what the preponderance of evidence shows, to what extent the hypothesis has been tested properly, and to what degree there exists a consensus among those with the qualifications to judge the evidence. As far as I know, none of the above factors point to the veracity of the hypothesis that "pair bonding” works the way you are claiming. Is there maybe a metastudy or something that you could point me to?
1
The only study dealing with this question that I'm aware of is linked here.
When there are multiple studies, we can have meta-studies. I can't see this particular issue attracting much government funding (or attention from female-dominated social science academia), can you?
1
But she is right. The sexual revolution is the worst thing that has happened to modern women. Sex was a huge bargaining chip for women and reserving that power for marriage meant men had to commit to providing for women.
Now that it is easy to get sex without commitment men can live perfectly content "bachelor" life-styles.
15
It sounds like you're making the assumption that all women want marriage, and all men need to be "trapped" into it.
Personally, the thought of using sex as a bargaining chip grosses me right the fuck out. I am glad I no longer have that power.
I spent my 20s having sex when I wanted, and I don't regret any of it. I'm happily married now, and I didn't give him my "leftovers" (ew), I gave him my whole self, informed by all the experiences I had in my life, including all that great sex. He was having sex all that time, but nobody's telling me I got "sloppy seconds."
I didn't have to trick my husband into marrying me. We'd already been having sex for years! I didn't need him to provide for me because I can already provide for myself. We entered into marriage as equals, so that each could support the other when they falter, so that we would have a recognizable union, so that we could get sweet tax breaks.
9
It sounds like you're making the assumption that all women want marriage, and all men need to be "trapped" into it.
As a group? Yes.
Individual results may vary.
2
Gross. What a fucked up attitude.
1
It sounds like you're making the assumption that all women want marriage, and all men need to be "trapped" into it.
No. Your marriage may be an egalitarian marriage. DiaboliAdvocatus did not make this claim about all women or all men.
1
"the thought of using sex as a bargaining chip grosses me right the fuck out."
But that's exactly what all women do. Would your husband be with you right now if you had a dick instead of a vagina? Some how, I bet you aren't dating a fat unemployed homeless man with a mental disorder. Oh no, he must be 'leveraging' his looks and job and health. God forbid you consider that.
"I didn't give him my "leftovers""
Yes you did. He would have snatched up a less-used girl if he could have. Likewise, you could have found a better man if you had not slept around or married earlier. You may whine about 'but I love the guy I am currently with an am very happy' but that's just your brain rationalizing. Doesn't matter how you feel.
"He was having sex all that time, but nobody's telling me I got "sloppy seconds.""
Men and women are different. Sleeping around increases the value of a man, regardless of what everyone says. Other males may call them 'womanizers' or 'chavs' or whatever, but that's just a version of male-slut shaming since they don't like the competition. Even women that say they don't like men who sleep around tend to.. GASP.. sleep with those exact same guys! Fancy that.
"I didn't have to trick my husband into marrying me."
I feel bad for him, either way. Either he's with a low-value woman or he's going to get ass raped in the divorce courts. Such is the situation for the western male.
0
You live in a fantasy world...
0
Wow, dude.
I know you're trolling and you want to get a rise out of me, but reading what you wrote just made me feel so bad for you.
You're so dead-set on believing that all sluts must suffer, that women will eventually pay, somehow, for sleeping around. That's generally the sort of stuff you hear from people who are upset that nobody is sleeping with them.
Kind of a "sour grapes" thing, right? Instead of doing any serious introspection about yourself, it's easier to tell yourself that all these slutty women, having sex with everyone but you, are going to "get theirs" and can't possibly experience happiness.
Do you really think that the only people who can be happy together are pure, virginal, submissive young women, and dominating alpha males with good jobs?
If I saw the universe the way you do, I'd probably be just as pissed as you are! You've drawn such a tiny little circle around your definition of happiness, it's a wonder anyone can fit in it.
