Belinda Brown: A century of feminism has failed us. Women have betrayed men’s trust

Neil Lyndon, author of No More Sex War and one of the first men to openly critique  feminism,  is right to draw attention to the relentless problems now facing boys and men.

I am sympathetic to his logic that if the women who understand these problems, i.e. those who write for The Conservative Woman (I can say with confidence since he mentioned us in his article)  held political power, our sex might give us the authority to dismantle feminist vanity projects and shine a light and some funding on the serious disadvantages afflicting boys and men.

However I do not think it is traditional politics but something far more radical which holds the key to real social change.

Firstly, feminists may be a minority, but they are powerful. Women have real power in the family, rooted in their reproductive capability. This may, entirely through women’s individual decisions, lead to a secondary role in the public realm.  Feminists have used this lower public status as a bargaining chip to pursue their own self-interest in every possible avenue of public life.  Today feminists control the traffic lights and the road rules, men are only chauffeurs, even when they appear to be in the driver’s seat.

So as Neil seems to realise the cogs of the feminist machine will grind relentlessly on to ensure that any attempt to draw attention to men’s issues  will either be re-appropriated and reconfigured (e.g. male suicide becomes a problem of masculinity  but nothing of course to do with the way that women treat men or the loss of male identity) or systematically undermined.

If women knew the full extent of male disadvantage the feminist cathedral of cards would very quickly come tumbling down.

Secondly feminists  are not amenable to rational argument.  There are none so blind as those whose view has been eclipsed by ideology; ideology  built on distortion, piled on top of stupidity and upon lie after lie until the truth lies buried deep beneath.  Feminists are not going to turn traitor to an ideology which has not only nurtured their careers but determined crucial, life changing, and possibly life destroying, decisions in their private lives. The courage required to recognise their error would not be outweighed by the gain.

So Neil,  I  do admire your persistence and your passion and your ability to rise phoenix like from the calumnious feminist ashes. But to put your hope in Sandi Toksvig’s and others'  Women’s Equality Party? Neil read what they stand for  - their equality for men would mean pussy-whipped lap dogs tethered to their feminist cause.

No.  Sailing between the Scylla of feminism and the Charybdis of the MGTOW (Men Going Their Own Way) is going to require a far more radical response.  For those of us who care, and I care profoundly, we will end up losing if we play by the traditional rules of the game.

Feminism works well for women who want visible power and influence. But it has no strategy for social reproduction. Boys on Ritalin, internet addiction, obesity, oversexualised children, men in prison, fractured families – feminism has no long term survival strategy.  These are just some examples of  its scorched earth spawn.

The men who choose to go their own way, either as part of a movement or by rationally rejecting marriage and monogamy because it has cost their fathers and brothers dearly  may  be acting wisely.  But when it comes to the long term survival of human society, to the question of how to preserve the civilisation which their forefathers and foremothers created (long before feminism) theirs is not a  realistic plan. It is a social death wish.

If we want to rebuild society, we need a longer term, low key approach.

You are right, Neil,  that ultimately it is women, women who destroyed so much through their pursuit of self-interest, but who, because of their reproductive potential hold the key. This time round it is going to be very much harder.  Men trusted us, they served us, they built our houses, fought our battles and they received our respect embodied in patriarchal structures in return. But now they have nothing. What is more they have found out that if they do give us what power they had, we deprive them of their children, we take their resources and we give them nothing, nothing in return. This time round we can’t expect them to do our bidding, as they did for so long. If we want to win back their trust and if we want them to co-operate with us, and I do, we will have to concede some of our independence and be prepared to place some dependence on them. In this,  for their own security, we will have, I am afraid, to allow them to take the lead.

The radical plan involves the decreasing numbers of us  who have not fallen for feminism, who prioritise our families - and this includes our husbands as well as our children, our parents and our grandchildren. First we need  to make sure that the government allows us to do this, so that we do not have to be primarily dedicated to work.  That is a campaign in itself.   Only if we do this properly, place our families at the centre of our lives, can men once again follow suit.

This is what the feminist century has done. By almost destroying the family it has shown us that it is the cornerstone of society.  If we want  self-fulfilled, happy, creative individuals,  a functional, well networked society and a civilisation worthy of emulation,  we need strong healthy, resourceful families built on the commitment and selflessness of adults, persistence and a lot of hard work.

Only the steadfast women who are happy to prioritise the interests of their husbands and their children  can set this process in motion. The feminists can’t, nor can the MGTOW.  Women can do it, but only with the help of men. Together we can undo the damage which feminism created and rebuild a world of which can feel a little more proud.

Belinda Brown

  • Barry Sheridan

    Could I suggest another influence that has contributed to the gradual decline of females as attractive long term partners. This can be found in what is on television, especially those programmes that appear in the main to appeal to the female audience. Filling the screens during the day and into the evening are the improbable filled story lines of soap operas and other formats whose central themes acts as a showcases for the very worst aspects of human behaviour. At the heart of this diet is confrontation, a trait that appears to resonate to the average female psyche, although why I have no idea. While this may have been less of an influence than the institutional bigotries of modern feminism Belinda, it has played a role.

    • Belinda Brown

      Yes that is true and an interesting point. I am sure that there are many other influences for some of the problems we have but so few people appreciate the role of feminism as a social influence that I perhaps over-bang on about that.

    • Mez

      Confrontation is only an issue to those who can’t handle it. People in healthy relationships have to be able to confront issues – discuss them openly and find mutually acceptable solutions. UNhealthy relationships revolve around control and dictatorship (more often than not patriarchy). If there were’nt couples forming relationships based on the wrong bedrock there wouldnt be the issues developing now over maintenance etc, which are going to fall heavily on the man because of the external issue of national income disparity . Despite decades of equal pay legislation, nothing much has changed and womens skills are still valued less and stuck in low paid jobs

  • Nockian

    Feminists are ignorant of what they are doing. They are emulating something spiritual as manifest. It’s like a dream taken as reality. They intuit the divine femine but superimpose the female gender for it. It is a graven image no more, no less.

    It is true that the divine feminine is under attack, but symbolically attacking the masculine on the material plane, it is driving a greater wedge between the divine masculine and feminine on the spiritual plane. It takes us further from unity and into darker waters.

    Divide and conquer, is the separation of feminine and masculine on both planes simultaneously. As above, so below.

    The feminine has always been the most destructive in this trist, which is why it is often resisted forcefully. It is like fire. So, the battle takes place on two separate fields of combat. The solution is union in which one cares deeply for the other whilst accepting the unique differences. It is the marriage of heaven and hell.

    • Lock up your daughters?

      I am feeling a little feeble because much of that went way over my head. Were you speaking in tongues?

      Perhaps I understood wrong but may I present you with a bastardised quote:

      “Secondly religious fundamentalists are not amenable to rational argument. There are none so blind as those whose view has been eclipsed by ideology; ideology built on distortion, piled on top of stupidity and upon lie after lie until the truth lies buried deep beneath. …..”

  • gammosiuwong

    Thank you for a more fulsome acknowledgement of the wrongs that your sex has perpetrated upon mine however I do not agree agree with your solution.

    While I agree that family should be the very bedrock of society there’s no way that any government or feminists will now permit women a “traditional” role. You are to be thrown at the “glass ceiling” for the ostensible benefit of a few whether you like it or not. The group of steadfast women that you identify can never be large or powerful enough to effect change.

    It’s the mass of women who think with their uterus first that you must change (See SNP’s Women’s Pledge). You must change one of the most fundamental female traits – self-interest – for a belief in genuine equality and even justice. Good luck with that!!

    I think women DO appreciate much, though not all, of male disadvantage such as Family Law, Divorce Law etc which is in the papers every day; but they just don’t care.

    Women must be forced to abandon their narcissism and turning our backs will work in the long run; although, as you say, much harm will have been needlessly caused. The diminishment of the welfare Daddy State will hasten the process.

    • Lock up your daughters?

      Yeah, MGTOW will bring ‘dem bitches’ to heel [with thanks to Ali G]

      Seriously though; what ‘solution’ do you want and how do you see it panning out over say the next 2 (reduced or devalued) generations?

      This is a debate of extremes, most with their own sacred cows.

      Let’s do the math…..

      No Daddys + no “Daddy State” = ?…….

      = destitution
      &/OR
      = no youth/replacement in the population …….which business and government will remedy with mass immigration …..and potentially even a new religion being imposed on the country.

      Would male self interest make “traditional” man an easy convert?

  • Victor Milevski

    I would argue it’s, first and foremost, time to do away with the term. You name me anything that feminists support and I will find you feminists who oppose it. Anything at all and I will look in here again if anyone wants to try me on that.

    Feminists who oppose gay rights, gender reassignment, sanity, they all have names to distinguish them from other feminist groups. None of the “good” feminists have a name to distinguish themselves from the various “bad” groups. They need one in order to progress.

    • Mez

      I agree with that, grouping everyone together as feminists who just support equal rights, is like trying to call ‘the left’ a single party. Sandy Toksvigs parties objectives look like a lot of common sense to me, but it’s been tagged feminist above . Compare that to Natalie Bennet who’s endorsing marital threesomes and lives with somebody who’s a hairs breadth away from illegal

      “No, not a left-wing alliance of female party leaders, but the real thing! Asked at a Pink News event by a man who is “living with his two boyfriends” whether the Greens would back polygamorous marriage, Bennett replied:

      “We have led the way on many issues related to the liberalisation of legal status in adult consenting relationships, and we are open to further conversation and consultation.”

    • Belinda Brown

      Yes but all feminists believe in patriarchy, all feminists believe that men are more powerful than women and that women are disadvantaged by them. That is the fundamental flaw. Why do feminists need to progress? Their ideology has been accepted and adopted by all corners of society.

      • Victor Milevski

        What we need to point out is that every day there are more women in the patriarchy and it doesn’t change.

  • fubar_saunders

    Powerful argument, well made. Like it a lot.

  • A Nonymouse

    Women do not have to give up any of their independence, just stop taking away men’s.

    Current relationship and separation laws are manifestly unjust in their interpretation and application. Why would a man invest effort in a relationship or children when a woman can take both away with no reason needing to be given, and still demand he pay for them?
    Heard of any women locked up for refusing child access? Doesn’t happen.

    When you assume all men are sinners, or latent ones, then you drive away the decent, strong ones who won’t put up with it, and all you get left with are the indecent and/or weak ones; it’s a self-fulfilling prophecy.

    When people won’t listen, sometimes you have to let them hurt themselves before they realise their error. Feminism – that’s the version that demands more than equality (there’s nothing wrong with real equality) – is going to run society into a brick wall in a few years, and the stronger men are going to let it happen. They can’t be bothered with the aggro of not being listened to any more. Maybe you’ll listen after the wall is hit.

    • Mez

      There’s an example listed below of a divorce, whereupon the wife was looking for financial support from her wealthy father in law, and the Judge actually agreed to it, along with maintenance that was worth £4k per month (about half her husbands income of £100k pa (presumably after tax) at that time. Politicians meddling with higher tax rates are potentially wrecking divorced mens livelyhoods. It looks to me as though men taking ownership of this by only marrying with a prenup is the only way they’re going to take control of their own financial livelyhood. It would have to include future child maintenance which according to this is £7k pa, and if that is to be shared, the woman has to agree to it and on what basis, as well as clauses related to access. Should a ‘violent’ or other unknown aspect to their or childs relationship develop in the future. Claiming father in laws assets, is right out of order in my opinion, and it was a male judge – a Mr Justice Coleridge who agreed it.

