Category Archives: feminism

A Couple Links

 Robert Stacy McCain at his blog in a comments section

The Right Guy wrote: This has to be the most reckless example of social promotion and affirmative action.

(Ed: RSM) You will notice that (a) I waste no mercy on feminism and yet (b) very seldom mention race-based affirmative action. There are reasons for this.

Feminism, and the favoritism toward women it demands, heaps unearned advantages on the overprivileged — that is to say, it bestows additional benefits to upper-class college-educated American women, who are by birthright the most spectacularly advantaged people in all human history.

It is not the blue-collar waitress or the dropout retail clerk who benefits from the tilted playing field that feminism requires, but rather the well-born daughters of the affluent, who have attended the best schools and who cruise through life without ever having experienced any hardship whatsoever. No matter how WASPy or wealthy or elite-educated they may be, feminism hands these women a platinum-plated Victimhood Card, which they play ruthlessly to wring every possible advantage from life.

Should it ever be your misfortune to have to deal with one of these haughty, indolent creatures in your workplace, God grant you the serenity not to call her out, for then you will be guilty of sexual harassment — as if such a worthless thing could ever be worth the bother to “harass.”

Whatever the unfortunate impact of affirmative action for ethnic minorities, they are rarely so insufferable as a rich 23-year-old white girl who expects the entire world to bend over her kiss her overprivileged ass.


Mass murderer Dylan Klebold’s mother writes an essay for Oprah Winfrey’s magazine.

 “Dylan’s participation in the massacre was impossible for me to accept until I began to connect it to his own death. Once I saw his journals, it was clear to me that Dylan entered the school with the intention of dying there. And so in order to understand what he might have been thinking, I started to learn all I could about suicide.”


“Early on April 20, I was getting dressed for work when I heard Dylan bound down the stairs and open the front door. Wondering why he was in such a hurry when he could have slept another 20 minutes, I poked my head out of the bedroom. ‘Dyl?’ All he said was ‘Bye.’ The front door slammed, and his car sped down the driveway. His voice had sounded sharp. I figured he was mad because he’d had to get up early to give someone a lift to class. I had no idea that I had just heard his voice for the last time.”


“For the rest of my life, I will be haunted by the horror and anguish Dylan caused,” she wrote. “I cannot look at a child in a grocery store or on the street without thinking about how my son’s schoolmates spent the last moments of their lives. Dylan changed everything I believed about myself, about God, about family, and about love.”



Filed under american women, feminism, Mens Issues, omega, race

Reactions To Novaseeker and a Response to Obsidian

I wanted to specifically address the issue of whether knowledge and interaction with women bring unique insights and wisdom. I will work off of some posts Novaseeker has made at three blogs on the subject.  

 From Chuck’s blog

I agree that throwing out women wholesale is not the best approach. I do think there are some people in the MRA-sphere who are inexperienced with women and so on. However, many of us are NOT inexperienced with women, have been married to women, fathered children with women and so on. To paint all of us with one brush (and I know you had a tiny disclaimer in there in a wall of text) is dumb. Inaccurate and dumb.

Agree completely. My only question to Nova, (a wise, well read, excellent writer and thinker and really smart guy, someone who I suspect has more wisdom than I do I might add) is does he think he gained wisdom and valuable insight from being married? 

One more question…

If all MRAs had little or no personal experience with women would their collective wisdom be greater or smaller?

I think its obvious.  Men like Welmer, Nova, and Elusive Wapiti bring more wisdom to the table with regard to mens issues not less.  Sure I can speak to marriage and divorce, but not with the insights and authority they can.  After all, I’ve never been married or divorced.

But the more important problem with your post is that it equates knowledge of relating to women with “wisdom”. That’s inane. Yes, knowledge of interacting with women is nice to have if you want to interact with women, as most of us do. But does it make us wise? Gosh, that’s one of the silliest things I’ve ever read. Wisdom follows from many things, but understanding how women work and how to relate to them is not one of them.

First I’ll state that many experiences in life bring wisdom. Especially endeavors that test virtue and resolve or require hard work and discipline.  Let me use a few examples.  Lets take two typical 30-year-old guys.  Identical in every way.  IQ, values, upbringing, physical attributes, job, education…blah blah blah…except for one thing.  One guy served 2 tours in a war zone and the other guy has zero military experience.  Who would probably possess more wisdom?

How about the same two guys, but one of them had successfully battled cancer?

How bout the same two guys but one has 10 friends and the other has 0? 

How about if one of them is married and has 2 children?

The last example is what I am getting at.  I submit that everything being equal, the married with kids guy is probably going to have more wisdom than the single guy.  I say this as a single guy myself.  Living with another human being, and all it entails, bring valuable insights.  Children within marriage, (necessitates interaction and some understanding of women) bring wisdom.

How bout the same two guys, but one of them has had 5 girlfriends and the other has had zero?

I believe, again, everything equal, the guy with 5 girlfriends is going to probably have more wisdom.  Relationships, great or terrible, provide keen insights into human interaction.  I know I’ve learned from them.  I learned a lot about myself.  Both my good and bad qualities were more easily recognized.

What I’m trying to get at is that HUMAN interaction, for most people, brings wisdom.  I tend to think a car salesman would generally be more wise in the ways of the world than a guy who works the graveyard shift at a warehouse. The former, if he has any curiosity or self awareness,would be able to offer all sorts of tidbits and observations on the human condition which the latter probably couldn’t. 

Human interaction doesn’t just bring knowledge, it can bring wisdom as well.  I know some not so well educated types who possess much greater wisdom than the college educated ivory tower intellectuals wandering around.  The former’s insights come from human interaction, not reading. (Reading can of course provide wisdom though.)  I think this is obvious and I don’t see why interaction with women would be any different.

Luckily, all things aren’t equal.  For instance, I have two married friends.  One is incredibly insightful while the other is as dull as a rusty butter knife.  Even though the latter has many experiences I can’t relate to, I consider myself wiser than he is. My other experiences, taken as a whole, trump his.

It is also possible to be wise in some areas and not others.  I know a leftist like this.  In matters of business and personal relationships he is dynamite.  When talking politics he has all the insight of a 10-year-old girl.  Trite wouldn’t even begin to describe it.

One of my best friends has very little experience with women. Giving him advice on the subject is, for the most part, futile.  When it comes to the ladies, he sucks.  That being said, he is one of the most stand up guys I have ever known.  I’d go to the gates of hell for him.  He is also really astute in other areas.  He is deep and philosophical.  I value his opinions.  With women I have more wisdom, but on other things, he does.  I also would say,on balance, he is more valuable to society than I am despite my advantage with women.

One last example.  A friend of mine from years ago was solidly an alpha.  Going out with him always meant getting stuck with the second best.  In some cases, if he was feeling particularly greedy, the third best.  Despite his ability with women( and his awareness of the reason for his success) he wasn’t all that profound in other areas.  I had him beat.  Another friend of ours, completely inexperienced with women, was Benjamin Franklin compared to him. 

From my blog

Some fairly fine philosophers, theologians, scientific and artistic geniuses were celibates, or more or less celibate. The notion that “unless you’re getting laid, you’re a failure at everything else in life, and everything you say is worthless” is therefore beyond stupid — it doesn’t reflect historical reality. It’s dismissive and divisive and is precisely the kind of carping that we men of various strands need to avoid.