Me? I'm going to keep on hanging out with my husband. Despite my besmirched honor and low value, he seems to be enjoying himself. I know I am. Maybe I just don't know how good it would have been if I'd just kept my legs closed and waited for a wealthy provider to come along, but hey, I guess we can't have it all!
Good luck on your journey. I hope your wounds heal enough to let you get close to someone someday. You have my pity.
-1
dammit.
well I sure fucked that one up.
Think it's too late to change her mind?
4
The only thing that would change her mind is the Ludovico technique.
1
Correction, SOME men can live that life. Remember that only a small percentage of men are really getting laid like rock stars in hookup culture. Looking around my various social circles I'd say it's less than 10%.
1
I understand your criticism, however, I would encourage you to do some reading on the bio-chemical basis for pair bonding in humans.
Not surprisingly, the bio-chemistry works slightly different in male and female brains. Female brains, however, have a harder time resetting to the "able-to-pair-bond" state in women with a string of multiple partners and a history of promiscuity. The good news, however, is that both male and female brains CAN reset! It requires a period of abstinence, but its entirely possible (not easy) for a person to regain his/her ability to attach to another.
That doesn't excuse male promiscuity (which still negatively impacts the male's ability to pair bond) but it does explain why its worse for women to be promiscuous. Her physical and mental health can be severely eroded by promiscuity, which is bad for her, her potential offspring and her potential mate.
2
sleeping around hurts a woman's ability to commit to marriage far more than it hurts a man's.
Please keep to the letter and not the comments, thank you.
-9
Well, I think it is fairly relevant, since the comment was made by the person who wrote the letter, expounding upon the letter.
She is, as far as I can see, condoning her son's uncommitted sexual relations with other women, while at the same time openly calling women who do the same thing "sluts". The above is the explanation she gave. The double standard is atrocious, and the explanation pseudoscientific and wrongheaded. Spreading this kind of material around is a way of discrediting ourselves, not furthering the MRM cause.
19
Where does she condone anything?
1
You call the double standard atrocious. Why is that?
The double standard exists because men (for the most part) don't want to settle down with a woman who has been fucked by a lot of guys. We have the right to decide what we want in a partner so you can't really argue that this is wrong. While women (for the most part) are strongly affected by groupthink and tend to find men who get a lot of attention from other women attractive. Ergo, if I bang mad chicks, other women will want me even more. Again, women have the right to decide who they want to fuck, whether it's me or the 40yo virgin, and you can't really judge them either.
So what exactly is wrong with this double standard from a moral standpoint and what do you propose to do about it?
-1
Are you serious?
The double standard exists because a lot of men are sexists who judge women for having sex but simultaneously want to have sex with them. And I can most certainly judge you for such a hypocritical stance, because it simply means you haven't bothered to engage in the most elementary of critical thought processes on the subject. You throw around bullshit like 'women are affected by groupthink' (implication that men are rugged individualists, nice bio-truth there buddy, next you'll be telling me that men are violent sociopathic rapists... oh no wait you don't like bio-truths... oh wait do you? what?!) without any justification and simply use it to back up crass misogyny. Ugh.
4
Seems you accidentally stumbled on the phenomenon known as Preselection. How you got there is a little odd, but it is indeed something real. They've studied it in grouse, humans, and a variety of other species. The grouse was humorous. They had a male and a bunch of females in a pen, but the females ignored it. Researchers then took a stuffed female grouse and placed it near the male. The females then wandered over and started displaying mating signals.
With the human study, a college team took pictures of men and had women rate the men on a scale of 1 to 10 in looks. They then took the same pictures of the men, this time with pictures of women smiling/facing the men, and had women rate the men's looks again. The second time around the men were rated on average 1-1.5 point higher.
2
Commenting on your own work doesn't "expand" on it. In fact commenting on the same forum as your work doesn't mean you're expanding on it either. Let's just agree to disagree.
-10
Not "expand". "Expound" - as in explain. Read my edit above.
9
agree to disagree
Said by thr person who was right... Never
-1
A wonderful read. I was afraid that the lady wouldn't be able to back up what she was saying but after reading the comments I saw that her knowledge was well established.