      There’s a list on this site of how and which maintence terms are agreed

      http://www.familylawweek.co.uk/site.aspx?i=ed142750

    • NastyNinja

      GO MGTOW. Watch it burn.

  • misomiso

    +1

  • Lock up your daughters?

    I love it.

    Satire at it’s best. Well done Belinda!

    Not all nonsense, and highlighting real issues ….but still very funny.

    I blame myself 😉

    • Belinda Brown

      It’s not satire.

      You should.

  • Oliver J.S McMullen

    “First we need to make sure that the government allows us to do this, so that we do not have to be primarily dedicated to work.”

    And that is the rock on which your hopes will founder. The very expression “government allows us” is fundamentally and utterly wrong – the government should be servant not master and it should have no say at all in these issues. If you take the attitude that you need government’s permission (allowance) for the way you organise your lives you might as well admit defeat before you even start. What you aim for should be part of a much wider political movement of social and moral conservatives whose aim should be threefold: wrest power back from the progressive elite, politically and intellectually destroy that elite, systematically reduce the size and scope of the state. Only then will we have a chance to rebuild a society worth living in.

    • Belinda Brown

      I couldn’t agree with you more….I see a two pronged approach…getting rid of feminism would help to reduce state dependency and strengthening the family and the networks which spiral from it would provide an alternative source of strength and security….from that position of strength anything can be done.

      • The Prisoner

        Well you go ahead and do that. I’m going fishing and staying the hell away from women. Okay with one exception, that is escorts. Escorts are the only women left out there that are half way honest anymore.

  • Mez

    What you’re writng is personal opinion based on a minority of other personal opinions published in the press. Radical writers who according to this site, have destroyed marriage. “Women’s Equality Party” are a group of people with their own shared opinions, they don’t speak for all women, and they don’t speak for all feminists. For the record I’m not a feminist, I’m a libertarian, and as such I believe we should have the freedom to develop our lives as we see fit, proviiding it harms nobody else in doing so. That philosophy allows married women who choose to to stay at home and have children, and career women the opportunity to persue their careers, without being forced by ‘anti-feminists’ into their own entrenched traditional ideology, (which can be just as harmful as extreme feminism, but in different ways). A majority has no right to create an edict over a minority in either way.

    What you should be looking into is the radical left, the social Marxists who have had an agenda since the inception of the Frankfurt school to destroy the family.

    This ‘School’ (designed to put flesh on their revolutionary programme) was started at the University of Frankfurt in the Institut für Sozialforschung. To begin with school and institute were indistinguishable. In 1923 the Institute was officially established, and funded by Felix Weil (1898-1975). Carl Grünberg, the Institute’s director from 1923-1929, was an avowed Marxist, although the Institute did not have any official party affiliations. But in 1930 Max Horkheimer assumed control and he believed that Marx’s theory should be the basis of the Institute’s research. When Hitler came to power, the Institut was closed and its members, by various routes, fled to the United States and migrated to major US universities—Columbia, Princeton, Brandeis, and California at Berkeley.

    The School included among its members the 1960s guru of the New Left Herbert Marcuse (denounced by Pope Paul VI for his theory of liberation which ‘opens the way for licence cloaked as liberty’), Max Horkheimer, Theodor Adorno, the popular writer Erich Fromm, Leo Lowenthal, and Jurgen Habermas – possibly the School’s most influential representative

    1. The creation of racism offences.
    2. Continual change to create confusion
    3. The teaching of sex and homosexuality to children
    4. The undermining of schools’ and teachers’ authority
    5. Huge immigration to destroy identity.
    6. The promotion of excessive drinking
    7. Emptying of churches
    8. An unreliable legal system with bias against victims of crime
    9. Dependency on the state or state benefits
    10. Control and dumbing down of media
    11. Encouraging the breakdown of the family

    https://libertarianalliance.wordpress.com/2013/01/18/the-frankfurt-school-conspiracy-to-corrupt/

    There’s also the change in finance and credit over the last 50 years – most definately a male dominated profession. Feminists didn’t arrange for easy credit to be made available at a ratio of 6-7 times + income in the 00’s. In the first half of the 20th century women were unable to get a mortgage in their own right, and only half their income supported a mortgage as part of a married couple anyway. It is that alteration, allowing both to borrow 6-7 times their income which has forced up house prices . According to a Capx article this week, there is in fact no ‘national’ house shortage, (allowing for certain regional issues), houses have become too expensive because of easy credit availability. Withdraw that, and house prices fall (as they did in 2009). House prices and mortages are more often than not why women are being forced to work full time, coupled with the fact tax on their income supports govt spending.

    from order-order today

    “No, not a left-wing alliance of female party leaders, but the real thing! Asked at a Pink News event by a man who is “living with his two boyfriends” whether the Greens would back polyamorous marriage, Bennett replied:

    “WE HAVE LED the way on many issues related to the liberalisation of legal status in adult consenting relationships, and we are open to further conversation and consultation.”

    • Belinda Brown

      For the record I am an anti-feminist but I believe that women should be able to have as much of a career as they want to – totally and utterly.

  • Mez

    An exerpt from a BBC article about Sandy Toksvigs party – supported by both men and women. Obvously when maintenance is being agreed, men are having to fill the gap created by an external income disparity, and because so many girls grow up thinking they’re going to live a dream of having a family and that’s all, they don’t consider the risk of having nothing at all to fall back on if things go wrong (which stats show they often do, and often because of traditional male attitudes). I can’t see anything anti-family or ant-marriage about their objectives quoted below.

    “Asked why the party was specifically campaigning for women’s equality, she replied: “There’s a huge issue. Women are certainly not equal. How is it that we still have a pay gap? What is it, 45 years since the Equal Pay Act?

    “On average for part-time work, women are paid 35% less than men. How is that possible? Ten per cent less in full-time employment. It’s the Women’s Equality Party because unless we access all the talents in this country we’re not going to succeed. Equality’s better for everybody.”

    ‘Majority’ voice

    Author and former Time Magazine editor-at-large Catherine Mayer is among the party’s other founders.

    According to a Facebook post about a recent meeting, their aims and objectives are: Equal representation in politics and the boardroom; equal pay; equal parenting rights; equality of and through education; equal treatment by and in the media; and an end to violence against women.

    Asked why she had not joined an established political party, Toksvig replied: “Most of the mainstream parties seem to treat women’s issues as if we were a minority group rather than, in fact, what we are, which is the majority of the country.

    “So you get separate women’s manifestos, or you get childcare talked about as if it was only a woman’s issue, and if UKIP and the Green Party have taught us anything, actually pushing our agenda from the outside and pushing the mainstream parties to pay attention is much more successful.

  • Fabian_Solutions

    You hate Feminism and you’re a woman?

    I suppose you don’t want the vote?

    I suppose you don’t want to be paid as much as a man for doing the same job?

    I suppose you don’t want to work outside the home?

    I suppose you don’t want your daughter (if you have one) to become a doctor, lawyer, scientist or politician?

    I suppose you want to be the property of your husband?

    As a woman you should appreciate all that Feminism has done for us women.

    Without Feminism, women would still be subjugated second class citizens.

    • The Prisoner

      I see women getting paid the same as me all the time. Trouble is they don’t do the same work that I do, yet they get paid the same. Feminist like you don’t want equal pay for equal work. Just like you want greater rights than men have, yet not of the responsibilities that come with those rights.

      Tell you what, you go be a feminist all you want to. I am a MGTOW so I will never be around you anyway. Oh, guess what that means? I have solved a lot of your problems as a feminist.
      No more cat calls or staring at you. Why, because you have nothing to offer us.
      No more date rape. Why, because we won’t date you anymore.
      No more domestic violence. Why, because we won’t be living with you.
      No more worries about alimony and child support. Why, because we won’t marry you or have kids with you.

      See once again men have succeeded in taking care of the problems that feminist have. Feminist your problems have been solved by MGTOW, we leave you to your own capable hands and will now go fishing. Oh and don’t think of showing up at my place unless your going to cook me a meal, then leave.

  • Fabian_Solutions

    I’ve got it.

    The real reason why men don’t want equality for women is they are scared of us.

    They can’t handle competition from women in the workplace.

    That’s why men can’t handle the idea of a woman becoming President.

    They want to return to the 1950s where simply being a straight, cis white male gave you a massive advantage in the job market.

    Well it’s not happening, boys.

    Men are going to have to get used to competing against us in the job market.

    Men are going to have to get used to being out-earned by your wives and girlfriends.

    Deal with it.

    • ThisIsTwentyFifteen

      Come and compete with us down the mines.
      We’ll teach you a thing or two about your notions of “equality”.

  • Dr John Barry, UCL

    Feminism pretends to represent the needs of all women, but in reality feminism represents the needs of only that small minority of women (~20%) who prefer a career to a family life. However, in order to increase their numbers, this 20% – who are only 10% of the population – had to convince the other 80% of women that (a) women are oppressed by the traditional family role and (b) women are liberated by entering the workplace. These two lies have been at the root of a huge amount of hurt and confusion in recent decades e.g. women who leave childrearing too late because of their career and end up lonely in a job they find endlessly unfulfilling. I personally believe that we should support the needs and aspirations of all women, including the 20% who want only a career, the 20% who want only a family, and the 60% who want some element of both (figures from Catherine Hakim’s ‘Work-Lifestyle Choices in the 21st Century’). As a first step we have to (a) wake up the the reality that proper childrearing is the cornerstone of society and (b) refuse to remain silent in the face of everyday feminist propaganda. Well done to Conservative Woman for giving a platform to people who can see right through the typically one-sided gender drivel (promoted in places like the BBC and the Guardian), and are not afraid to say it.

    • Mez

      I don’t think feminism is necessarily at the route of this. You quote several issues which are relevant.
      ‘Ideal child bearing timing’. That’s around the age of 25 years; far too young for most men of similar age to support it, and which creates another issue in terms of women choosing partners purely to time childbearing, rather than necessarily the partner for his own sake.
      Education is needed even for women who want an entirely traditional role
      a) because otherwise men/the state are forced to carry the repercussions financially of having under educated low skilled divorced women, and
      b) because women are closest to children, generally spend more time with them, and their attitudes towards education and career have a big impact on the childs own attitude towards the same thing.
      Most women are having children in their thirties without major repercussions, both men and women in their thirties are more likely to have the experence needed to select partners for the right reasons.

      Some work is extremely unfulfilling, and that applies to both men and women, an issue for employers as well as an education system which is steering people in the wrong direction to early.

  • MASTERARTGOD

    i was shocked you knew about mgtow

  • NastyNinja

    You can’t stop feminism. They are pushing their own special curriculum in elementary schools now to indoctrinate the children. GO MGTOW. Fuck society. Let it burn.

  • NastyNinja

    Men, walk away. Go MGTOW. Let’s hit the reset button.

    • GORF

      Reset button.
      No.
      Let’s pull the plug and consign the machine to a landfill.

    • The Prisoner

      Sad part is that women will still blame us for this happening. It would be funny if it wasn’t so true.

  • Jenny L

    Well said Belinda!
    ” A century of feminism has failed us, women have betrayed men’s trust.” The sheer amount of injustice, indifference and hostility men and boys face is utterly shameful, male suicide rates and homelessness, ignored.
    I wholeheartedly support “Justice for Men and Boys.” Mike Buchanan, its founder and leader is a hero, he is scorned and ridiculed by feminists but he resolutely stands against them. He has my admiration and respect.