Agree on all counts. Particularly the last sentence.  I have no desire to call out anyone’s chosen lifestyle.

 From Ferdinand’s Blog

The idea that a man’s relative success (or lack thereof) with women is the fundamental measure of his manhood…

Well I guess in animal terms it could be argued that way.  I don’t think, (or at least really hope not) humans are solely animals though.  I would hope I have as much value as Silvio Berlusconi.  Heh. Seriously though, I agree with him.  I think integrity, honor, and decency are much more vital to being a man than how many pussies a guy has plundered.  Ahh, if only integrity and honor made the gina tingle.

, or, even worse, the most important area of his life

In a perfect world I believe marriage and raising children would be the most important thing in most men’s lives.  Again, I say this as a single guy with no kids.  Even in that perfect world though there would be many single men who contribute mightily to society.  In our far from perfect world, it would be a bad idea to blindly follow the marriage/children model.  Conditions on the ground have changed and men should act accordingly. 

If that means the pursuit of a wife or even a girlfriend isn’t the most important thing,  fine by me.  Plenty of ways to contribute to society, grow as a person, and live a contented life. 

is precisely the kind of over-reaching extremism I criticized over at Chuck’s and at Gantt’s. I am a supporter of men learning Game, as you know, but sentiments like that one are just plain silly.

I’m not sure if he is addressing my position specifically, or ideas he has an issue with in general.  If it’s the former I will just say that I sure don’t feel extreme.

To sum up…  

Relationships and marriage generally bring wisdom.

There is more than one path to wisdom.

Marriage and children are vital for a strong and vibrant civilization.

Every man being married and having children is not vital for a strong and vibrant civilization.

A mans inherent value isn’t predicated on his ability with women.

Success with women, although I believe it usually brings wisdom, is morally neutral.

There is more than one path to being a decent man who lived a life worth living.


Obsidian, a thoughtful and effective Game advocate left this comment at Ferdinand’s yesterday.  I thought I would respond because I disagree with him, both in tone and substance.

Now, before you or anyone else starts howling, lol, lemme also say, that I find the MRA cause to be legit-I just think that some of their tactics, of which bashing Game is one, is woefully offbase. 

Too broad a brush.  Most MRAs seem to be fine with Game.  If I am right, then it is hardly one of “their” tactics.  I have no problem if he wants to defend Game from the few MRAs (or anyone else for that matter) who attack it.  I do agree that a few MRAs were offbase with regard to their criticism of Game.

If these guy are really serious about making structural changes, again I say they should be involved in the political process, lobbying their Senators and Congressmen, among other things.

Who says they aren’t?  I have all sorts of passionate positions, but I’ll be honest, I don’t email congressmen.  Why? Because its largely ineffective. MRA is in its infancy. Changing as many hearts and minds as possible is about the only effective strategy right now in my view.  Politicians aren’t leaders, at best they are followers.

Now take Glenn Sacks-he’s an MRA that I got mad respect for. He doesn’t spend his time breaking on Playas-instead, he devotes his time to doing just what I said above-lobbying lawmakers, bringing awareness to MRA issues and getting facetime to make his case before a wider public. If all these “opponents” of Game and supposed champions of MRA, HBD and Western Civ are really serious, all they need do is look to Glenn Sacks-he’s shown them the way. They don’t even need to reinvent the wheel.

Agreed.  Most MRAs would agree as well I suspect.  I know I certainly like his style.

 Now personally, I don’t see the MRA movement making any major legal/political headway anytime soon, and for many of the reasons you’ve written about Nova, among other bloggers.

Agreed.  So what?  I write and discuss all sorts of things that aren’t making headway.  In many cases, causes I hold dear are becoming less realistic as time goes on.  If anything, its fun to rag on feminists.  Do you oppose Roissy when he does this?

 Simply put-if you buy into Evo-Psych, and I do-Men are too inherently competitive to cohesive work together to bring about change ala the NOW mold. Not. Gonna. Happen. We’re just not wired that way.

Largely agree.  NOW and other leftist ideas will crumble under their own weight if given enough time.  To the extent that a mens rights movement can speed up the process, all the better.  Should Glenn Sacks, a man just complimented, retire?

 Which is why Game is in many ways the perfect solution, because it’s all individually focused. One doesn’t need expensive lobbying efforts or laws repealed and others passed-all one needs is the right material, a dedication to learn, and a desire to change.

Largely agree.  Game is the micro to MRAs macro.  Game is not a solution because their are no solutions. Game helps though.

Ahh, but you see, that’s the trick-alot of guys out there DO NOT wanna change ANYTHING about themselves. Game is really about growth and self improvement, and many Men are afraid of Change. And again, like Chuck Ross said, the Human Mind can and will concoct all kinds of stuff, all kinds of defences as to why one is a failure. As we all know, Women do this all the time. Now, it seems, so too, do the Menfolk.

Yes, some men don’t work enough at self improvement.  Some are even bitter.  Some blame women for their failures.  Call 60 minutes.  How this invalidates MRA efforts is beyond me.

 I disagree with your view above-a Man who cannot get laid is a sad sight to behold, there’s simply no getting around that fact. Mind you, I’m not talking about the King of All Playas here-just being able to simply get laid with a decent looking chick every now and then. If a guy can’t make that happen, in my book, just about everything about him is seriously suspect.

This is nonsense. Just about EVERYTHING about him is suspect?  I can think of plenty of guys I know, who almost certainly don’t get laid, who are good, decent men.  A 60 year old guy that works at a gas station should be viewed with suspicion because he doesn’t get laid?  Please.  How bout a religious guy that sticks to his principles and avoids pre marital sex?  How bout a guy in a wheelchair?  Really, I love Game and I love Roissy, but man there is more to life than fucking. 

Another thing.  Men tend to gravitate to what they are good at.  Naturals, or men who run Game with ease, will spend more time and effort trying to get laid. 

At some point, for a guy that lacks the natural talents, both mentally and physically, Game and chasing women lose their luster when compared to other pursuits. Lets get real here. Some men, no matter how much they try will always suck with women.  This fact doesn’t make them worthless human beings worthy of suspicion.  They might just accomplish more than the guy out chasing tail all night too.

I gotta tell ya Nova, I’ve never seen so many sorry excuses for Men before in my life.

Exaggerate much?  He could give me his best example of poor MRA behavior and I could counter with all the punks, thugs, criminals and vermin I see everyday in the news.  I’d say they are more “sorry” than the most bitter MRA he could find.

 I mean that. Guys who throw up every excuse under the Sun as to why they refuse to make any changes in their lives for the better, talking about all this abstract, big macro shit as if they gonna be able to solve it-Ha!

Self Improvement and “big macro shit” aren’t mutually exclusive.  Also, men can be brilliant and insightful in one area and terrible in another.  The latter doesn’t negate the former. If I think an MRA is bitter with regard to his personal dealings with women, fine.  It won’t stop me from finding insight into other things he talks about.  Everyone has their biases and weaknesses.  By the way, solutions don’t exist. Only mitigations.  I’m not dreaming of Utopia and most MRAs that I read aren’t either.