16
Notice how, instead of addressing the criticism in the letter, the self-proclaimed feminists are attacking the mother.
Feminism! /i
13
That's the main feminist tactic, attack the person personally and not their arguments.
15
Metaphorically speaking, Feminism operates on the heart, not the brain. Give the MRM a few decades of unquestioned "correctness" and outlandish victories and it might be in the same place.
13
I doubt it. Women are taught that emotional arguments are acceptable and in fact powerful against men. Men on the other hand are taught that their feelings are irrelevant.
Even the Feminists know this, it is why they attack logic and fact based arguments as inherently male.
11
Mansplaining, otherwise known as logic and rational argument.
11
I've often wondered what will happen to the MRM when it is no longer needed. I truly hope it doesn't turn into another feminism.
7
That is the general fate for any organization that has achieved its goals.
Either fade away or repurpose. And to have success typically takes time, organization, and money. So by the time such groups should fade away they now have a lot of momentum to keep them going.
3
[deleted]
1
Or not. If you have a logically defensible position, you will be fine, regardless.
Feminism isn't logically defensible at this point. It is religious dogma; not to be challenged.
Its easy to defend logically if you actually really want equality.
2
To be fair, I found very few arguments and a lot of allegations. I think her depiction of the women of today, although containing a grain of truth, is not very accurate. At the very least she should restrict herself to modern feminism which, thankfully, does not comprise all women. I find her piece more emotional than argumentative.
6
That's the main progressive tactic.
FTFY
1
5
Notice how in "addressing" it, the first actual thing you say attempts to dismiss it before even reading it with the whole "psh, you're a cis-white-male, we've heard it before".
but there is a legal system in place to make sure that children are raised in an appropriate way by the appropriate people.
How convenient that the most appropriate people so often happen to be women.
You were raised in a culture that permits, even encourages, women and girls to always push for more. Not necessarily to do more or earn more, but to demand more and to expect more.
Yes, because it's a backlash against the culture that forbid and discouraged women and girls to push for or expect anything but the crassest misogyny. Women have every right to demand and expect more until there is equality.
Really? You think you are entitled to more without actually doing more? You agreed with that?
You were punished far less severely for your transgressions than were your male peers. The fuck kind of bullshit is this? Source
It's pretty much proven that there's a huge gender disparity in the sentences that are dished out for similar crimes. Google it.
9
Notice how in "addressing" it, the first actual thing you say attempts to dismiss it before even reading it with the whole "psh, you're a cis-white-male, we've heard it before".
That was tongue in cheek, and I had read the whole thing twice before writing my rebuttal, but the sentiment remains. Because I've heard it so many hundreds of times before. I'm a dude and this kind of shit is so tired it's barely even funny anymore. There's this idea that it's somehow revolutionary and edgy to hold opinions like this, when in reality these are very, very old ideas that most us had hoped we'd never have to ridicule again.
How convenient that the most appropriate people so often happen to be women.
The system varies from country to country, and in a lot of countries it leaves a lot to be desired and can and should be modified to be more fair and more modern; as a society we are slowly getting over the idea that women are biologically innate caregivers, and our laws should reflect that. Few, including feminists, dispute that. The author of this puke-fest however is employing hyperbole to the effect that any mother can, at any time and for any reason, instantly forbid the father of her children to ever see his kids again, which is obviously some serious bullshit.
Really? You think you are entitled to more without actually doing more? You agreed with that?
Obviously, I don't agree with her sentiment ('women expect to be treated better than men, all the time, for any reason') but found her words to be ironically similar to my own view, which is that feminism should continue pushing, challenging, demanding and expecting freedom, equality and an end to misogynistic clap-trap like this being an acceptable mainstream opinion.
Further, any disadvantaged group is entitled to more without doing more, because they are getting less than the dominant group. As an example, I believe that people who stay at home to look after their kids and keep house, whether male or female, should be compensated in some way for their labour. Right now the vast majority of such unpaid domestic labour is performed by women, making it a feminist issue. Not all feminists agree with me, obviously, as this is particularly left-wing view; but it's an example of how someone should get more without doing more. The same logic applies to going on strike for higher wages, or demanding additional rights from a government.