  • Bogbrush

    I don’t see a way back, at best I can see a new deal based on independence.
    It might go like this; men have the ultimate power to withdraw consent to committed relationships. Women can do whatever they like but if the man decides he won’t get married or won’t do the deal there’s nothing women can do. The man, if he chooses, can wait for children. There’s abundant porn, plenty of easy women if you want no-risk sex or at worst he can find hookers more easily than ever before. It’s not nice, but it’s there. We’re already well into that stage.
    The next port of call is the State; if men won’t finance the woman and her preference for a home and children then she goes to the State to get the money another way. Trouble is, the State is in trouble, and welfare is in the sights. Childcare is the new NHS but child benefit could be up for limitation. We’re not at the stage of this coming unstuck but we’ll get there.
    What comes after that? A realisation that without legislation rolling back that the strike action by men is insoluble, followed by the pendulum swinging back? Maybe, but almost certainly done surreptitiously and dressed up as something else. This process of re-evaluation has already begun on multi-culturalism, there’s no reason why feminism won’t also become discredited but it won’t lead us back to a bygone age but to something new that, hopefully, works.

    • michaelsavell

      In the UK,isn’t there a new law being proposed and probably rushed through that
      gives unmarried women who cohabit,the same rights as a wife after 2 years?
      I cannot remember that bill even mentioning male rights so presumably itonly cuts one way.I suppose that is because women are the majority of property owners now.
      I really think Belinda can forget her good intent.The only way anything will change is through the use of something other than logic.
      A for her “incentives”—-these will become obligations on decree of a fantastic tax hike for being a single man.

  • TruthAndLight

    It’s way, way too late to turn back the tide. It’ll take another century to fix anything. The best bet for men is the MGTOW mindset. What’s MGTOW? Choosing bachelorhood in the face of totalitarian, hypocritical, hyper-gynocentric, man-hating, feminist rule.

    Over the past 40+ years, tens upon tens of millions of men’s lives have been destroyed through divorce. Hundreds upon hundreds of thousands of those men, upon realizing that their future was destroyed, committed suicide. How did this happen? No fault divorce. As a bread winning man, your wife can cheat on you, cuckold you and then walk away with most of your assets and future income. While she’s off writing the next chapter of her life with the pool boy or bartender, you’ll be forced by law to finance her life goals through alimony and child support – else go to jail. Did you know that child support is another form of alimony? Why is that true? Because child support is based on what you make. It goes up exponentially based upon what you earn – and is tax deductible to the recipient (your now deeply hated X wife), not the payer (the man fool who will die homeless).

    There has been a deep decline in marriage rates over the past several decades, that perfectly aligns with the implementation of no-fault divorce.

    Feminism has never been about equality. Feminism is about the destruction of the patriarchy. What does that mean? It means the destruction of men and the redistribution of their wealth and power to women. It means better outcomes for women and far worse outcomes for men. In other words, feminism isn’t about equality of opportunity or equality of outcome. Feminism is about female superiority. In the US, thanks to their dead husbands, fathers and divorce raped X husbands, women now hold the majority of US wealth.

    If you think the feminists are crazy – you’re kidding yourself. The feminists will win. They’ve been winning for several decades. In the not too distant future, women will be far more privileged members of society than men than they already are. In the US, women already receive the majority of state and federal funding for heath, education and welfare. Men are the majority of poor and homeless. Laws are already in place to specifically privilege women over men and to give women easy access to destroy men’s lives (no-fault divorce, Title IX, Yes Means Yes, Affirmative Action, the VAWA, etc). These laws and policies have nothing to do with equality and everything to do with ensuring women’s privilege over men and the redistribution of men’s wealth and power to women.

    The pope recently made the statement that men need to stop blaming feminism for their problems. THE POPE SAID THIS! Know why? For the same reason white knight politicians pander to women for their votes. Gotta keep the meat in the seats, keep the birth rates up, keep men stupid, married and divorce raped, keep the money rolling in and keep the gynocracy voting for socialism/Marxism.

    The last thing you want to do as a man is get married.

    Yes. It’s very important that everyone recognize that it’s all about divide and conquer. Unfortunately, the majority of women will sit back and watch men be destroyed. Why? Because the denigration of men and the redistribution of wealth from men to women suits them. The bonus is – so long as they don’t claim to be feminists – they really had nothing to do with the plight of men. It’s no different than the mass silence of people during the slave days or the mass silence while the Jews were being slaughtered. There was an unacknowledged, unspoken gain being had – and those having it weren’t going to rock the boat. Sure – there’s a minority of women out there working for true fairness and equality, but the vast majority of women will sit idly by as men are pushed further and further down the economic and social ladder. What we get most right now is what I like to call “equality lip service”. “Feminism helps men, too.” LOL. See any women fighting against women’s dominance in college? Nope!

    Now that men are opting out of marriage in record numbers and the birth rate is collapsing in Westernized nations, even the pope is getting his white knight on. Unfortunately, that means more male shaming and pandering to the gynocracy. That in turn means more division and more men opting out of marriage and family. Tis a return to the days of the fall of Rome.

    With all the evidence we have to date, it’s clear that feminism is about privileging women at the expense of men’s lives; which is why you don’t see a strong, organized effort to nix male-only selective service or any other federal or state program that is unfairly funded or targeted at privileging women over men.

    I can definitely see where the rich would want women to have power, privilege and carefully disguised, man-hating authority over men. Why? Women create the next generation of wage and tax slaves. To the rich, keeping them happy and men subservient to women works in both women’s and the rich’s favor. For these reasons, every effort will be made to either boost the marriage and birth rates or to divert even more wealth and power from men to women. These “programs” will be extremely stealthy. Examples are the “cohabitation rights bill” in the UK, which was specifically written to give women rights to alimony and asset division upon breakup, “Yes Means Yes”, which is a back door method of opening men up to civil law suits, a way to give women totalitarian control over sex (See Brian Banks and other high profile athletes) and a way for women to attack and destroy patriarchal power structures (see Rolling Stone and the Greek Fraternity attack) and female only STEM classes (they already exist).

    Feminism is all about money, power and control and the transfer of such from men to women. One way or another, feminists are here to make sure that redistribution of power and wealth happens. Men opting out of marriage and family will not stop that redistribution. No-fault divorce isn’t the only way to “get er done”.

    I don’t think most men realize what feminists are talking about when they talk about the “wage gap” – including the white knight pope. The point feminists are making isn’t so much that men make more than women. The point feminists are making is that men make more because the things with which they choose to endeavor are more financially valuable (STEM fields) in the open market. To feminists, the jobs in which they normally endeavor should be paid more to compensate for the intrinsic lower market value of those positions (the not so STEM fields). Yes, this is most certainly socialism/Marxism.

    If you want to see the future of the US and all Westernized nations, look to Sweden. Converting all Western nations to Sweden has been the goal of progressives all along.

    • Davidgw

      An astute comment… and the point about Sweden is well made. But I have to say, I live in Sweden and as general rule, it is far fairer to men upon divorce than the UK. To start with assets are not divided up, because usually the women are working as well as the men. Secondly, it’s normal the child custody is divided exactly equally between women and men. They usually take a week each. Finally, just a quick point I want to make about equality. Yes Sweden is a more equal society, but in my view that has more to do with the fact that historically it was always equal I.e. They never had to force it on anyone. It was never conquered, it never had a feudal system, it just turned out more equal naturally. Add the fact that it was never really involved in either of the last world wars has meant it could leap ahead at the end of the last one. Lastly, it has way more space per person, which means that many people have second homes and most people can get on the property ladder. Britain could never ever become Sweden in my humble opinion, even with a great deal of force!

  • Mez

    Only in your own mind

  • Mez

    a contract is a contract if the state won’t support a contract that flies in the face of the existance of all other contracts

  • Pussinator

    So the ultimate conclusion of this article is TradCon women want their slaves back. Well to be very honest and straightforward, this post very easily and smartly pegs all miseries and troubles in heterosexual relationships upon feminism, whereas feminism is merely a temporary phase in women’s movement and the crusades of the fairer sex against men have been ongoing for centuries, it’s only now that men are waking up and this awakening must go on as articles like these are very subtle attempts to sabotage that very awakening of men and pull them back to the plantation. Feminism is just the political manifestation of inherent female nature and biology. Of course both genders could enter into companionship but not in any current or past forms. The entire paradigm and relationship dynamics need to be completely remodelled from ground up where both sexes don’t have to compromise even one bit of their freedoms and aren’t held hostage to one another, rather peacefully co-exist on the basis of mutual respect and cooperation.

  • Titan000

    Boys need mentoring and initation rituals to properly transition to manhood.

    • Lock up your daughters?

      Hi titan, Thank you for not getting your proverbial knickers in a twist over my retort. My attempt at humour has gone way over some heads [/meh]. Yes, “Mentoring” is a good idea and should be important for all young people.

      All this talk of “male sovereignty” and “initation rituals” sounds a bit like a cult of masculinity -or regression into tribalism. What do you have in mind? Something similar to ancient Greece or something akin to Masai warrior culture?

      I can’t see that being more than a fringe movement in western civilisation, or being taken seriously outside of near all male online echo-chambers.

      Civilisation (or society) functions because people cooperate and compromise -outside of total lawless anarchy, individuals compromise aspects of their individual sovereignty, largely obey laws and submit to pay taxes etc. etc.

      Presumably in your imagined world, the boys submit significant portions of their sovereignty to the older men (yourself perhaps) ?

      Is this “sovereignty” just a boy thing. Do girls not get any?

  • ray

    The vault is always open to the saints. Yet somehow the funds remain intact. How about that.
    In no major empire of the world have men ever imposed tyranny upon women. Quite the opposite, in fact. In corrupted empires (like US), weak men gradually give power away to females, so they can prosper and look good themselves! Ta da ain’t I wonderful. While their nations died.
    Yet throughout the past century in America we see incremental totalitarianism via collective female power — political and otherwise.
    Yes, Arab tribes limit female power, because unlike glutted Ms. America, until recently nomads couldn’t afford for women to run their territories. The environment doesn’t permit such selfishness, stupidity, and unconcern for future generations.
    I’ve heard this ‘men would have done the same thing’ rap for two decades now. It’s not getting any more true.

  • ray

    Safety is the female, not male, obsession… Homeland Security, endless laws, rape-culture, war-on-women, cameras, I-phones, prisons.
    Under the current system, eventually and soon, few little boys will have daddies. And a lot of bad things will continue to result from that. It’s not about men ‘feeling safe’. It’s about fatherhood and masculinity not being made extinct.
    The vault is going to be closed, tho. You’re right, this won’t be allowed again. But I can’t imagine why that would worry a truly conservative woman.

  • Lock up your daughters?

    Thanks for the explanation.. So profound and so true

    ……and a really gentle but thorough errrr… ‘doing’ dissipates that ’emotional energy’.

    Now there’s a simple solution which I like !

    🙂

    Are you going to tell them, or shall I ?………

  • DollarPound

    If it’s not a battle, then why do you bother with such sweeping negative generalisations about men? Ones like:

    “The difference between boys and girls is that girls grow up”

    Your hatred of men is apparent. If it was directed against any other group you would recognise it for the bigotry it is.

  • Joao Rui De Oliveira

    This article addresses one aspect of the issue it seeks to deal with, this does not detract from the points it makes.