 Not buying it one minute. I know the deal. These guys are more than merely afraid. They’re cowards.

I think Obsidian is emoting. I’m sure it feels good.  Way to vague.  Who are “these” guys? 

 Style, before he became such, had more balls, and is actually doing more to change the world, than the whole lot of these Keyboard Warriors, there I’ve said it, and I mean it. Because they can’t even change themselves to meet a nice looking lady for a night-how in the hell are they gonna “save” Western Civ? As we say in the hood, “Nigga, puh-leaaasseee…”

Game has plenty of “keyboard” warriors in their own right.  This fact doesn’t delegitimize Game.  Most MRAs are pretty aware of the long odds they face in “saving” Western Civ.  I agree on Style making worthwhile contributions though.  What this has to do with another man choosing to fight on another front, I have no idea.

So, no, Nova, with all due respect, and I embrace you as a brother, on this one we just gonna have to agree to disagree. All this stuff about MRA, and HBD, and Western Civ, and Conservative this, and Libertarian that, all of that jazz ain’t nothing but elaborate, High IQ smoke and mirrors covering up the simple fact that A, Game WORKS, B, that those who rail against it most don’t have it and C, they’re either too afraid or too angry/bitter or both, to actually try to change their own lives for the better. And I for one am sick and tired of listening to grownassed Men behave like low class Bitches.

Again, Game and MRA aren’t mutually exclusive. Perhaps I should provide a personal example.  Obsidian, I get laid.  I’m not G Manifesto or Roissy, but I do alright.  It’s possible I’m even more successful than you. Who knows. I enjoy the company of women. I’m not bitter or angry(sometimes I should probably be more angry).  I also consider myself a Conservative/ libertarian MRAer.  I have no problem extolling the virtues of Game, using it, and pointed out injustice in our legal system and gynocentric cultural bias. I’ll also submit that learning Game should open a mans eyes even more to injustice and cultural decline not less.

Either you think Game and Mens Rights Advocacy are basically incompatible, or you are using a sledgehammer when a fly swatter would do. 

 You don’t know me, but I’ve been reading you now for close to a year. I often agree with you.  I think you provide valuable insights and a good check on some of the things said around the Roissysphere. You seem like a truly decent and good man.  Just want to let you know that I respect you.  If you read this, I’d like to hear your response.


Filed under alpha, american decline, american women, beta male, female nature, feminism, game, Mens Issues

Game and MRAs

I wanted to comment on a kerfuffle( yes I used that word) that occurred between proponents of Game and a few MRAs over at Ferdinand’s blog a couple days ago.

If you read here, you know I am both a proponent of Game and consider myself an MRA.  Or, more accurately, an advocate for mens rights.  I’m not sure if writing, conversing, and thinking about mens issues make me an “activist”.  I’m not really a “take to the streets” kind of guy.  Hawaiian Libertarian makes a reasonable distinction here.

I see four main reasons why certain MRAs have a problem with Game and its advocates. 

1. They don’t understand Game.

2. They view women who require “gaming” to be unworthy of a mans attention. 

3. Religious men think it’s immoral. 

4.They resent anything short of complete shunning of worthless, entitled, “Ameriskanks” and think of men who don’t share this view as enablers.

For the purposes of this post I will leave aside #1, 2, and 3. They all tie in with each other. I’ve talked about them before and so have many others.  I’ll just say that Game isn’t only beneficial to young single guys who wear funny hats and nail polish, trolling nightclubs looking to hook up with “whores” (as opposed to madonna’s who just want “good men”).

Here are my thoughts on #4…

First let me say that if an individual man wants to shun relations with women completely, forgo sex, marriage, and children, fine by me.  I don’t have a problem with that.  I’m not here to tell anyone how to live their life. 

I will say that for the vast majority of men, this option is a non starter.  Be they young or old, religious or secular, rich or poor; men want women for sex, children, and companionship.  Complete avoidance of women might be an option for a select few, but can never be sold as an attractive lifestyle choice to most men. 

In addition, not all women are Ameriskanks.  Men can debate the numbers, but who can argue this?  Whether you want to say that 95% of women are decent, or 5%, some women are relationship worthy. ( Our legal system makes extreme caution necessary of course.)

So I ask, short of a lifetime of celibacy, what is the best way for an individual man to deal with women in the year 2009?  Without an answer to this question I will continue to think that these MRAs are unrealistic, dogmatic, out of touch and perhaps, too personally invested.

I think some MRAs opposed to Game resent it because they feel it is more male capitulation.  Women are once again benefiting from men bending over backward to appeal to the special little princess. While it’s true that women are more attracted to men who successfully run Game (intentionally or not), it is men who are benefiting much more in the long run.

Game at the margins, levels the playing field( and what an unlevel playing field it is!) and gives a man more leverage. More leverage means more options.  More options means putting up with less of her shit.  The time and effort put in to “catering” to her gina tingle is well worth it when you consider the alternative. Sucessfully pushing her attraction buttons may mean the difference between a long marriage and a divorce. Not feeling like a lickspittle, pushover, chump, herb/mangina is also an added benefit. 

Another objection seems to be aimed at alpha men.  Maybe a little bit of resentment at all the sex they are lavished with, or again,  that women are getting what they want by having sex with the men they desire.  Game is the wrong target though.  Alpha men, of which there are plenty of naturals, would be scoring in great numbers anyway.  Game may make an alpha a super duper unstoppable alpha, but it is most beneficial for guys a bit farther down the totem pole.

It seems that some MRAs think female hypergamy and an assortment of others behaviors are unique to contemporary, feminist influenced, American women.  It only seems that way because in times past a womans natural animal desires were constrained by cultural norms and the law. Game is a tool that helps a man personally constrain female behavior.  It ain’t a panacea, and its effectiveness is limited by human ability, but its better than nothing.

If men accept female nature for what it is then they will be less likely to wage a futile and unproductive war against it.  Women have always been this way and always will be. Nothing new under the sun.  It would be nice if MRAs don’t start resembling some feminists and their “all men are rapists” ideology.  As much as I rail against unconstrained female nature, I would also hate to live in a world where male nature is unchecked. That said, I still resent being viewed as a rapist and a predator.

Ive said it before and I’ll say it again, MRAs are good at pointing out inequities in the law and destructive behaviors women engage in.  Game advocates are good at pointing out why women are doing it, and on a micro level, the best way to respond. 

Both are necessary and have their place.  Female nature isn’t going to change.  The only way to curb its excesses is legal and cultural change.  Incentives are everything.  I’m not optimistic in the short term of this happening, but I do know shunning women altogether is fanciful and counter productive.

Finally, the tenets of Game can work on platonic relationships with women as well.  I may sound like a sycophantic supporter of Game when I say this, but I believe a priest can benefit from it.  Got to pass those nun’s shit tests after all.  I bet their shaming language is strong.  Think Meryl Streep in the movie Doubt.  I’m exaggerating a bit to make a point.  For a more real world example think: co-workers.  So yes, I believe even celibate men can benefit from Game.