It's pretty much proven that there's a huge gender disparity in the sentences that are dished out for similar crimes. Google it.
This woman is talking about children.
-3
[deleted]
3
This woman is talking about children.
There are also studies showing that teachers are quicker to think a problem was caused by boys, and boys are punished more harshly than girls. I've seen various people on r/MensRights talk about a girl doing something and then blaming him when he was a boy; the boy says "I didn't do it"... well that's what they all say, isn't it? So the teacher sides with the girl, even spouting lines like "A girl would never do that!"
There's the common mentality that girls are more innocent; boys are more nasty. Boys are made of slugs, snails and puppy-dog tails...
1
that any mother can, at any time and for any reason, instantly forbid the father of her children to ever see his kids again, which is obviously some serious bullshit.
Judging from at least some of the cases I have heard about in the US (yes it's anecdotal)... it's not THAT bullshit.
Obviously, I don't agree with her sentiment ('women expect to be treated better than men, all the time, for any reason') but found her words to be ironically similar to my own view, which is that feminism should continue pushing, challenging, demanding and expecting freedom, equality and an end to misogynistic clap-trap like this being an acceptable mainstream opinion
Two things.
-
I'm surprised that you think this is an acceptable mainstream opinion. I would say that men, way more often than women, are "demonized" in mainstream media. In fact, even criticizing the actions of some women or suggesting that boys need help is cause for mass protest in some places (Warren Farrell at UofT just for a recent example... or slut walks for an older more well-known one, if you actually read the cops statements they weren't bad at all).
which is that feminism should continue pushing, challenging, demanding and expecting freedom, equality
I think many are of the opinion that equality has been reached (at least legally without a doubt), and what they are pushing for is special treatment, which is nothing like equality. Look at the affordable health care act for a recent example.
Further, any disadvantaged group is entitled to more without doing more, because they are getting less than the dominant group.
Entitled to more than... what they currently have? Or, more than the group that is not disadvantaged?
If it's the former, then that must be under the assumption that they are getting more for doing what they have always been doing (and what everyone else has been doing), thereby bringing what they get inline with everyone else... aka equal work, equal pay.
If it's the latter... then no, that's insane.
Right now the vast majority of such unpaid domestic labour is performed by women,
I don't see this as a problem, as long as it's done willingly, since presumably, it's done under some sort of "social contract", which states that the man brings home the bacon, the woman takes care of the home. She is in effect, being paid, because she is being supported by her partner (you could switch the genders here and it would still apply) who agreed to do it. I'm sure you've read the statistic that women actually make up a pretty large majority of consumer spending, which means that while men more often make more (or are the "breadwinner"), that the women are still doing the money. So while these women aren't being paid directly, they are definitely seeing more of the money their husbands are making, then their husband... which reinforces what I just said... that she is in effect, being paid.
This woman is talking about children.
The same sentiment still applies. (Again this is anecdotal), but it's insane the amount of shit girls get away with in school.
1
acceptable mainstream opinion
Feminism is an ideology which labels some opinions as acceptable and others as unacceptable. It is an ideology of thought-control and censorship.
Further, any disadvantaged group is entitled to more without doing more, because they are getting less than the dominant group. As an example, I believe that people who stay at home to look after their kids and keep house, whether male or female, should be compensated in some way for their labour.
O_o
"Should be compensated" = others should be forced to pay for their choices.
1
"So fucking what."
That was the extent of the criticism. They admit that women are sluts and then say men should marry them regardless, or that they don't want to marry men in which case their opinion really doesn't mean shit in regards to this letter. It is for a specific audience of women, if you're a lesbian, you're not the intended audience and your criticism is void.
5
Missing the point so hard.
-
Being a 'slut' is not a bad thing. Stop saying it is. There is nothing inherently wrong with being promiscuous.