    My Grandmother was devoted to the well being of her family, she agonized over her children and grand children, she was a servant to their well being. Her life was characterized by her selflessness and devotion. What drove her was love, she loved her husband and she loved her family, thus the work she did, and she did work in the market place, was always orientated towards the value that would bring to the family. Her allegiance was not to women’s interest but to the interests of her family, in everything her family was prioritized. What did she receive in return? our love, we loved her honored her and respected her, she also got to be part of a family that vibrated with her immeasurable contribution, in so living her life was filled with eternal meaning.

    Where did feminism factor in her thinking? the question for her I bet would be how would it serve the interests of her family and I know what her response would have been…

  • ManWithPlan

    This is a fair and worthwhile analysis with much to recommend it. However, I’m not sure you’ve thought through your solutions. Whether a woman “let’s the man take the lead” or not, their relationship is still governed by the absurd, gynocentric legal system. On account of her sex, the most demure, supportive and committed woman still can call upon this legal system for any reason or no reason. In fact, her state of being fully dependent on the husband will make him even more vulnerable to an unjust divorce and possibly decades of alimony/child support.

    As you say, men can no longer trust women. I have witnessed with my own eyes religious conservative women rip apart their husbands and homes in divorce with just as much gusto as any secular feminist woman. What we need is for the legal system to change, and for that we need non-feminist women willing to step out from behind the backs of their husbands and lobby for it, on their own and alongside the men who do it. Women’s voices are more effective in this fight, as the men are painted as Neanderthal woman abusers whenever they utter one word against the gynocentric bent in society.

    Many women are starting to speak out on these issues, and that’s terrific. But they need to continue to speak out as an independent voice. Not a voice that pleads with the men to run into battle for her, once again, like we always have. Men are becoming quite fed up with that, frankly.

    • Mez

      What we need is for the legal system to change, and for that we need non-feminist women willing to step out from behind the backs of their husbands and lobby for it, on their own and alongside the men who do it.

      What you seem to be arguing for is’ real equality’ and for non feminst women to become real feminist rather than matriarchs.

      • Belinda Brown

        I agree with the first part but real feminists blame things on men. I’d much rather take responsibility and be a matriarch any day…

  • michaelsavell

    Belinda,take it from an old guy who was around in the 1930’s.
    Men have always loved women but women have always disliked men,needed them yes,but loved them,no.To keep the family together it was always the policy to make women rely on male wages even though the wife generally made all the big decisions and managed the money.
    Most [people were renting off private landlords until the 1948 sitting tenants act and it was required to put down a 50% deposit on the property you were already renting in order to buy it.At the time the workplace was very much in the hands of the unions and wages were
    gathering momentum but at that moment wives were forced to go out to work to help pay the mortgage and these wives broke union rules by accepting less money than had been bartered for making employers rub their hands in glee.It has been downhill workplace wise ever since but,of
    course after taking the lower money for ruining the male workplace women since then decided that they want the same money which really the country could not afford.Now that families are split costs have doubled and the welfare program has gone through the roof and we are trying to keep an NHS which will,in the end be unaffordable

  • Mowery

    ‘The men who choose to go their own way, either as part of a movement or by rationally rejecting marriage and monogamy because it has cost their fathers and brothers dearly may be acting wisely. But when it comes to the long term survival of human society, to the question of how to preserve the civilisation which their forefathers and foremothers created (long before feminism) theirs is not a realistic plan. It is a social death wish.’

    Society was built on the bones of men who sacrificed themselves for the greater good. Now, the society that men built has rejected men. Let it die. Women are called to submit and men are called to give their lives up for their protection. If you will not submit, then you can protect yourself. Until the last vestiges of the current decrepit patriarchy are destroyed (the military, the police, etc) women will continue to live in a deluded world where they think they are pretty princesses that can suffer no hurt and do no wrong. Only in the temporary anarchy caused by a lack of government, when people must either live in fear of roving bands of murderers, bandits, and rapists or stand and fight them, will women finally figure out that the egalitarian siren song of the Marxists and Freemasons was a lie. Once they realise that their only option for protection from being gang-raped is to submit themselves once more to the patriarchy, they will gladly choose patriarchy and wonder why they ever rebelled against it and preferred equality (a societal delusion which presumes that men and women are somehow equal) to chivalry (a societal system based upon natural law which presumes female submission). Remember, God is the ultimate patriarch. To rebel against the patriarchy is to rebel against God.

    Just as Rome had to die so that Europe could rise, so too, modern society must die so that a new society can be reborn. Women will suffer greatly in the process, as they see their sons slaughtered and their daughters raped, but that is simply God’s just judgement upon them for their rebellion. Just as Satan chose his fate when he thought he was greater than God, and was cast out of Heaven, so too, women chose their fate when they chose not to submit and one day they will realise that in true society, there is only room for submissive women.

    Will women have a part in helping to re-build society? Yes. They will do their part by submitting to their their husbands as Saint Paul commands them to do. Will they envy their liberated sisters who live freely, in the cluches of the roving rape bands? I doubt it.

    Are men partly to blame? Yes, men rebelled against the patriarchy when they rebelled against God-ordained kings. They presumed that they knew better than God and took power for themselves. It should come as no surprise that women blindly followed their example.

    • Gatanis

      I did totally agree along the first two chapters and then you started talking about god. It’s not god. It’s nature.

  • wordsIVue

    You are putting the cart before the horse if you think that prioritizing families is actually going to cause a resurgence of family life. Rather, if you remove all the obstacles to safe and happily family life then people will take to starting families. Marriage and family should be the last in your “radical plan”. When all the other problems are solved, then the family situation will solve itself.

  • Take The Red Pill

    “…until we reach the point where hetero-relationships are such a legal liability that American guys are forced to go MGTOW…”
    THAT point has been reached for some time now. It’s just that enough men haven’t “learned their lesson” yet…but they will eventually. All it takes for a White Knight or a Beta simp to become a MGTOW is to be foolish enough to interact with a modern Western woman long enough to either be divorced or falsely accused.

  • Mez

    this opinion is so biased and inaccurate it’s hardly worth the dignity of a response, the society we live in does not ‘hate’ men, actually it’s forcing men to change their attitudes, but unfortunately addressing the situation after marital break up ie after the horse has bolted. Anybody who thinks society are all men haters based on a couple of bad experiences hasn’t lived or hasnt lived enough to see the difference, but maybe we can’t expect more from people who’s opinions are so easily swayed by articles in the media who are just other people airing their own personal opinions.

  • Take The Red Pill

    “If the vault is open even the saint will steal. If the roles would be reversed we would have done the same thing.”

    Are you projecting?
    You can speak for yourself! I have morals, ethics, a conscience, and my parents taught me to know right from wrong. And even though I am not Christian, I believe in the righteous spirit of the Ten Commandments, even as I also believe in the concept of karma.

  • Robert Strong

    100% correct.

  • Take The Red Pill

    Because MGTOW has become visible; it is society’s price of the evil of feminism.

    • Insidious Sid

      Feminism is a hate-filled political power and money grab.
      MGTOW is simply the most logical of all responses by men.

      The shaming works less and less while MGTOW grows in numbers.

      The system is failing, and now it’s only a matter of time.

      Feminism was always cutting off the branch on which it sat. In it’s lust for power, it could not see the final result of scorching the very field you live in.

  • Factory

    Before the ‘Tender Years Doctrine’, (a feminist invention), men got custody of children by default. Furthermore, most families in those times were agrarian, and the father was in close daily contact with his children. Feminism, in conjunction with the Industrial Revolution, changed that.
    In short, the idea that Feminism facilitated closer contact between men and children is an utter lie. In fact, the complete opposite is true. As is the case with everything Feminists say.

  • Lock up your daughters?

    Good grief …..Most of us have noticed sexual dimorphism by the age of 4 and by adulthood most of us have noticed that we are better at reading maps than women are.

    We do not have to cite scientific studies to know that. The scientific studies tend to confirm sex differences, with men and women tending to function better in different areas. This superiority and right to overall “sovereignty” merely exists inside your head.

    How are you going to be a “default winner” Titan?
    My seed will still be on this earth in 50 years, and probably 1000 years and onwards it will be contributing to the ocean that is humanity. Even my daughters are in the top few % in the ‘boy subjects’ of maths and sciences. They are equipped for the modern technical world of maths and communication, and hopefully eventually for compromise with men of their choice.
    Note the word compromise. Your ideas work in tribal societies which are long past.
    I consider myself lucky and privileged to make a positive contribution to humanity.

    Good luck finding females to submit to your overall sovereignty -or your seed will have a short life on magazine centrefolds and computer keyboards.

    • Titan000

      ”How are you going to be a “default winner” Titan?
      My seed will still be on this earth in 50 years, and probably 1000 years and onwards it will be contributing to the ocean that is humanity. Even my daughters are in the top few % in the ‘boy subjects’ of maths and sciences. They are equipped for the modern technical world of maths and communication, and hopefully eventually for compromise with men of their choice.
      Note the word compromise. Your ideas work in tribal societies which are long past.
      I consider myself lucky and privileged to make a positive contribution to humanity.”

      We will have to see about that. And if so good for you and them. If something is true its true if its false. And it is common sense that to go against actuality is to invite eventual demise or failure.

      ”Note the word compromise. Your ideas work in tribal societies which are long past.”

      I don’t think masculinity and femininity as long as sexual dimorphism exists will be obselete. And likewise I do not advocate replicating the forms of the past but rather the principles that causes such forms to arise in the 1st place, obviously there will be differences but there will always be similarities.

  • Axe Man

    Great article.

  • Belinda Brown

    Very interesting. Actually I had wondered how WomenAgainstFeminism could be translated into action. One of the things about it is that it is international so one would need to find those that lived in one’s own country. Also one of the ongoing problems could be that the women who are against feminism have less experience of public realm activity – however that would be an excuse rather than a good reason. You make lots of interesting points Mr wordslvue.

    • wordsIVue

      I am glad I am getting through, new insights are often like Marmite. The first necessity is for all the anti-feminist women to keep in contact and form a network. This should include women of all backgrounds and persuasions, not just conservative women. Then they can coordinate their actions and find opportunities to share platforms, both online and physically, whenever possible. When there are enough committed and active women, they can form an official organization which can claim to represent a non-trivial number of women. If I am right about a change of trend in the offing, momentum will build on its own, even if the people involved are inexperienced or uncertain, or if they don’t fit together well. As long as they are committed and willing to act. I can make some more suggestions, but it’s probably best not to done in a public forum.

  • sdmartin2000

    Dear Belinda,
    apologies in advance but I think it the effect of my scandinavian friends ,who tend to be brutal ly honest. It’s actually mind boggling that at least a women , particularly someone with academic credentials ,actually being honest about feminism.However, given that in your own words “women have betrayed men’s trust” .Why, should I or any man accept that women can , or , actually have any desire to work towards some sort of reconciliation?

    I hope most men consider it’s too little , too late, and actually start considering what is in our interest without regard to what women think or feel.I hope that feminism drives men to completely discard chivalry towards women as obsolete.Then women through feminism will actually get what they asked for equality, and it will set men free.

    As an academic exercise let us assume that you represent at least a unknown , statistically relevant proportion of women.As far as I can see the effect of women like yourself on feminism has been about as effective as pygmy trying to deal a death blow to a charging bull elephant wielding a very sharp mango.

    What evidence can you provide that women are not just employing some sort of ruthless bait and switch tactic , or male-friendly repackaging to continue the zero sum gender warfare championed by feminism?

    Why should women not reap the rewards of their support for feminism , with the growing indifference of men towards women ?Finally lets us take a page from feminism and ask “what’s in it for me?”