I don’t see how it is productive for MRAs, who mainly focus on macro issues, to shun proponents of Game.  They aren’t mutually exclusive.  Men that use the tool of Game on a micro level can be just as supportive of the need for legal and cultural change as the guy going the celibate route.

Litmus tests don’t work for tiny outnumbered “movements” either.  It seems to me a big tent is in order if any progress is to be made.  If MRAs want to be taken seriously on the micro level, they need to offer more than isolation and celibacy as a mitigation.

I’ve made the distinction between Game and MGTOW( the micro to MRAs macro) before, and after thinking about it, dont think this is quite right.  Game is afterall, a tool.  MGTOW is more an attitude or way of life.  A man going his own way can use Game is my point. ( I believe most MRAs agree with me.)

I’ll end by pointing out that my critique was, I believe, shaming language free.  I didn’t call certain MRAs virgins, bitter, or terrible with women.  I’m sure some are.  I also believe that men more experienced with women have a much better understanding of their nature as well.  

In many cases, I believe it to be an unfair charge though.  A 40-year-old guy who did alright with women in his 20s, got married at 30, and got ass raped in divorce court at 40 is a common scenario.  An inept bitter virgin would be an inaccurate discription in this case.  MRAs also come in all ages.  A 60-year-old guy deciding to go celibate is a bit different from a 25-year-old.  Calling the former bitter and horrible with women is silly. Some men don’t have the desire, temperament, or ability to use Game very effectively.  I don’t feel the need to take them to task for it as long as they are as understanding to those who choose to go the Game route.

I welcome any criticism from MRAs that disagree as well.  Just leave out the “you are all fools and a hinderance to mens rights” please.

Four clarifications…

1.This isn’t a criticism of all, or even most MRAs.  After all, I would be criticizing myself if I felt otherwise.  Most seem to get it.

2. I don’t believe Game is the end all, be all, quick fix to everything ailing America.

3.MRAs are free to continue to dislike Game( I won’t hold it against them in other words), but I hope they reconsider their desire to excommunicate those who feel differently.  Again, big tent.

4. Criticism of how the tool of Game is used by individual men is valid and would make for an interesting discussion.

A question for MRAs critical of Game…

Out of curiosity, do you have more contempt for “players” like Roissy or Roosh, or for herb/mangina/swpl/leftist types?

I submit that the former is doing nothing to oppose (and in most cases supports in one degree or another) needed legal change, while the latter works to undermine it.

One last thing…

Talk on the danger of rape allegations ramping up as a result of Game being used with better skill and in higher numbers was discussed in Ferdinand’s thread as well. 

 A few quick thoughts…

Game shouldn’t replace a man having common sense and good judgement.

This might be a reason to stick to “10 Commandments Game” heh.

Is a woman more likely to wake up and regret sex the next morning with an alpha appearing “Gamer” or a nice guy beta? ( I realize this is just one possible false rape scenario.)

Not a rhetorical question. I could see arguments for both actually.  The “alpha” is going to be put in that position a lot more than the beta so his odds of being accused are higher, but the beta is more likely to trigger feelings of “ickyness” than the alpha.  If the beta suddenly seems insensitive to her needs, watch out.  A woman feels that a beta owes her a lot more for sex, especially the regrettable kind( and will resent the beta), than an alpha.  See: Max, Tucker.

This is the one time I would encourage a man to go the lickspittle, fawning beta route. If you were sexing while beta it is in your best interest to do so.  At least for a couple days or so.  More on this another time.


Filed under alpha, american decline, american women, beta male, female nature, feminism, game, Mens Issues

Thoughts on Polanski

I wasn’t going to comment on the Roman Polanski Saga, because frankly, it doesn’t interest me much.  I lost the ability to be shocked or outraged by such events long ago.  I’m either jaded, or like the lefties like to say, not paying attention.  I’m leaning toward the former.

Anyway, Alias Clio made a comment over at Roissy’s that peaked my interest a little bit so I figured I would respond to that.

Hey Roissy, I’m suffering from insomnia so I have a question for you: Roman Polanski – was it rape? Does he deserve to be prosecuted?

Prior to the last week, I didn’t know much about this case. All I knew was that Polanski was living in exile in France because he fled the U.S. after being charged with raping a 13-year-old.  Although I haven’t exactly immersed myself in every detail of this sordid affair; I feel comfortable answering in the affirmative to both of Clio’s questions.  Yes, I know I’m not Roissy.

You’ve defended Monica Lewinski, sort of, who was over 18 and not (quite) pitched at Clinton by her parents, as Polanski’s victim was. So will you defend her?

‘I’m not exactly sure what she is getting at but I’ll just say that there is a world of difference between a 13-year-old girl and a 22-year-old woman.  Not sure why Roissy or anyone else would not defend a 13-year-old girl as long as her story is credible.  I haven’t seen Gannon over there in a long time. Heh.

I’m curious, because although there’s some “he said, she said” in this story, I find this victim credible. And Polanski did plead guilty, or so I understand. An alpha male? Or a sociopath? Please don’t tell us that the two are exactly the same.

I find the victim in this case, from the stuff I have read, to be credible as well. 

An alpha male?  Probably. A sociopath? Perhaps. In my humble opinion, the two are not  the same, but they aren’t mutually exclusive either.  It is possible to be both.  I think most sociopaths would tend to either be alpha or omega.  Outliers at either end of the spectrum.  Ted Bundy or Scott Peterson the alpha.  Jeffery Dahlmer or John Wayne Gacy the omega.

The act itself was not alpha though.  Self control is an alpha characteristic no? 

She goes on…

JB, it still looks like rape to me, except that if Polanski weren’t famous no one would have heard about it. In fact, if he weren’t famous it might not have happened at all, because the child’s mother would not have left her alone with any old middle-aged man who had promised to get her picture into Vogue. I don’t think that the mother’s actions were intended to end in the rape of her daughter; she was both naive and ambitious, but not evil. But I don’t believe for one moment that the girl consented.

I won’t speak to this particular mother since I don’t know anything about her, but I don’t doubt there are plenty of parents who are willing to recklessly endanger their child’s well being for a shot at fame and fortune.  I’ll go farther.  Plenty would encourage their young daughters to sleep with powerful men if they thought it would help them break into the cutthroat world of modeling or acting.

Some evidence…


There’s some ground for suggesting that Polanski thought the girl had consented, though, or that her mother’s consent had secured her own.

I haven’t seen anything credible in my limited study of this case to suggest consent.  Is her age in doubt?  Is the drugs or alcohol she was given in dispute? I don’t believe a mother can grant consent for a girl that young either. If I am missing something I would like to know though.

And I can recall a debate about rape both here and at my own website, in which various commentators suggested that any time there was any doubt at all regarding consent, the alleged perpetrator should be given the benefit of the doubt.

Not sure if she means in a court of law or opinion.  If she means the former I think that rape trials should be held to the same evidentiary standard as any other legal proceeding.  Beyond a reasonable doubt, not any doubt. 

This is hardly a typical “date rape” case in any event.  If a prosecutors only evidence is the female’s word, the male probably shouldn’t be charged.

I take each case one at a time.  In this instance I believe the girl and her mother.  From what I know, I believe Polanski raped her beyond a reasonable doubt.  The fact that the girl was 13 makes it much easier.