-
Men, and women, should marry whoever they want, but might want to stop basing that judgement on whether your partners a fucking virgin because surprise it's 2012 and we have condoms
-
Not wanting to marry a man doesn't make you a lesbian, you troglodyte
-
Being a lesbian doesn't not make your criticism void, since the intended audience is 'wimmin'
-1†
Eh the point is that everyone has a fundamental right to decide what they find attractive. You have missed that point yet again.
- Being a 'slut' is not a bad thing TO YOU. You are right that there is nothing inherently wrong with being promiscuous. However, there is nothing inherently wrong with men not finding promiscuity to be an attractive trait in a partner. Most of us don't. Stop complaining about it.
- Men and women should marry whoever they want. You got that part right. But again you have no fucking say in what men (or other women) base that judgment on. No say. At all. I don't give a fuck what year it is or what prophylactic you're using because you will never get to tell other people what they can and can't find attractive, you ogre.
- I never insinuated that it did. However, if you are a lesbian OR a woman who doesn't want to get married, THEN your opinion means shit in regards to this letter because you weren't the intended audience.
- Responding to a letter that wasn't addressed to you does make your criticism void. It literally means your opinion doesn't matter at all. And the intended audience was not "WOMYN" it was "single women who want to marry men." If you're not a woman, not attracted to men, or don't want to get married, then kick rocks, lady. Because your opinion on the matter is peripheral garbage.
6
There is nothing inherently wrong with being promiscuous.
Increased risk of STD's? (just to nitpick).
There is also nothing inherently good about "being a slut" either. It's personal preference, which means people have differences in their opinion of it that are all just as valid as the next. Nobody should be forced to approve of someone elses behavior that they disagree with.
1
- Men, and women, should marry whoever they want, but might want to stop basing that judgement on whether your partners a fucking virgin because surprise it's 2012 and we have condoms
IOW, people should marry who they want, as long as their reasons are ones I (feminism) deem acceptable.
- Being a lesbian doesn't not make your criticism void, since the intended audience is 'wimmin'
It makes it irrelevant.
1
Being a 'slut' is not a bad thing. Stop saying it is. There is nothing inherently wrong with being promiscuous.
Holy shit! I laughed when I read that and realized you are serious!
I guess you think there is nothing wrong with STD's, unwanted pregnancies, and noncommittal relationships? Lol, I can't help but laugh about having to ask someone that. I'd like to meet the parent who says, "It's fine with me if my daughter is a slut."
0
I have a hard time commenting on this one.
On one hand, I seen so gods damned many of the exact kind of feminist this letter is bashing in my life that my preprogrammed "Grr I am mad guy!" response is...well, Grrr. I am mad. Where are my rocks, I must throw them?, and etc.
On the other hand, I have also met a goodly amount of women who aren't like that at all, and I hesitate to throw rocks at them just because a host of others who happen to share the same genitalia have pissed me off in the past.
...
Fuck it. Too much thinky for not enough Philosophy. I'll just stick to my moral myopia, and be happy with it.
12
And I've never met any women like that article describes - the only ones that would even come close were almost always conservative traditionalists who believed in strong gender roles (so definitely not feminists).
Most of these things seem like general character flaws that have little to do with feminism, and the author just wants a scapegoat.
12
[deleted]
8
He's just a nice guy and she'll come around to him soon.
Or he's been married to his high school sweetheart and just shouldn't be commenting.
1
People should be free to comment here no matter what their life-choices.
2
The Disney Princess Genderation has EVERYTHING to do with feminism.
What the fuck do you think happens when you scream "GRRRLPOWER" at little girls and constantly tell them they're better than the boys and explain away all of their flaws and mistakes by crying sexism?
You breed self entitled brats who feel like the world owes them something and know they can get away with anything by just playing the victim.
7
Disney Princess stuff is all about enforcing strong gender roles and traditional views on relationships, so feminists usually oppose it.
Even if that wasn't the case, where are men shown to be flawed versus women in most Disney films that feature the stereotypical Disney Princess?