    • Belinda Brown

      “apologies in advance but I think it the effect of my scandinavian friends ,who tend to be brutal ly honest. It’s actually mind boggling that at least a women , particularly someone with academic credentials ,actually being honest about feminism” – Ha! maybe my honesty is because I am half Scandanavian too!! will think about replies to your questions.

  • sdmartin2000

    Just another point Belinda your article is not an eye opener for men.Many men especially MGTOW’s /PUA’s understand feminism and women better than women.We have no illusions left.You can’t appeal to MGTOW’s or PUA’s good will ,or duty to women towards cause women destroyed it.I don’t think you really appreciate the damage down by geocentric culture .

    Nasty ninja I love your comments 🙂 Please pass me another cup of women’s tears it tastes so sweet

  • Henry Smith

    Really, you are totally against a new system of interpersonal relationships that might actually work? It is the old way or the highway?

    As the poster stated before his comments were deleted, we are not going back to the old model of marriage. That is in the past and really was not a good deal for men. Through the bright light of feminism, men are finally realizing what a bad deal it is for them, even 60 years ago.

    Then you compare them asking for new ideas on relationships to communists and anarchists?

    Wow.

    Maybe put your personal convictions aside for a moment and entertain the idea that there is another model out there that will benefit the rearing of children.

    • Belinda Brown

      Not at all. What I disagreed with, in that comment, was the idealistic tone. Actually I think in life we are always going to have to make sacrifices and that is likely to infringe our liberty to some degree , whatever our gender, nor do I believe we will ever have complete equality, nor do I want it. I do believe in marriage of some kind – it exists throughout the world in some form and I suspect always has. I think that there have been some good moves where men spend more time with children and where women who want to can be more dedicated to work and that new forms of relationship are already evolving. I don’t have a problem with that.

  • crydiego

    Love, and emotional conection, — that’s romance novels. That is why I know, women are not the problem. Men and women are born to love someone.

    • Insidious Sid

      I love me, and I love my children. Love for anyone else is subject to terms, conditions and cancellation without notice.

      Love is based on trust and loyalty. Without that, you don’t have love – you just have feel-good chemicals interfering with your better judgement.

      • crydiego

        Good words but the mind cannot always rule the heart, love makes no sense what-so-ever!

        • Insidious Sid

          Women need for things to make no sense. Their constructs are interconnections of illogical feelings and emotions. Their “system” relies exclusively on mental disorder and chaos. “Hamster spinning on a wheel” is an undue compliment when you really think about it. Liberal feminism relies upon the masses being in a state of confusion and moral relativity – and anyone who claims to resist this state of affairs is a major threat.

          Only men who cannot rise above their biological imperatives and human weaknesses will succumb to “love at all cost”. This is what totalitarian movements like feminism rely upon – basic human failings.

          MGTOW is a triumph of the human spirit – the success of men to overcome these human frailties and weaknesses. Even something as powerful as the allure of romantic love can be thwarted.

          Men can, indeed, accomplish anything with enough determination and discipline.

          • crydiego

            OK

  • Daniel Kulkarni

    Once trust has been withdrawn, it cannot come back. Even if laws are changed to be more male-friendly, they can always be changed back. The time for talk is done. Women are responsible for this sinking ship and I don’t feel sorry for them at all. I am never get tied married and never having children. I am a man going my own way. Now lie in the bed you have made.

  • Tim Barker

    Sad to see MGTOW – I’m married to a wonderful Vietnamese woman.

    Most Vietnamese women have a job, their own money, friends, a family, their own transport – normally a motorbike- that they bought and paid for; all done against a backdrop of a male dominated society. So that makes them the ultimate feminist freedom fighters right?

    Well no, Vietnamese women do not have the Feminist sense of entitlement and the lack of accountability that Feminists seem to thing is their birthright.

    Vietnamese women seem to be able to balance being independant with being feminine and having traditional family values. She will dress to impress, has time for a career, a family AND to get her hair and nails done. She’ll cook for me when I’m working my ass off as I work in a male dominated industry.

    I don’t think we dominate some industries to control women, I think we normally just go for the highest paycheque – that’s our breeding imperative, to support. Normally the highest paycheques come wth the biggest sacrifices. Then there is the fact that men are more inquisitive and have an almost obsessive fascination with “how things work” which makes each one of us a talented engineer, with the right training.

    My wife is wonderful, I have nothing but admiration for her. She has not lost the ability to empathise with and communicate with men effectively. She has no desire to control what I do, she understands that as a male I am naturally more sensitive, so she is and she pushes me when I am doubt myself.

    Don’t go your own way – marry a Vietnamese girl or someone else from a family oriented culture and treat her well. The domestic competition will ultimately force a feminist re-think!

    • GORF

      Some of us can do without mommy 2.0.
      Women are women regardless of political divisions.
      You will always be nothing more than a utility. Thee only difference is those “good” women will toss you a tastier biscuit.

    • Lock up your daughters?

      Please don’t be upset by GORF and his “mommy 2.0” dig, below.
      To some like GORF mgtow has become a fanatical religion

      I hope that readers will appreciate the openness of your post. It is easy to take pot-shots at other people’s lives and choices.

      I wish you and your wife the best of luck and happiness. Sex with affection beats the paid-for sort any time …..and can be a hell of a lot more regular 🙂

      Can I ask how long you have known your wife?

      If it has been going well for several years I would seriously consider children. How do you (& her) feel about this?
      Having kids is a whole new ball game, but be aware that it will change you and change her.

      • GORF


        For woman, man is really a kind of machine, if rather an unusual one. Her ideal, if she could define it, would be a robot capable of thought, of programming itself, of continuing to develop and produce an ideal set of functions to meet each new situation. (Scientists, too, are working on the development of such robots, who will work for them, make decisions for them, think for them, and put the results of their labor at their disposal; but these robots will be constructed from non-living matter.)

        Long before man is in a position to choose his own way of life, he will have formed the necessary addiction to praise. He will be happy only when his work brings him praise ,and, because he is an addict, his need will increase-and with it the type of achievement so much praised by his woman. This male need could, of course, be satisfied by another man, but as each man is working feverishly in the interest of his own addiction, he has no time to help others. Indeed man exists, as it were, in a state of constant antagonistic competition with other men. It is one of the reasons why he loses no time in getting his own private panegyrist, one whose praise will be his exclusive right, someone who will always be at home waiting to tell him when he has been good and just how good he has been. It is apparently only by chance that woman is best suited to this role: but in fact, she has been preparing all her life for it, waiting to assume it.

        -Esther Villar

        • Lock up your daughters?

          Quoting from one of your bibles again?
          Yawn

          • GORF

            I bet you consider your comments biblical themselves.
            You stand alone.

          • Lock up your daughters?

            I have no problem with “standing alone” in this environment.

            The balance of ‘critters’ is so dependent on the specific environment ……e.g. if you find a fresh ‘richard-the-third’ [cockney] on the pavement you will likely find a small hoard of flies feeding & buzzing around it.
            Enjoy!

            Most of the other critters are just passing by -crossing over from the garden, to the meadow on the other side.

          • GORF

            I bet you think you’re clever too.
            By the way. That meadow analogy very apt. It is of course where wives tend to their flocks.

        • Nockian

          That’s an interesting thesis.

          I think it’s important to put things into more abstract terms in order that we can understand how we relate to women on the physical plane.

          Both men and women are comprised of male and female elements. For historical context the male element is always portrayed as ‘the blade’ and in eastern philosophy it is the head. The female element is the chalice and in eastern philosophy it is sexual energy which makes its way from the perineum to the head. The male energy does not want to move, but the female energy can be encouraged up the spine to the head with very little effort.

          My thesis is that the historical context is incorrect and is based purely on sex. Until Plato and Aristotle appeared -in the West at least-we were unfamiliar with the notion of logic. Until we became familiar with logic we could not have science. We obviously did make logical decisions before Plato, but we hadn’t applied rigour to the form.

          These earlier ages of man were inhabited by superstitions and primal emotional responses to them. In Eastern philosophy the analogy is that of the rope and the snake. It shows that we can be fooled into thinking that one is the other and reacting erroneously. If we mistake the rope as a snake we become frightened and the fear creates the action to either run, freeze or kill the snake. What’s more we can react almost without thinking. The emotion of fear, is then ruling our logical reasoning.

          In the instance of a snake or other danger, then this is completely understandable. We don’t want to spend too long pondering the oncoming sabre toothed tiger before deciding to act or we may become dinner. However, modern man doesn’t face only these simple dangers, so, he creates them. Man has developed an entire panoply of emotions like that of an artists paint pallet. He can now create fears, hopes, likes, dislikes, sadness, guilt etc which are entirely unrelated to reality. They are really stories without any logical element attached. Each wave of emotion causes thoughts and actions which cascade and combine into an ever growing mess of uncontrolled chaos. The worse this emotional chaos becomes, the harder it is to act rationally because the powerful emotion is overwhelming the rational mind. A person afflicted by these powerful emotional flows will be metaphorically lost at sea without any way of navigation. He will simply thrash around until finding help, or drown. I apply this equally to man and woman.

          On the physical level the propagation of children is a product of human action. Von Mises treaty on human action gives insights into why man acts. If, for instance, a man has children then he is effectively creating capital. He must surrender a proportion of production in order to become a Father. He must weigh the physical cost /benefits and the emotional cost /benefits and arrive at an action. Women must do the same.

          Yet for women the cost is automatically higher and so is the risk. A pregnant woman is not as secure, she must consume greater production whilst simultaneously being less able to achieve greater production. Childbirth is also an inherently dangerous undertaking. In order that the woman can reduce the risk then she needs to find a partner who is prepared to surrender productive output. Therefore childbirth is a far more risky undertaking for the woman. That means there is something else going on. Women and men are not taking actions with the same risk/reward ratios. There must be an emotional bias. Women must inherently be less logical and therefore it follows, they are controlled by emotion, to a far greater degree than men. A man is driven to have sex, not necessarily for the purpose of producing children. Women are equally driven to have sex, but with the caveat that there is the risk of pregnancy.

          To create a family which works requires a balancing act. The man must need to invest in children and the woman must rely on the man. If there are to be no children, then the investment is equal and is that of a productive partnership. There is no requirement for either partner to rely on the other. This is all pure economics on one level and emotional drivers on another.

          Logic by itself is not capable of physical action. It can only analyse whatever the senses detect and make conclusions. Emotion, on the other hand can and does offer unreasoned actions. Logic can be used as a lens for emotion. It can accept an unreasoned proposition and decide not to act. Here we see free will at work. Emotion can be made a partner to logic. It’s a very natural symbiosis. Creativity and action does not come from reasoning. It is the order that comes from reasoning and the creativity and action that comes from emotion that together serve the whole. The final piece in the jigsaw is the solid form of the flesh. Neither reason, emotion or living flesh can exist entirely independently. This does not apply to such things other than human beings-that we know of. Instinct exists in animals, but we cannot say that they have separate reasoning and emotion, they don’t feel and reason, they simply act as if there is no separation at all. Thus their creativity is limited to web spinning and nest building. Some animals show a degree of separation, such as primates, but humans are responsible for projecting their own emotions and reasoning on the animal. They see sadness and guilt where none exists. Animals don’t ‘feel’ in the same way we do, even if it sometimes seems that way.

          Where does this leave us with regard to men and women, male and female, emotion and logic ?