Of course, this girl was, at 13, under the age of consent to begin with – a complicating factor in the case and certainly one that guaranteed Mr Polanski’s being found guilty. But many men who post here don’t seem to think much of age of consent laws, either.

I can only speak for myself but I believe in them. Within reason of course.  I don’t want 20-year-old boys going to prison for having sex with 16-year-old girls for example.  I know I am taking a courageous position when I say that I don’t think it should be legal for 44-year-old men to have sex with 13 year olds. A bold stand indeed. 

That’s why I’m asking the question. I’m not in any doubt that it was rape. I don’t think the girl or her mother stood to gain anything by making a false accusation of rape, as the case was tried in 1978, a time when feminist legal theory and anti-rape fury had not reached the high level of influence they would in the 1980s.

Greed was still operable in the 70s though.

 If the child had wanted to appear in Vogue at any price, both mother and daughter would have done better to remain silent about the rape.

Her last point is a good one.  It gives the girl and her mother more credibility.  At the very least they could have taken a payoff and went away quietly.  The fact that they didn’t is telling.

Thank you Clio for providing me with something to post today.  You raised some good questions and concerns.


One last thing though.  The victim no longer wants Polanski prosecuted.  Here are some words from her I found on Wikipedia:

In a 2003 interview, Samantha Geimer said, “Straight up, what he did to me was wrong. But I wish he would return to America so the whole ordeal can be put to rest for both of us.” Furthermore, “I’m sure if he could go back, he wouldn’t do it again. He made a terrible mistake but he’s paid for it.” In 2008, Geimer stated in an interview that she wishes Polanski would be forgiven, “I think he’s sorry, I think he knows it was wrong. I don’t think he’s a danger to society. I don’t think he needs to be locked up forever and no one has ever come out ever — besides me — and accused him of anything. It was 30 years ago now. It’s an unpleasant memory … (but) I can live with it.”

I have a question.  Do you think she would be so forgiving if it were a lowly “Average Joe” who had raped her as opposed to a famous director?

Oh, and I did like The Pianist.


A few links…

ABC News story on the case

An excerpt from the victim in grand jury testimony ( graphic in nature)

A feminist( Anne Orangebum) gets into a huff when called on her bullshit

A member of Charlie Manson’s harem, who killed Polanski’s wife Sharon Tate in 1969, died a few days ago


A couple off topic links…

A former aide to Bill Clinton is claiming the ex pres got a bit too friendly with her.  I believed her up until she said she got “uncomfortable.”  HT: Jammie Wearing Fool

I found a picture of these ugly left wing piglets protesting against private health insurance.  Of course my goal in life is to subsidize these two slobs early onset diabetes so they can sit around surfing Jezebel and Feministing all day.

Update: Ace, over at Ace of Spades correctly labels Andrew Young ( John Edwards buttboy/former aide) at the bottom of the post.


Filed under alpha, american decline, american women, beta male, female nature, feminism, media, Mens Issues

My Outrage to the 24 Hour Divorce



I have passed by this billboard frequently in the last few months and decided to take a picture of it today.  It sits on the main northbound street that runs into Downtown Denver. 

What can I say, I love fossils.  The T-Rex, the Brontosaurus, you name it, they all fascinate me.  I have to admit, I almost wet myself in anticipation when I first laid eyes on this billboard. I mean c’mon. An expo is coming to town that not only features fossils, but gems and minerals as well!?!  Good golly! Needless to say, I am excited.  I got out of work early so I could blog about it.

I would like to survey my readers on their favorite fossils and some of the best expos they have att….shit…

My bad, this was meant for my Geology blog.  Oops.

Well, I guess while I’m at it, I could offer a few words about the other billboard.  See the ugly yellow and black one?

The one, I should point out, that is doing its best to distract motorists from what could shape up to be the greatest exposition in the Mile High City’s history?  Yeah that one.

My first reaction was disgust.  What kind of sick, repressive, patriarchal culture makes a woman wait an entire day before she can be unshackled from the chains of “marriage” slavery?  I am outraged.  Offended as well.

We know this billboard ain’t meant for men.  Most know how lucky they are, and would never think of divorce.  Only a few men at the top, who trade in wives like used cars, consider it.  These men have high powered lawyers to handle their dirty work.  No need to call an 800 number.

I have a few objections.  First, as we know, women’s education is in poor shape in this country.  Thanks to male privilege, little girls are slighted and ignored by the male dominated public school system.  Sure, there are a few female teachers, but the administration is a “good ol boys” network if I ever saw one. 

With that as preamble, I ask the question: How many women, especially those of lower socio-economic status, are able to read the word “divorce” on the billboard?  What are they to do?  What about women that can’t speak English?  Are they supposed to suffer the indignity of divorce in a week, or even a month?

Think of the difficulty and danger that is faced by having to write down or dial the number while driving. I realize what fantastic multitaskers women are, but should we put yet another additional responsibility on their plate?

Pull over you say?  Please, and be late to work, where a man is champing at the bit, looking for any reason to fire her?  If you are going to ask those kinds of questions, I‘m going to have to ask you to leave.  Take the misogyny with you. 

Clearly if this injustice is allowed to stand, we will see the patriarchy attempt even bolder acts of oppression.  These brutes are devious.  And patient.  I suspect most of them have read Rules for Radicals.  They understand incrementalism.

First they make women wait 24 hours for a divorce, then a week, then a month, and pretty soon divorce is outlawed.  Once this happens, the burqa isn’t far off.

I try to be a solutions driven person.  It’s not enough to complain about the patriarchy.  Bold action is needed to keep it at bay.  With that said, here is my idea that could rid the country of the injustice of a 24 hour waiting period. 

After all, women aren’t guns, they are equal human beings. I was only confronted with this sickening display of male aggression hours ago.  My solution may be hasty, but something must be done.  Remember, no justice, no peace.

Without further delay, I suggest: The drive thru divorce window.  Think this is radical huh.  I call it tit for tat.  The male power structure, in places like Las Vegas, Nevada, already have drive thru MARRIAGE windows.  Typically what happens, is a man will get a young and inexperienced woman drunk, or even slip a drug into her drink, and then sucker her into marriage slavery.  By the time she realizes her mistake, days or even weeks can go by before the situation is rectified. 

Corrupt judges have even been known to deny a division of the assets in these situations.  The victimized woman is left with nothing.  A disgrace. We can strike back though.  It will take perseverance and hard work.

Obviously, women have a very hectic schedule.  The 35 hour work weeks, the yoga classes, jaunts to the spa, picking up the only child, and vital trips to the mall can make finding time for a divorce exceedingly difficult. 

I propose a law, federal mind you, not some bullshit city council proposal, that requires McDonald’s, Wendy’s, Taco Bell, even Arby’s, etc. to provide an additional window that deals exclusively with divorce.

For women who make healthier choices, I would require Kiosks at Whole Foods, Subway, Qdoba, and the like.

Suggestions on naming this important legislation is greatly appreciated.

Don’t give me some Constitutional mumbo jumbo either. Heck, we could amend the Americans with Disabilities Act if we have to.  If this country can make businesses provide wheelchair ramps, handicapped parking, and wide doors, it can certainly make them build an additional drive up window or kiosk.  What’s the big deal?  After all, think how many women in America are disabled by their lazy, asexual, insensitive, and often brutally violent husbands.