2
I think what the letter does best is explain a popular perception of the situation, and a popular reaction to that perception.
Feminism has told women that they can have it all, and seeks to give it to them at great social subsidy. You might feel like you don't encounter any ladies who take advantage of this, but do you really know the intimate views of all the women you've ever met? Consider yourself. Do you let everyone know your views on gender relations, sexuality, social order, etc., or do you just let your views silently color your thoughts and actions?
6
Do you let everyone know your views on gender relations, sexuality, social order, etc., or do you silently let your views color your thoughts and actions?
I actually do try to let everyone know. Not literally everyone of course as that's impractical, but I'm pretty vocal and open about my views on things like this. It would certainly be easier if other people were too.
Virtually all feminism that I've encountered has focused on targeting or eliminating negative gender stereotypes for women, and the importance of evaluating our actions and intent, the latter being a useful trait to help deal with cognitive bias in general, not just gender-specific issues.
9
And conversely, a large majority of the girls at my high school back when I lived in New Jersey were exactly like this. I only know 1 "conservative traditionalist" and I'm still pretty good friends with her to this day; neither she nor I knew any other females like her in our entire graduating class of 200 female out of 294 total students. If you live in a more "Republican" or "Conservative" state then I can see how you'd never really come across the type of female the author described, but they're more commonplace in "Democratic"/"Liberal" states than there are Chinese people in Chinatown.
3
Eh, high school's not the best example. Nearly everyone, myself included, was an idiot in high school.
I grew up in northern Colorado, which has a roughly even mix of conservatives and liberals.
3
Your liberals in Colorado may as well be Tea Part Patriots by the standards of places like NY and Cali.
Come visit The North East portion of this great nation and find even a hand full of women not like the ones depicted in this article. Honestly after 20 years of dating up here I'm hard pressed believing there are any.
3
Well the thing is, most people don't have a reason to change after high school, especially when their behavior and idiocy is only reinforced by the media and their own family & friends. I used to be a Neocon partly out of pure opposition to all the Liberal extremism, but once I graduated and got away from all the whackjobs, moved to South Carolina and started being challenged by my best friend who's a Libertarian, I wound up becoming one over the course of 4 or so years. I've visited Jersey a few times and I've bumped into people I used to know, they haven't changed and I wager not very many other people have either. They have no reason, when you live in a community of perpetual self-approval and circle-jerking over making decisions based on emotions rather than logic.
2
Have you not been to college in the past 10/20 years?
2
I just graduated actually. Between community college and university, I've been in college for 5 years.
2
So she starts off by saying my son is going to slay pussy till hes 30 then yells at girls who are going to sleep around till their 30
12
I may be wrong but I think she wasn't exactly approving of this so much as saying that her son will hook up with one girl after another, thinking he's finally found "the one" only to be dumped after the sex each time or bailing out after seeing their true colors. I've been alongside several guys who've been through multiple relationships, "nice guys" and somewhat White Knight types, who've been duped. The type of girls who do this are the "product of 60 years of American Feminism", the kind who use guys to get spoiled with gifts and fulfilling sex before ditching them once they either get bored or find a more appealing host to leech off of.
5
she starts off by saying my son is going to slay pussy till hes 30
No she didn't.
1
If I were a philosophy professor I would use this letter in a logic and critical reasoning class to demonstrate poor argumentation and examples of fallacious reasoning. Those of you who like the letter might think I'm just being disagreeable, but I mean it. This whole letter would be perfect for that type of assignment.
10
I assume in this class you would do more than sing songs about how logic and critical reasoning are lacking?
2
Well yes, some of my personal criticisms are addressed elsewhere in the thread and you're welcome to check my comment history if you're interested.
2
Maybe you'll even articulate for your students exactly why the reasoning is fallacious.
1
I love that mom. She freaking nailed it and then some.
8
That... was beautiful.
7
Not sure how is the writer of the letter "getting it". Among other things (s)he seems to subtly attempt to push gender roles on men (be masculine) and mourn the loss of traditional gender roles.