          Man has fairly well conquered his environment. The beginnings of the conquering were seeded in the beginnings of swapping from hunter/gatherer to farmer. In the last few hundred years we have virtually eliminated all disease, hunger and predation in the West. We have done so, with so much success that we have begun to create and invent our own demons to fight. If we have enough food, then we resort to over eating, resulting in morbid obesity requiring surgery, drugs and psychiatry. The West is inventing terrorists because we can’t find any predators we need to create them.

          Why is this happening ?

          It’s because emotion and reason are not instincts. They are a form of advanced physiology. A physiological leap forward. However though they are inherent within us, they are not instinctive in the way of an animal. Just as we teach a baby to talk, we must also develop reason and harness emotion. If we neglect the aspect of reason development we slip back into emotional chaos. We become dangerously irrational and we can’t resort to instinct because we gave that up. As we have become a more advanced civilisation, it has become easier to give up logical development. Even 5000 years ago we were in danger of ignoring its development. We relied on a few to provide that steer and so emerged rulers, parliaments etc. Over centuries these structures have become infected with the same lack of logic and resorted to emotional thinking. We have even coined a phrase for it ’emotional intelligence’ – now there is an oxymoron if ever there was one. It’s new age bullshit-scientism. We are rolling back the years of dedicated reasoning and returning to the age of emotional turmoil. It is immensely dangerous.

          Men are potentially more logical than women. That’s the key. This is only a potential. If men are unable to develop that reasoning to a high degree then they are no more logical than women. Both sexes are then heading for the chaos of emotional destruction. The accelerator is flat to the floor and no one is holding the wheel. We are resorting to the actions of immature adults, no more than squabbling children in a playground.

          This feminism and MGTOW is exactly mirrored in children. Boys refuse to play with girls, or let them join in. Girls avoid boys and are forced to seek the company of their own kind. Rivalry erupts between the groups. Physically the boys are stronger, so the girls must compete in other ways.

          We are seeing here the exact same thing that is happening on the non physical plane. A separation is occurring. Instinct is settling into reason and emotion. Neither is yet mature. It is the emotions that mature first ( it’s why girls are said to mature earlier than boys). Sexual attraction begins. Our emotions broaden out and we are ‘teenagers’ trying to cope with this enormous on rush of conflicting feelings.

          Logic has not yet begun to mature. The playground is a chaos of jilted lovers, jealousy, guilt, violence, rage, hate, sadness going off like fireworks. The same is happening on the non physical plane. It’s impossible to get the head straight because of the emotional flood. It’s is the emotional energy pushing at the reasoning capacity in a wild way. This is the uncoordinated desire to mature the reasoning centres. It is the bird pushed from the nest in order that it must fly or plunge to its death. By some innate method we can survive this stage, but we haven’t yet learned what we must.

          Back on the physical plane it is now young men and women falling in love. Yet they don’t yet know responsibility or have the knowledge sufficient to sustain the relationship. It’s all just a feeling of need and some smattering of reasoning sufficient to prevent it all, falling apart.

          Yet now we are regressing. We are regressing on both planes simultaneously. With little need to develop our reasoning capacity we are falling under the spell of emotion. Neither sex is developing the capacity and instead it has been replaced with cunning and intellect. One group now wishes not only to separate, but to control the other. It started with men subjugating women and now it’s women trying the same thing with men. This isn’t a good strategy for survival. It is the Union of male and female; of logic and emotion that is key to where we are and where we can go. Women are attempting to seek equality with men, but it can be seen on the non physical plane that this is impossible. Logic and emotion can never be equal. They are chalk and cheese. They must reach an accommodation in which emotion gives way to logic and logic allows emotion to provide the motive energy for creative action. One must dominate the other, but not in the sense of subjugation. Emotion must be equally content to let logic determine the course of actions, as logic is to have emotion create the actions. It’s a divine partnership in which each plays its part and together they are a far greater sum than separated.

          Emotion will always be the first to develop. It is the motive power which explodes a seed into life and drives it to become a plant, but it is logic that guides the plant towards the sun. Uncontrolled emotion is chaos in action. It is as destructive as it is creative. Logic is no action at all, it is uncreative, a watcher, dull and slow.

          The answer isn’t to go to the separate corners of the playground and plot against each other. There are no winners here. Unless we find a way of uniting we are physically and spiritually lost. We gave up instinct and now we must live responsibly with the consequences.

          Emotion then is like Fire, it can produce incredible benefits or untold destruction unless it is focused and directed. This is precisely the position women should adopt, but there is the ‘but’, and it’s a massive ‘but’. Men have stopped developing a logical mind. A woman has no more reason to partner with a man, than she would with another female. Indeed it might be preferable. Men have gone of in a huff and are pouting in the corner after being scolded and harangued by a force they are ill equipped to direct or understand. Raw emotion on a charge is like a forest fire, it rages and destroys in such a voracious way the best thing to do is to run.

          It’s important to realise that reasoning and its development are akin to learning to talk, in other words they require a degree of tuition, unlike emotion that is always available. Reasoning must be taught. It requires tutors who would once have been the parents or the wise men. This is why we have a need for Government. It is a blind need and cannot provide what is required. We cannot elect our reasoning to others and then run around at the whim of our emotions like headless chicken. If we had reasoning in place we could see how foolish that idea would be. We would need reasoning in order to discover those that also had good reasoning. If we haven’t that measure then we cannot assume that anyone else has it. Now we have everyone running around like headless chickens and each hoping the other knows the best thing to do. That’s bloody hopeless.

          We need to begin teaching logic to our children. We must give everybody to power to reason strongly. We must stop encouraging children to be ‘creative’ in school, because children are creative inherently, they don’t need to be encouraged in that direction. It is only in this way that the true strength of men will appear attractive to women. They can know they will not be subjugated or abused, because it is illogical to do so. Women won’t need A mission to seek a mythical equality and men won’t go off pouting in a corner. We will work together in unity if we rediscover what was lost. We will become greater than we ever imagined, or could ever imagine. Both on the physical plane and procreation and education, also on the non physical plane of spiritual completeness. Emotion acquiesces to reasoning and reasoning acquiesces to emotion, but above all it is logic that has the final say and so it is man that must steer.

          • GORF

            I enjoyed this, thank you.

          • Lock up your daughters?

            That’s really interesting. I don’t agree with all of it though, and notions like “emotional energy” I accept for the purpose of discussion -scientifically/logically it is not “energy” but the co-‘operation’ of the body’s chemical and nervous control systems. But let’s not dwell on that.

            “Both men and women are comprised of male and female elements”. Indeed, us humans are a pretty diverse lot. My side of the family (including children) are all quite a “male” lot. At least three generations combining “tom boy” interests and attitudes with mathematical and clinically logical minds.
            I agree that women tend to present as more emotional, but logic is not a male monopoly.

            I do not agree that “Emotion acquiesces to reasoning and reasoning acquiesces to emotion”. There is a balance but in reality it is usually the stronger individual in the situation “that has the final say”.

          • Nockian

            Agreed with some additional comment.

            I did try and make the point that logic/reasoning is not a male monopoly. Only that female biology will ultimately be predisposed too a higher emotional energy/less reasoning ( strike whichever ). That’s really an extreme position. It’s like male and female athletes. A male athlete always has the potential to be stronger and faster, but what a man can achieve today at the peak of physical power, a woman can manage tomorrow. That advancement is always prevalent, so we can ignore it for the sake of this discussion.

            It’s also important to differentiate between skills and logic. It’s absolutely possible to train someone to become anything if they have that capacity. That does not mean they are any more logical than the floor sweeper. There can also be a high level of intellect present, the person may be immensely bright, but that doesn’t mean a high level of logic or reasoning.

            By acquiesces to emotion/logic I was implying the need for balance. That logic/reason won’t exist without the presence of emotion. Its why I gave the example of a seed growing until it reaches light. The seed becomes a sapling, becomes a tree, the drive doesn’t stop . In the case of a human being, it isn’t a case of either/or. In order for logic to flourish, emotion must be supplying the desire/need. If we have no emotions, then we don’t need logic/reason, but we can have emotion with a minimal amount of logic/reason.

            If the emotion acquiesces to the control of logic, ultimately, it is the final arbiter, but again this is exactly like the athletic example. It isn’t static, one drives the other to ever greater excellence, just as it should in a good female/male partnership ( I don’t exclude a homosexual partnership either, but as we are talking about feminism I have omitted it ).

            My conclusion is simply that we have neglected logic in the education in both sexes. We have been absorbed with the attainments of skills and the manipulation of behaviour by Pavlovian training.

            Children are encouraged to express themselves first, and master the tools later. The idea of expression is purely emotional and the tools are the equivalent of logic. We are taught that it isn’t necessary to master the tools first, just a quick familiarisation and then get down to creation. Whilst that is fine for making a pot, or writing a story, it is downright careless when it’s imposed on the needs for real life skills. It means you can learn to read, but not know how to read. It becomes impossible for the illogical to have any basis for the rejection of something written, heard, or seen. Where making a teapot badly isn’t going to get a person into any sort of trouble, accepting a written idea as fact without discrimination can be more than a little problematical.

            Feminists are the same as socialists, they haven’t developed the logic by which they can refute these ideas. It’s just another form of ungoverned emotional activism.

            I saw another example of this behaviour displayed on the daily politics show. There was a woman talking about species equality. Species equality, I ask you, what has gone so badly wrong? I mean how long is it going to be before it becomes necessary to have equality for dolls, rock and air ? I suppose the only way to find that out is to go and ask the fairies that live at the bottom of the garden and read some tarot cards.

      • The Prisoner

        You come back and tell me that same crap after your wife cheats and divorces you, takes your kids away then demands 80% of your income. GORF just like myself are not MGTOW out of any other reason than self-preservation. Women are just too narcissistic and self-entitled these days and have a very bias court on their side. Paid for women are cheaper and more trustworthy than any other women out there.

        Oh and GORF I hope you don’t get offended that I included you in on my rant. Keep up the good work bro.

        • GORF

          Hey prisoner it’s me Isaiah. Lol.
          The only thing I’m offended by are twits like “lock up your balls in wifeys purse” pretending to be men.

          • The Prisoner

            LMAO, thought I recognized the writing style.

    • Insidious Sid

      The cancer of feminism has spread globally. ‘Marry a girl from banana republic X’ is not a safe bet anymore. Remember: “Eddie. EDDIE! I WANT HALF EDDIE!”

      Remember the great and wise prophet, Eddie Murphy.

      • flight2q

        This must be from some routine I don’t recall.
        But you can get hilarious results just from googling eddie murphy divorce.

        • GORF

          It’s from RAW (1987)

    • silversurf

      Tim .. I am not sad to see MGTOW, which has been a grass roots movement for decades of guys protecting themselves against a feminist dystopia. But I am sad to see a narrow group of haters within MGTOW who devolve the ‘natural’ movement into a hate machine (PIGTOW?) that attacks anyone of the Red Pill community (millions) who are not living carbon copies of their own path.

      I went MGTOW to some extent before it became an acronym. At the time this meant turning my back on Western women, Red Pill consumption and personal growth. It was a very liberating experience, but I married an Asian woman a few years later.

      The point is that here, instead of being totally nihilistic about a future with women I engaged male agency to control my direction and situation to meet my needs.

      Now we live in a remote part of Australia. Indeed, to enter into this relationship I had to trust her. Threatening thought, I know, but with Red Pill knowledge I chose well and took my time. It’s a bit like I am ghosting in remote wilderness with a woman who wants to ghost as well.