A women could order a happy meal for HER child, pay for it (hopefully with the husband’s credit card), pick it up at the next window, and then, instead of driving directly to the day care center, make a quick stop at the divorce window.

There, a smiling, and understand woman ( a man with this job could only provide unneeded trauma) would take down a bit of vital information and enter it into a national database.  Within minutes, hamburger still hot, a woman can drive away emancipated.  Now that, my friends, is more like it.

Think of the additional jobs this third drive thru window could provide.  At first, I thought, that wise, undocumented Latinas, from south of our border, could fill these positions. 

Thinking about it more, I don’t think this would work.  Although wise in many ways, they wouldn’t be sensitive to the feelings and plight of an American women.  Most are just not educated enough to understand the perils of the patriarchy.

I think a partnership with local colleges, possibly the women’s studies department, would be more fruitful.  Perhaps, some sort of internship, or required community service, would do our young budding minds some good. 

Another option would be a collaboration with community organizers.   I’m waiting on a callback from the Denver Acorn office as we speak. Their recent work in helping a woman start a brothel tells me they are natural allies.  Small business, especially women owned, is the backbone of this country.

Child support and custody, alimony, division of the assets, and other messy situations are often used by men to try and make a woman feel guilty about her decision.  These situations can be time consuming, mentally draining, and hurtful.

To me, this is just as offensive as the 24 hour waiting period.  After all, a woman has to get on with her life. In addition, like free speech, or freedom of religion, a woman has a right not to feel guilt, or regret her decision in any way. 

She might have even met a man who better fits her needs.  A man who understands a woman’s unique sexual desires, or one that is more mature and financially stable. Is she supposed to ignore her feelings to appease some archaic patriarchal standard? 

Sometimes, a newly freed women just needs to get out with her girlfriends. Friends who have been by her side, through thick and thin, while she survived the hell of marriage slavery. After years of living this drudgery, women often need to hit the town, and go to night spots, to mingle with the more enlightened and less bitter. After years of emotional abuse, validation from younger, less demanding, and open minded men, feels wonderful.

Believe it or not, former oppressors aren’t so understanding.  In fact, they often try to blame, or make their former slave feel guilty about the situation.  Sometimes they even fight for child custody. What chutzpah. They will do anything to maintain control.

Many are complete deadbeats who object to meaningful child support or alimony.  They expect their former chattel to live on crumbs.  See how brutal the patriarchy is?  Even the tiny strides that have been achieved by the hard work of politically powerless women’s groups is fought tooth and nail.

This is why the national database is vital.  It should be set up to divide assets( and freeze them when necessary), provide for restraining orders, give custody of children to the victim, and set proper alimony payments. 

Shortly after, it should set up a years subscription to, or, if the woman chooses, Local nightclubs, travel agencies and shopping centers might be convinced to provide gift certificates to the newly freed.

All of these details should be completed before the last sip of Diet Coke.

In addition, a Federal officer should be dispatched immediately to remove the ex-husband from the woman and child’s home.  This should be easy to set up.  If local home security companies can pull it off, certainly our federal government can.
This step is vital in allowing a woman to move on with her life.  To expedite the process, contracts with rent by the week motels should be established so the federal official has a place to quickly take the ex-husband. Many men are lazy and make little money, and many have no friends or family who will take them in.  Prisons no longer in use, or not at full capacity, is a possibility as well.

Perhaps a public/private partnership with Uhaul could be had.  Anything that belongs to the husband, in consultation with the national database, could be stored by Uhaul at the ex-husbands expense.

Keep in mind, speed is essential.  A woman shouldn’t have to change her hectic schedule much in order to avoid seeing her former oppressor again.  Any contact could cause trauma, or irrational second thoughts about the divorce.  A quick trip to Macy’s should be the extent of any time killing.

Happy Meal+divorce+finish Diet Coke+daycare center+Macy’s+return to home sans husband = peace of mind, empowerment, and equality.  Oh, and most importantly, the 1st step toward closure.

 I would also support adding divorce to the “Family and Medical Leave Act” to protect women during this trying time.  Eh, check that.  12 weeks UNPAID leave?  Gimme a break.

I propose the “Recently Emancipated Leave to Find Yourself Act“.  After a divorce, a woman should be granted 18 months of paid leave to find closure and start a new life. Perhaps a government sponsored trip abroad would be helpful. Free daycare sounds like a good idea as well.

This is just one possible solution to the scourge of the 24 hour divorce.  I’d love to hear any other suggestions you have as well.  I think that any solution should not only fix the obvious injustice of a time consuming divorce process, but also work to eliminate any bad feelings a woman may suffer in the aftermath.  Remember the patriarchy’s biggest weapon is guilt.

I’ll leave you with some final words…

George Bush, while a clear oppressor of Stepford wife Laura, got one thing right when he said this: “When people are hurting, the government has gotta move”. 

Well, women are hurting.  Now lets move.



Filed under american decline, american women, female nature, feminism, humor

Ice Road Truckers and a Woman Worth Highlighting

I got hooked on The History Channel’s Ice Road Truckers three years ago.  Although TV in general, and reality shows in particular, don’t usually interest me, I took a liking to IRT right away.  I have always had a fascination with the Arctic and the extreme climate and conditions that go with it.  This alone explains the show’s ability to suck me in for three seasons.

This new genre of reality show, one that highlights dangerous blue collar jobs, is interesting in itself.  Sex, titillating voyeurism, and people doing outrageous and embarrassing things for money aren’t used to sell this new concept.  Could you imagine this being successful 60 years ago?  Would Jackie Gleason have been preempted by a modern day Grizzly Adams, chopping down a redwood tree?  I think not. Why does it work now?

 A few factors in no particular order… 

A higher percentage of the population lives in an urban setting. 

 An interest in the roots of the country’s high standard of living. 

Unique all male work environments.

Male bonding and conflict. 

A feminization of the culture.

A feminization of television.

An appreciation of the work.

Masculine traits like goal orientation, problem solving, and teamwork.

Work that involves danger.

Work that is adventurous.

Men sans de-balled mangina tendencies.

Compare all of this to the kind of jobs so many men are stuck in today and it’s easy to see why these shows can be compelling.  The lifestyle these jobs provide, and the people who do them, are more interesting and desirable than they were 60 years ago.


In season three, Ice Road Truckers featured its first female driver.  When I first heard about it, I wasn’t optimistic.  I figured 1 of 2 scenarios would play out.  The female would be an ugly, tobacco spitting, bull dyke or an incompetent, affirmitive action gimmick. 

The former would shed no light on male/female work relations (what’s interesting about a “man” without a penis?), and the latter would bring cringe inducing incompetence, talk of “brave pioneer” ad nauseum, and constant complaints about men and their insecure, superiority complex. 

I figured it would be an Alaskan dyke, and considering the alternative, hoping it was. Needless to say, I was not looking forward to this politically correct distraction.

Surprising, my worries would be unfounded.  The woman in question, Lisa Kelly, turned out to be young, attractive, and most importantly, able to pull her own weight.  She was a tomboy, but still had feminine aspects to her personality.  I really liked what she brought to the show.