I may be wrong in my interpretation, but if I'm right the writer of this letter is not getting it at all and is instead yet another conservative trying to dictate the lives of men and women alike.
7
Read more of my blog. No SoCon here.
1
This is exactly the view of my partner. We have both been married before. She has 3 sons and absolutely hates feminism. She was treated like dirt by other women because she chose to stay at home rather than keep working. When she divorced, she didn't try to clean out her ex.
7
When she divorced, she didn't try to clean out her ex.
Are you sure? Not to suggest all women do this, but any person may be manipulative.
0
I am sure, mainly because I know him and they still get along. I actually think that she should have asked for a better deal and he far more than 50%. I gave my ex waaaay more stuff just to get it over and done with.
1
You might be able to find out one way or the other from court records.
1
"They know that the minute they sign a marriage license, everything they own is yours, but nothing you own is theirs (except your debts) and you can walk away with cash and prizes, at any time, for any reason. Or for no reason at all. "
Yep.
7
I'm suddenly glad that my mom used to laugh feminists in the face :s
6
Half of you have been raised without your fathers, yet only a few of your fathers deserved to be kicked out of your lives; you were raised by the women who kicked your fathers out
That was a really powerful line. I'm gonna use that
5
"Men are dropping out, Ladies. Chivalry has died of blunt force trauma, in a beatdown administered by Grrrl Power."
Yep! There's one. Style, rhythm, tone, metaphor, personification, and a beatnik voice. Should we make a note of it? Reminds me of Tom Waits. Tom Traubert's Blues perhaps? (Video, Lyrics)
5
Oopsie. This is pretty good. I like the racy prose style.
It seems to capture the whole thing in a nutshell. Anger concentrates the mind, and this lady is angry.
4
Oopsie. This is pretty good. I like the racy prose style.
Welcome to the manosphere. There's a lot more where that came from. You could do worse than start with Heartiste.
1
Thanks. Who are you?
1
What do you mean? Are you asking for my SSN?
1
What are you talking about?
1
Wow, the bullshit in that is like eyeball deep.
It should be criticized. I mean WTF?
He sees overweight women wearing unflattering clothes that display muffin tops and rolls of fat, who drool over his biceps while telling him that “looks aren’t important.” He sees slutty women who dress to attract men, sleep with the “hot” ones, and denigrate the rest by calling them “creepy.” He sees “competitive” professional women, whose primary tool for getting ahead is the threat of sexual harassment lawsuits.
Really? Seriously?
4
He sees overweight women wearing unflattering clothes that display muffin tops and rolls of fat, who drool over his biceps while telling him that “looks aren’t important.”
I think that line is genius. Yes, seriously. That said, she is generalizing like crazy (which she knows), but there are a lot of women just like this. The type I've encountered over and over is the "Men are so shallow . . . I will only date guys who are at least 5'10."
6
Yeah, this is what happens when a very bitter mother raises a son. I don't even want to know how deranged she made her son.
The most hilarious part is explaining how great her son will be at 30 years old in a great career.
He is some private in the marine corps who hasn't even been discharged yet.
But don't worry, hes GONNA be a nuclear engineer!
2
I'm kind of the guy he's talking about, and I've just decided that I'm going to work on my career and forget the fact that some people find love and even get laid. It's easier and probably more rewarding, from what I learned from my parents and people around me.
3
I went that route for about 10 years. Boy was that a mistake! Made for a terrible work-life balance and really hamstrung my ability to get the type of women I really wanted and mucked up my social skills to a degree. Really made for some unhealthy relationships I shouldn't have tolerated.
2
I've been single since I was 17 and I'm now 31. I don't see what difference it would make, except I'd be making more money.
1
Some of it is good, but there is a lot of craziness sprinkled in:
You were raised to be a slut, at least through your twenties... DO NOT, under any circumstances, repress your sexuality.... then give your leftovers to the guy you’ll promise to love, honor and cherish for the rest of your life. Wow, how lucky is he!