      We don’t have any of the feminist gender battles that I would have with Western women. Essentially the male / female contract is working equitably like it should . It helps me an awesome lot that she is totally anti feminist, has assisted Men’s Rights by blogging to the Asian community about issues men face, and stands up to other social pressures. Once she informed organizers of a Woman’s Multicultural Festival that she couldn’t contribute unless the men were invited from the getgo.

      Her anti feminism and affinity for Men’s Rights certainly acts as a buffer to the toxic influence of Western women and culture. Her attitude remains untainted. Other ethnic and language buffers also filter the negative messages of misandry … and she is equally disgusted by feminist hate. She has seen the damage on my own friends, and been part of the process of supporting them.

      Also, she came from an affluent country and introduced her own sizable monetary resources .. not that she is rich by any means .. just financially equal .. and generous. A few years ago she bought me a new 4X drive. I did pay about 25% of the cost .. I wanted some additional BLING. She does not drive .. best car I’ve ever owned.

      Also we are not having children.

      If we ever did divorce and we had to split our equity .. the 50/50 share would be fair given that she has contributed large funds to our finances. Yes, it would be emotionally painful but not robbery.

      During the ‘courting’ / filtering period, I had the opportunity to test her attitude to wealth .. i.e. how would she react if I lost all my equity. She came up trumps. Over time I tested and found her values were solid.

      Another deterrent is my own informed intelligence, resourcefulness, and preparedness to fight back. She knows that I am experienced fighting for survival in a post feminist world … she knows that I know the system so well and has seen me operate in it. Occasionally when she has observed this, she mentioned that she wouldn’t like to have me as an enemy. This was more a complement meaning .. “You handled that well” This is not something I use to ‘control’ her in any way. She wants me to be this way .. she likes male agency .. she likes me standing my ground.

      Our location plays a part. Living in a remote wilderness situation means that toxic cultural influences are less pervasive. This is like collaborative ghosting. She is aware of the toxic influences and keeps away from them.

      Woman’s’ magazine are viewed as cultural pornography in our house – not allowed through the door.

      I also tested that my NAWALT was not addicted to city conveniences, and longed for nature.

      So in summary, for me to secure a safe haven to marry again meant;

      1. Turning my back on Western women. Red Pill consumption and personal growth.

      2. Choosing a good Asian NAWALT, who became anti-feminist and pro-men’s rights, and valued honor, family, and husband. Cultural buffers to feminist poison play a big role.

      3. NAWALT introduces significant monetary resources.

      4. Stay informed and resourceful, but don’t use it to control. Be ethical.

      5. Remote wilderness lifestyle means less toxic culture. The NAWALT has to love nature and solitude.

  • Justin

    MGTOW for life – or until I meet a good woman from the Philippines or SE Asia.

  • Justin

    Women mature earlier than men do. However, from my experience it seems women stop maturing at 16.

    • Benoff

      Exactly. I am a MGTOW but kinda dated two women in their late 30is and a woman that is 23 in the last two years.
      Except for fading looks there were no real mental differences and all of these women had higher education too.

      When I compare myself, I was a little tree seedling in my 20is mentally and have grown in many aspects .. except for the hair on my head which is in a serious recession (lol)

  • The Prisoner

    I would say that women have done more than just betrayed men’s trust. She has made herself a very painful and expensive risk to take on. Yes we hear women yelling out all the time “where have all the good men gone”, yet when they see one they take advantage of him. Once the nice guy has been cheated on a few times or lost his family and income due to divorce, that nice guy will shy away from women.

    Now of course not all women are like this, some women can be very loving wives. However the trouble is that we don’t know who you are. Worse yet we don’t know how you will change into 5 years, 10 years or more. Now do you get it women? It is not about trusting who you are right now, it is about trusting who you will become. Oh and guess what, we (as in men) don’t trust you anymore. You have proven time and time again that any trust placed in you is misplaced trust.

    Ahh, you say that you want to change things now. Make marriage safe and rewarding for us men, well guess what? We really don’t care anymore and we damn sure don’t care about you. Hell just look at any forum where men express that they are upset about something in their wives past or about their wives cheating on them. Major responds from women is “get over it” or “grow up” and the best one “well he is just insecure”. Do you honestly think that any self-respecting man would want to wake up next to a woman like this? Today most women only keep a man by totally destroying his self-esteem and emasculating the poor guy. Oh but now that men are walking away from you, now you want to change things.

    Guess what cupcake, myself along with a growing number of men have had enough of your crap and false promises. We are now walking away from you and living life on our own and to the fullest. I don’t dream of having a woman in my bed anymore. I dream of the next sexy escort I am going to meet up with and pay to leave me alone after I am done. Yes, give me all of your crap on love and so forth. Guess what, I can adopt a dog for that. Oh and that dog will be more loyal and ask for a hell of a lot less than any woman ever will. In my 44 years I know one major thing about women. It is not a case of if she will screw you over or cheat, it is only a matter of when she will screw you over and cheat. I am actually thankful for feminism, because it did not empower women. Feminism exposed women for what they are. Thanks to feminism I have been MGTOW for a few years and I can actually look forward to retiring.

    Men reading this, please don’t take my word on this stuff. Read up about it, read up about divorce and child support laws. Read up and find out what happens to a guy if he is injured on the job or loses his job. That’s right, you will go to jail if you cannot meet the financial demands the court has placed on you. Think that woman your seeing will make a good wife, look up how many women initiates divorces. Better yet, look up how many guys that have been married 15 and 20 years find out about their wives cheating on them in the first 5 years of the marriage. Do yourself a favor and look this stuff up, then look up MGTOW. Just because you become a Man Going Their Own Way does not mean you can’t get laid. It is just that you take a different approach to it and protect yourself better. MGTOW’s are not the guys living in their mom’s basement playing video games and can’t get laid in a woman’s prison. A lot of us get laid all the time, just not by the same women. A lot of us take trips to other countries and pay escorts their to have our fun with. The major thing is that we can save our money and enjoy it for ourselves. We use our time wisely and learn new skills or take up hobbies. MGTOW is not the ending of life, it is just the beginning of a better life.

    • Carl Stevens

      I would love to improve on you post but i cannot.

    • Insidious Sid

      Excellent post brother.

      I am not a number. I am a free man.

      • The Prisoner

        Sing it brother….

        I am not a number, I’m a free man..
        And my blood is my own now..
        Don’t care where the past was..
        I know where I’m going..
        OUT…

        • Insidious Sid

          MGTOW is just….

          Run to the hills… Run for your lives!!

  • GORF

    We’re not fooled.
    Women have betrayed men’s trust since Adam and Eve.
    The only reason why women, such as you, are speaking out against feminism now after 50 years of Antoinetteian apathy is because you can’t handle equality. Men walking away from women means you will have to fend for yourselves and that scares the p i s s out of women who wanted it all-the privileges of feminism and chivalry all rolled into one. Women have always seen men as dumb chattel that would do whatever they want without question and will put up with anything to kiss that flesh ring between their legs. You didn’t count on the fact that even the most gentle of dogs will attack when beaten repeatedly.

    Get it though your heads.
    It.
    Is.
    Over.

    There will be no return to the “good old days” (the flip side of feminism). Men have left the bargaining table and are discovering their lives are perfectly happy, if not infinitely happier, without women. And as with everything, money talks. The amount of money men save without women in their lives shocks many men out of the delusion. And I’m not going to even get into the criminal laws that every single female “conveniently” disregards (becauee they adore those laws).

    Women are so incorrigibly self absorbed that each and every one of them, especially traditionalists, believe they are worth the risk of those laws, worth the cost of time and money, worth enduring their interminable emotional capriciousness, and that we men must feel grateful for the opportunity to suffer. Just like those who rationalize slavery on the basis that “the slaves would be living in huts and chucking spears if not for the slave trade”, women believe we should be appreciative of being rescued from a life of loneliness.

    In the words of the band Gang Of Four:
    We live as we dream, alone.

    And we do so just fine without women.

    • Lock up your daughters?

      Please don’t EVER remove this comment
      It’s a monster mash with something for everyone

    • silversurf

      I took Lock up your daughters’s comment as supportive of your stand

      • GORF

        You need to reread it.

  • The Prisoner

    Thank you for putting into words what I was thinking.

  • The Prisoner

    Sorry Belinda, however I would suggest telling your daughters to get use to living alone and to buy a cat. This is what the result is after decades of using men then casting them aside. Remember “A woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle”, well I guess that works both ways. Yes women are strong, independent and don’t need a man. So why is it now that woman are crying foul when men pick up their toys and leave your sorry butt? I am guessing that women does not like it when a man looks at her and says “no thank you”. You see while feminist were busy turning men into a walking ATM machine they forgot about one thing. That one thing is that men can choose to stay away from, well women like you. Sorry but I won’t buy into your bull crap, you ladies started this crap and the men will finish it.
    Bed, Made Lie.. Any Questions?

  • The Prisoner

    And women wonder “where have all the good men gone”. Bwaa haa haa.

  • The Prisoner

    Yes and in states like Florida, the N.O.W. organization has fought tooth and nail against removing lifetime alimony for women. Feminist have fought hard for women’s reproductive rights and fought equally as hard to remove reproduction rights from men. This has gotten so bad that adult female teachers can statutory rape a minor boy and not just serve little to no time in prison. She will collect child support from that minor child. The only reproductive rights men have is to keep their pants zipped up. Even then that does not always work, because if he is raped (which by law a man cannot be raped) he can still be held responsible for child support. Oh and let’s not forget, if I am drunk and wake up with some she beast then all is good. However if she has been drinking and consents to sex, then I am imprisoned as a rapist. So yes tell me how feminist have helped men out, please. I love to read a good fiction story.

  • Insidious Sid

    Ah, yes. Calls upon men to “rise above” the burning fields feminism has set alight – we must MAN UP and fix what feminism has defiled and destroyed. Or, perhaps not. Perhaps women can WOMAN UP and fix the damned social disaster they have either helped create or did nothing to stop. As for us men – we have been shown over and over that we’re just resources to be exploited. We know our worth, from a woman’s point of view. From a feminists point of view. We’ve seen our future through the eyes of the parasite/locust socialist feminist – and we’re not playing the game anymore.

    Sorry ladies, you’ve chosen. Now men get to choose. Fathom that. We don’t all *need* you like you all have assumed we do. Some of us have the backbone, the fortitude and the MALE STRENGTH to walk away from the strongest of biological imperatives.

    The men are leaving the plantation. Oh, but where have all the good men gone?

    We’re right here darlings. And we’re going to watch it burn.

    • furryfinder

      love how they say man up ironicly a man chooses and a slave obeys they always forget this

      • Insidious Sid

        Yes, hahaha, man up = kowtow to feminism (read: gender discrimination, abuse and slavery) or else be shamed.

        This tactic stopped working for me ten or so years ago. Now it seems others too have wised up and dismiss this childish behavior.

  • Insidious Sid

    They’re like the little birds that pick the rotting meat from between the crocodiles teeth. They’ll risk everything for something worth nothing. They have no influence. They are nothing.

    • GORF

      Great analogy!

      • Insidious Sid

        I’d rather be covered in honey and dropped on a termite mound than become a simp and hand my very balls over to the wimmin folk and their feminism and their brave new world. Feminism be damned.

        • GORF

          Leave that to blue pill manginas like “lock up my hobbies in my man cave”. They are the hogs of the relationship world. They clean up (wife up) what men discard (pump and dump) and keep the population of post-wall hags in check. A hog rolls around in filth with a big smile on its face.