A few reasons why she stood out…

1. She took criticism and instruction well.  I never saw her bristle or take offense when someone who was more experienced and knowledgeable (a man) told her something useful.

2. She didn’t whine.  She had a pleasant demeanor and seemed to enjoy what she was doing.  She seemed like an ambitious and hard worker.

3. She didn’t appear to be an affirmative action/gimmick for TV hire.  From what I could tell, she knew what she was doing.  I never felt that she was the “weak link” that other people (men) had to cover for.  In fact, I would guess her skills to be above average if compared to the male truckers.

Sidebar:In my opinion, the road IRT highlighted in season 3 was the toughest they have shown to date.  The Dalton Highway was featured, a road that runs from Fairbanks, Alaska all the way up to Prudhoe Bay.  The truckers supply parts, big and small, used in oil drilling, and exploration.  The weather is of course harsh and unpredictable, and the road runs through difficult and diverse terrain.  The road is icy, narrow and often steep, which make passing and breaking a challenge in itself.  End sidebar.

4. She was honest and humble about duties she needed help with.  Lisa had only been driving a big rig for a couple years, I believe, at the time of the show’s filming, so on occasion something would come up ( usually mechanical) that she couldn’t tackle herself.  She was fine with someone (a man) fixing it for her.  She tried to understand what they were doing in order to handle it the next time by herself.  Additionally, I never got the feeling she took advantage of her co-workers eagerness to help her (and eager they were).

5. Didn’t try to be a man.  Feminine, and at times flirty, I think Lisa enjoys being a woman, and I suspect, understands male/female differences.  I’m sure we have a lack of a college “education” to explain this wisdom.

6. Liked her co-workers.  Never noticed a chip on her shoulder or a superiority complex.  She seemed to take the extra attention that comes with being young, female, and good looking in stride.  I don’t recall a single moment where she played the victim or claimed to be offended.

7. No feminist drivel. Very little talk about how unique, empowered and special she is, or her quest to blaze a path for every women locked out of the ice road trucking game.  I suspect she realizes that very few women could accomplish what she has, and maintains a healthy respect for the men who do the work.

Another sidebar:  I was struck by how respectful the men were of Lisa.  I mean this should be a feminist’s wet dream. A woman surrounded by a bunch of unrefined, blue collar barbarians should bring a barrage of inequality and sexual harassment. 

Of course the opposite is true.  Hard working men with wives and children, invested in society, will treat a woman with respect, and provide protection from those who don’t.  In addition, men love to work with women that are competent, hard working, and don’t seek special favor.  (Ironically, this behavior will be such a breath of fresh air, that, many times, it will be rewarded with special favors( especially if she is attractive).  As long as a woman maintains an aversion to it, I have no problem with this.  I have no interest in fighting human nature.)  End sidebar.

I realize that her upbringing, and lifestyle in the wilds of Alaska, have a lot to do with her behavior ( she is strikingly similar to Sarah Palin).  I also understand her nature and “tomboyishness” are a bit unque as well. 

I don’t expect most women to have her background, or an interest in her lifestyle, but it would be nice if her attitude was a bit more prevalent. Especially in work settings. It would be nice if I won the lottery too I spose.  In other words, I’m not holding my breath.

On the bright side, if her behavior was commonplace, I wouldn’t be writing this, and probably wouldn’t have a blog in the 1st place.  Wait, is that the bright side?  Nevermind.

In the interest of fairness, and for the purpose of advocating what I am for, instead of only addressing what I am against, I have decided to occasionally highlight women who deserve it.

A contrast between Lisa’s behavior (and the improved workplace environment it brings), as opposed to what I commonly see, is worth a post of its own.  For now, I’ll just say that I believe her to be very unique and worth celebrating.

Congratulations Lisa Kelly, you deserve it.


Filed under american women, female nature, feminism, media, Mens Issues, pop culture

My Men’s Rights Journey

I can’t remember what the exact impetus was that led me to type “Repeal the 19th Amendment” into my search engine three years ago, but in doing so, I began a journey into the world of Men’s Rights and other related issues. I think the first website that came up was: 

I’m sure most who read here have happened upon it.   If you haven’t, lets just say that nuanced and intellectual wouldn’t be used to describe it.  At the time though, it was refreshing.  It was like playing Grand Theft Auto and  releasing pent up frustrations by running over, or shooting innocent by standers.   If the larger culture is dominated by feminist assumptions;  MABTW is balance on steroids.  No joke, word, or idea is taboo there.  Surprisingly, some of the commenter’s were actually pretty insightful. After perusing the unabashed misogyny for a bit, I moved on to more constructive and reasonable fare. 

I found sites like Glenn SacksChristian J’s, Pooks Mill, Angry Harry, Eternal Bachelor, No Ma’am, Marky Mark and the like.  Not long after, I found Hawaiian Libertarian, Elusive Wapiti, Novaseeker and a few others places I read to this day.  The timeline gets fuzzy with all of the clicking around that I did, but I believe Dave in Hawaii is the man who 1st brought me to the world of Roissy and other proponents of Game. 

Tangent:I had certainly heard about PUA philosophy before, but it never struck me as something beneficial to the larger culture. Early on, it wasn’t something I was looking for either.  I thought it only applied to men that were terrible with women.  Awkward, painfully shy, and passive guys.  Men invisible to most women, or who stick out like sore thumbs because of their obvious social ineptitude.  What did that have to do with me?  I had never been Casanova but I did alright.  At times I did quite better than alright.  I was never resentful or angry about a lack of female attention.

As you can see, I had a lot to learn.  Roissy and the likeminded tied it all together.  I admit that if Roissy had the politics of Noam Chomsky, I probably wouldn’t have been as receptive to his message.  That’s missing the point though.  Roissy wouldn’t be Roissy if he had a leftist persuasion. He ties evolutionary psychology, societal trends and the dark parts of female nature in with Game theory.  Think a dyed in the wool leftist could do that?

I don’t think you have to be of a conservative or libertarian persuasion to “run” Game and be successful with women.  Far from it. However, I think it would be damn near impossible to truly understand why it works so well and be a leftist.  Too many pretty lies to overcome. End Tangent.

Roissy led me to sites written by Welmer, Chuck Ross, Whiskey, Ricky Raw and Thursday among others.

Eventually I came upon Beta Revolution, Ferdinand Bardamu, Alpha Status, and Josh Xiong.  The pace in which I am finding new and insightful blogs seems to be accelerating.

I really like what I’m seeing, or more accurately, reading.   A lot of constructive ideas are being batted around, and I think there is still a good deal of debate.  I hope this trend continues.

I also want to comment on why I typed those infamous words into the search engine. 

I suspect that most men who come to men’s rights websites do so because of a traumatic injustice done to them by women (or the courts) in their personal lives.  In times past especially, it often took a catastrophic event to wake men up about the inherent unfairness they face in our culture today.  Divorce theft, adultery, custody “disputes”, and false rape or harassment charges are common occurrences that can lead men to MRA and related websites. 