Yes, even in the military; they had to lower the standards so more women could “serve.”....they know that their productivity is why employers can afford to hire you to sit at a desk and shuffle papers....They don’t want to pay the salaries of millions of useless (and mostly female) government employees
2
Her comments about the military, and public-sector employees, are correct.
2
My son looks around and he sees bitchy, arrogant, malicious women. He sees spoiled greedy women. He sees financially irresponsible women. He sees lazy undisciplined women. (Yes, even in the military; they had to lower the standards so more women could “serve.”) He sees overweight women wearing unflattering clothes that display muffin tops and rolls of fat, who drool over his biceps while telling him that “looks aren’t important.”
It's the same thing that I see. Most women I see on dating sites have these poor qualities, so I don't even talk to them. And some are better at hiding it. So I date them, and discover they have these poor qualities, and I move on.
As a man, I figured it was just the poor quality of women in Michigan (since I have lived all around Michigan in big cities and small towns and dated off and on for 20 years). Now I know, maybe it just isn't where I live. Maybe this is a national issue.
3
What annoyed me about online dating was the women who demanded the guy have a high paying job, nice car and his own apartment. While she worked three shifts a week at the local pathmark. Disgraceful.
2
Lol. Well, that's a new one to me!
1
It's an international issue (i.e, affecting most of the Western world).
1
Wow. And I thought I was pissed off at feminism.
Well after actually thinking about it, I think it makes sense that mothers with sons would probably be more pissed off... at the very least, they have way more perspective.
They may know first hand what actual discrimination was like 30-40 years ago.
They also know how full of shit many feminists are right now
They care about their sons and see how all of this is affecting them.
Now to comment on the article: I think the only thing important to realize is that this obviously doesn't apply to every single female in the world.... otherwise it's spot on. All she's really saying is that men are now perfectly comfortable with saying "fuck that noise" and just not putting up with bullshit until they find someone perfect... which I think is perfectly reasonable.
My mother spouted anti-male feminist slogans at me all the way up until high school and to this day still tells me that the hardships men experience are necessary and acceptable because they "make men stronger."
Weird.
Men and women are equal.
Men need to be treated worse so they can become tougher because that's how they should be.
You can believe one of those. Not both.
This is a very prevalent belief. Some people theorize that feminism is a society-wide shit test.
nobody deserves to go through that.
Unfortunately, I got it easy compared to the way my great grandmother treated my grandfather, and my aunt treated my cousin. The former involved bludgeoning with a blunt object, and the latter involved restraining orders being placed against her.
Obviously it is something that runs in the family.
Your mother sounds like a real cunt. No one should have to suffer mental abuse like that.
In this issue yes she is pretty awful, but I think she is just more honest than most women.
I don't believe that women regard men as human beings in the same way they regard other women.
[deleted]
Hell hath no fury like a scorned woman.
Our best allies are mothers of sons and second wives.
They aren't allies. They are advocates, just like you and me. And yes, they often are some of our best members, which we should be thankful for how many there are.
I like this distinction. I've always thought it was odd when the feminists refer to men as "feminist allies" instead of real feminists, and I think it's important that we don't make our LadyMRAs feel like second class members of the movement.
Mothers that love their sons will. Not every mother loves their son.
This. Just as dads cared that their little girls were treated fairly and given equal rights so they became feminists back in the day when that meant equal rights so are moms now turning against the newest incarnation of feminism because they want their son's to have equal rights, be treated with respect, and not be blamed for all the world's ills.
In what way is the article spot on? All she does is tout stereotypes, heavily generalize men and women and complain about women doing things that both men and women do. The entire thing is full of insulting, demeaning language aimed at women and equally ridiculous crap glorifying men.
I would hardly call that article "glorifying men". Mostly, she's calling out the spoiled, entitled young women she sees trying to take advantage of her son.
I see this with my son since he was 15 (16 now). The girls he has dated are rich, poor, all kinds of backgrounds. He's a good looking kid. The girls are universally bitchy and controlling.
Also note that her chances of having, and keeping contact with, grandchildren are now tied in with her son's rights in society and under the law.
This is true.