This is certainly understandable.  Men, by and large, are completely clueless about female nature and will remain ignorant of it unless something horrible happens. The personal stories of men who have 1st hand experience with the burgeoning matriarchy are invaluable.  The passion that such injustices inspire make raising awareness possible.

My path was a bit different though.  I’ve never been divorced.  Don’t have children.  Never been accused of rape or harassment.  Never been passed over in promotion in favor of a less qualified woman. 

I have however, always been a conservative with libertarian leanings.  Even before I knew what those words meant.  “Jack Kemp” conservatism was about as close to left wing as I got.  I guess that was my version of being young and idealistic.  I thought my liberal teachers were naïve and foolish, even in middle school, and before I could really understand why.  This made my path to being aware of the struggles men face much easier. 

I was driven mainly by macro issues.  Listening to young women “discuss” political topics, and seeing the result of their voting patterns, planted the seeds into my head pretty early on. The general “girls rule, boys drool” attitude was also a factor.  Men portrayed as bozos on every commercial and television show became more apparent as time went on.  The “celebration” of every marginal or trivial “achievement” of “empowered” women grew tiresome.

I also remember the feelings of  disconnect between what I heard “victimized” women say, and my own life experiences.  I know this may surprise you, but I found it hard to believe that emergency rooms were over flowing with battered women on Super Bowl Sunday.

I had all of these feelings but no outlet for them.  Expressing even tepid reservations about what I was noticing seemed unwelcome.  Such observations were met with, at best, mild indifference and, at worst, major hostility.  Women were especially bad in this regard, but the men weren’t particularly stellar either.

Sure, my friends and I would talk about inequities and the like, but generally it was about micro relationship issues.  Most of my buddies were apolitical, or only mildly interested in politics, history and current events.  There wasn’t a lot of talk about the cultural marginalization of males and the consequences that arise from it.

What I was seeing was rarely confronted.  Especially before the Internet came of age.  The fact that so many feminist inspired shibboleths were ridiculous on their face, and still unchallenged, irritated me to no end. 

I was also aware that social ostracism wasn‘t the only consequence of speaking my mind.  In the college or work environment, much greater perils were possible.  Speaking my mind has always come pretty naturally to me.  In general I’ve always been pretty respectful about it. Even in my less refined and more passionate days.  The things I believe in can be especially provocative at a young age.  I was accustomed to heated and rigorous arguments.  The kind of folks I would debate, no matter their stand on a given issue, generally welcomed the verbal sparring. 

Feminism seemed to be off limits though.  Sure you could talk about it, but the price, at least at the time, seemed to be pretty high.  I knew instinctively that I could be viewed as a Neanderthal by liberal males, a whiner by older conservative men, or a “loser” that “hates” women by females of every political persuasion. 

Believe me, the “conservative” women, at least of my generation, aren’t much better than their liberal sisters.  In fact, in some ways, I respect the liberal chicks more.  At least they are consistent.

The fact that many of these issues were difficult to talk to fellow conservatives about, made it increasingly frustrating.  When its hard to find a like-minded person, who agrees with you 90% of the time on other issues, I’m sure you can imagine why.

I sure didn’t feel like an unreasonable and deranged misogynist.  I certainly wasn’t George Sodini, polishing my guns, and planning revenge on all the women who had wronged me.  I wasn’t a loser looking for a scapegoat for every problem in my life.  My positions at the time, were pretty moderate.  More moderate than they are now in fact.

I hadn’t even been “wronged”.  No life changing, traumatic event had woken me up and inspired a complete change in how I viewed women.  That’s not to say I had never had problems dealing with the modern day American female.  Pretty mild and common stuff though.  Nothing that could ruin or permanently change the course of my life.

I can’t remember the exact reason why I typed those immortal words into my search engine.  I suspect is was something to do with single women and their love for every entitlement program under the sun.  Perhaps it was the sparkle in their eyes when Bill Clinton graced a room. I dunno.  It was inevitable though.  I had noticed too much.  I finally needed an outlet for what I was thinking.  I needed positive feedback.  I wanted to know how many men were thinking the same things I was. 

Thank Gore for the Internet!  I’ve been reading ever since.  I’ve learned a lot, and refined my own thoughts quite a bit.  For over two and a half years I simply read, critiqued and formulated ideas.  Only two months ago was I inspired to start my own little blog. 

Is there anything to be taken from my own experience.  Well, yeah, I think so. 

Here are a few…

1.The ubiquitousness of female privilege in our society no longer requires men to be hit with the brick of divorce, child support, false allegation etc. to notice inequities, injustice and dangerous trends. 

2.I’m not special or unique.  I wasn’t wise beyond my years. I didn’t have some magical quality that allowed me to understand women better.  Quite simply, times are a changin.

3. Young conservative men are where it’s at.  I’ve heard arguments about how liberals( at least some of them) could be made to see the light on equality grounds or some such nonsense.  Sorry, don’t buy it.  People that don’t understand human nature in general, or male/female differences in particular, are hopeless. 

 Older conservative men are blinded by the shiny pedestal they have put women on.  Occasionally younger women, with attitudes like Ann Coulter or Christina Hoff Summers are to be found, and should be embraced when they are. 

Young men, of a conservative bent, are the ones most likely to be persuaded.  For one thing they don’t suffer from liberal guilt.  For another, they usually have thick skin.  Their natural inclinations against big government and special treatment make them natural allies. Young social conservatives that recognize trends not conducive to their religious beliefs, and an ability to see where feminized American churches are going, are also potential allies.

Side note:  I take great joy in the shaming of young conservatives/naive libertarians that don’t get it.  I think taking the Larry Austers of the world to the woodshed is probably a waste of time. Don’t discourage it though.  Taking Conor Frederdufus and Will Wilkerson to task is another matter.  I strongly encourage it.  This brings me to my last point.

4. Game makes Men’s Right’s cool.  It wasn’t necessary to bring me into the fold, but at the margins, I think it makes it more palatable for a lot of young guys that haven’t been royally screwed by women to accept.  Game is empowering and men have an aversion to victim status.  I don’t think it’s a coincidence, given my personal history, to have been inspired to write a blog only after Game had been introduced to me. 

Many apolitical men will seek out Game to improve their lot with women.  A Roissy like message, in one form or another, will help them see the light on an array of issues; not just ways to be more attractive to females. 

A movement made up, primarily of men screwed in divorce or family court, won’t gain enough traction in the larger male population.  By movement, I mostly mean an effort to help individual men see the light and react accordingly.  Sweeping legal and cultural change seems to me to be a pipe dream at this point.  My point about appealing to a broader base stands, whatever the goal is though.

Lastly, and to tie in with my side note, Game makes male shaming easier.  Put yourself in the place of your typical conservative leaning type of guy that doesn’t have a clue about male/female relations.  Would it sting a bit more to be taken to the woodshed by a  Roissy type, or by a 40-year-old Glenn Sacks type “bitching” about child support payments?  I love Sacks and all of his fellow travelers (like me) but I think we know the answer to the question.

I thought that telling the story of how I happened upon MRA and other related websites would be instructive.  I’m not sure how typical my path was, but I do believe that larger numbers of men around my age, give or take 10 years, will come to the same destination one way or another.


Filed under american women, female nature, feminism, Mens Issues, politics, pop culture