  • Insidious Sid

    Modern feminism is about political power, money and the socialism women need to spread in order to get their hands on it.

  • GORF

    By the way the title of this article displayed yet again women’s empathetical bankruptcy.
    It’s not “feminism has hurt men and boys” or anything about what women have done to males and how they stood idly by like lifeless mannequins while generations of men and boys were destroyed.
    Oh no.
    It’s all about her after all.
    “women have be treated me a trust” we have to get them to trust us again so we can get what we want.
    This is what make these pathetic pleas from the “fairer sex” so laughable.
    You don’t even try to hide the fact you don’t care about men. It’s only about making the whip softer so men will strap that bull tongue plow on once more.
    Men are waking up to this daily.

    Get a dog gents.
    A dog will die for you.
    A woman will lie for you.

  • Insidious Sid

    I’m sorry, but feminists breeding themselves out of existence and dying surrounded by feral cats is not a problem, but in fact one hell of a deliciously ironic solution.

  • Lock up your daughters?

    I have been looking after the house and kids a lot lately. My wife has been away up north a lot lately but will be back again (for a short time) soon. Her mum’s cancer has taken a turn for the worse so while she is hospitalised my partner is regularly away looking after her parents, including her father who has little ability to cope or help and needs care himself.
    My brother in law is not a great deal of use and prefers to ignore the situation as best he can.

    These caring roles usually (naturally?) fall to the women/daughters. You may have different experience.

    Please don’t worry for me or ‘us’. Nothing is bomb-proof but our shared experience and investment make us both very secure.

    You speak endlessly of going your own way …….but somehow you are still not gone.

    When you die, will you have left anything on this earth other than bitterness and bile for the ‘other’ half of humanity?

    • Insidious Sid

      Oh dear, the “Afraid to die alone” mantra.

      We all die alone.

      But a man who hands over his will and his balls is already dead.

      And there’s the rub.

      • Lock up your daughters?

        “Afraid to die alone” mantra ………No. Don’t think I mentioned that. It must be in your head

        • Insidious Sid

          “When you die, will you have left anything on this earth other than bitterness and bile for the ‘other’ half of humanity?”

          Your attention span is way too low to be of any value in this conversation.

    • GORF

      In other words your wife is probably riding the hobby horse.
      But you better keep those dishes clean, son!

      We are going our way fool. Just because you can’t take our presence doesn’t mean we are not. Going our own way means rejecting being a Swiss army knife-television-ATM-d i l d o like you’ve cheerfully accepted. You can’t take the sight of us because deep down you missed out on things you could have done had you not wasted your life in marriage. Slaves have contempt for runaways. By the way, we MGTOW usually talk amongst ourselves in our own spaces. It is people like the author who actively seek out our spaces. We’re just spreading the gospel but it appears from the comments that the gospel is self evident.

      Everybody dies alone sweetie and we leave the world naked. That includes you. So nothing you think you have will be with you among the bleached bones you leave behind. For someone who is an atheist you sure have a hopelessly idealistic view of life and death and presume to be a moral authority in a relative morality framework.

      P. S. I will put to rest this “one half of humanity” argument once and for all. Men are 100% of the population. We built civilization and we maintain it. Women simply feed off it. It is traditionalists like you that have made it so by mollycoddling women and serving them. MGTOW are going to end that and force women to pull their weight and match male contributions. Less and less coaches for the gravy train means women are going to have to walk alone.

    • phuckkunts

      I laugh at you. Your hole is ‘up north’ getting pounded by some disease
      infected slug, while you pretend that it is caring for sick parents.
      Lol, maybe that’s your fetish, dunno.
      I would guess that you hide in the closet masturbating as it is impaled by nigs.
      LMFAO at you.

      • coptic777

        Yea one reason why I advise black men to never join up with the white genetic neanderthal in any movement (unlike you I can quote actual science on this vs name calling if you Google ALL NON AFRICANS ARE PART NEANDERTHAL Your the ones who are part sub human) because the “manosphere” is full out white nationalist like you. Black men are the original MGTOW just like we are the original man on the planet. We have nothing to do with This however on EVERY website blog etc. that deals with This subject somehow us blacks are brought into it by you hybrids that get burnt by the Sun. Have some respect for your parents neanderthal. As a race your dying out….

  • Insidious Sid

    It all works except for the socialism part. It’s a ponzi scheme and one day, big daddy government won’t be able to print anymore money. Then all hell is going to break lose.

  • Insidious Sid

    Here James: have a wiener stick. We can watch it burn together.
    Marshmallow anyone?

  • PaulMurrayCbr

    It is not enough to win back men’s trust. You need also to supply positive reason why a man would want to marry.

  • The Prisoner

    Well I might consider coming to the table as long as she can do something for me first. Give me back 23 years of my life that was taken from me and give me back the time with my kid that was taken from me. Now, if Belinda can do that I might start thinking about coming to the table. Oh I almost forgot, I would also want about 6 million dollars in an offshore account and another 2 million in a Roth IRA account. However until I meet a woman that can do all four of those things, and do the same for every other man that was robbed of his life, these women can BLOW.

    • GORF

      You’ll find that before you’ll find a woman who can cook, clean and sew.

  • birttwathead

    “This time round we can’t expect them to do our bidding, as they did for
    so long. If we want to win back their trust and if we want them to
    co-operate with us, and I do, we will have to concede some of our
    independence and be prepared to place some dependence on them. In this,
    for their own security, we will have, I am afraid, to allow them to
    take the lead.”

    I find this comment very toxic as your are saying that men come second to women..”to do our bidding, as they did for so long” suggests that in the past women have expected to control and determine what men do..and all you are suggesting is that we soften the approach and “allow” men the illusion that women are not controling men..

    what a F**ked up theory that is..men do not want to be controlled..or make life easier for you in your traditional sense..all you offer is covert slavery..which man who’s wishes to stay a slave..the choice your offering is be our slave not a feminism’s slave..what choice is that..

    it’s no wonder men are going their own way.

  • BeijaFlor

    “Women have betrayed men’s trust.” That, to me as a man, is the crux of the matter.

    How do you expect to build any bridge to us men, without trust? How do you expect to reach any understanding, when our trust in you has been so thoroughly undermined? How DARE you expect men to build anything with you, when we’ve seen so damned many of our fellows lose everything to a fit of vindictiveness on the part of one of your sisters, or a pernicious lie from another who turns last night’s consensual-if-boozy sex into this morning’s RAAAAAPE!!

    Mrs. Brown, you may be personally trustworthy, forthright, decent and honorable – and I respect you, for taking care of your disabled husband, when Society would shrug and the Sisterhood would salute you for dumping him. But the well of trust has been too thoroughly poisoned, and we can’t trust your sisters, or the Society that backs them, or the laws that stand ready to crush us if we did “Man Up” and return to harness.

    Women, it’s all up to you. How do you expect to prove yourselves trustworthy, in the face of the past century’s repeated deceptions, attacks and betrayals, from the White Feather brigades of the Suffragists to the “kill off 90% of the men” RadFems of today? Because … I don’t have to build the future with you. I have no children, and no time left in my life to raise them. I will die alone, but I will not die a slave, deceived into harness by a “conservative” woman.

    • Insidious Sid

      No woman (or man) deserves inherent respect. They deserve basic human rights – the rest is up to them. I don’t go by flowery words on the internet, I go by people’s actions – this is especially true with women, who speak eloquently about their virtue and benign intentions but behave in a completely opposite manner.

  • Belinda Brown

    Gorf lock up your daughters is a woman.

    • GORF

      Pre or post op?

      • Belinda Brown

        We now have gay marriage and women can have wives. But it was an assumption. Possibly even a prejudice. I could be very wrong.

        • GORF

          A little reading goes a long way.
          Plus he would have told me.

    • GORF

      “I have been looking after the house and kids a lot lately. My wife has been away up north a lot lately but will be back again (for a short time) soon. ”

      -lock up your daughters? A “woman”
      (Unless of course he’s a 2 stroke, 16 cylinder, roots blown, aftercooled diesel d y k e).

  • phuckkunts

    I’ve literally stood by and watched 4 females getting their a55es kicked, while I lit a cigarette. Since females decided to soak up all of the special rights and privileges lavished upon them, yeah I could care less about you subhumans. Quite frankly, you could count me among those in Florida who cheered the blacks on as they raped the silly hole.
    If I were you I’d be grateful for mgtow, the alternative is so much worse.
    Make no mistake, the alternative is coming.
    Enjoy the few years that you have, hole. As for your daughter….. yeah, that day is coming sooner rather than later.

  • tomodd

    Lol

  • phuckkunts

    I don’t care if you things submit willingly, or otherwise. You will submit.
    You gonna have to serve someone, it might be the devil, or it might be the Lord, but you’re gonna have to serve someone.
    Because females have created this situation, eventually they will serve on their knees licking the dirt from the boots of men.
    That man might be your protector, or your owner.
    I don’t care either way, I’m busy making filthy female pigs pay for their treason.

    • GORF

      Nice Bob Dylan reference.

  • phuckkunts

    I deal in true equality.
    Delivering equality to a female pig feels like, hitting a bag of pudding with some sticks.

  • phuckkunts

    For the children…. the ones they don’t sacrifice to baal ?

    60 million and counting. Hey kunts, you don’t suppose the men saw that ?

  • The Prisoner

    Well if a woman cannot tell the truth in a comment section like this, how in the hell are we suppose to trust them anyplace else?
    How do you expect men to want to get married when women think of us and treat us like some sort of work in progress?

    I hate to be the one to burst your bubble ladies (and Belinda), but men are not a work in progress for you to mold to your liking. I am a cigar huffing, bourbon drinking, meat eating man that refuses to allow any woman to change me.

  • phuckkunts

    “Aren’t dogs a bit more loyal?”
    Yes, that’s why they’re MAN’S best friend.

  • phuckkunts

    In that day seven women will take hold of one man and say, “We will eat our own food and provide our own clothes; only let us be called by your name. Take away our disgrace!”
    Isaiah 4:1 is coming. Sooner rather than later.

    • silversurf

      wow truly prophetic

  • Insidious Sid

    ” It is the men who want to disappear off into non-reproductive hedonism.”

    Oh my we’re still on that are we? That men are sexual reprobates and women are the bastions of sexual morality? More shaming language. More misandry. More “women good men bad”. Snakes and snails and puppy dog tails, indeed.

    Feminism and it’s birthchild called “hook up culture” (invented and controlled by women) is all you need to know about women’s moral compass when it comes to sex. And on that subject, a man will have sex and expect nothing else. A woman agreeing to sex is usually getting out a rather long list of things she expects in return. For most women, sex is just leverage for something else they want more.

    But thanks for the chuckle.

  • silversurf

    ” Feminists were very keen to destroy the family because of how it got in the way of self- realization and self- actualization”

    Feminists are very keen to destroy the family because it’s leaders pursue a Marxist agenda and formula .. class warefare.

    “Destroy the family, you destroy the country.” – V.I. Lenin

    “We can’t destroy the inequities between men and women until we destroy
    marriage.” – Robin Morgan (ed), Sisterhood is Powerful, 1970, p.537

    “No woman should be authorized to stay at home and raise her children.
    Society should be totally different. Women should not have that choice,
    precisely because if there is such a choice, too many women will make
    that one.” – Interview with Simone de Beauvoir, “Sex, Society, and the
    Female Dilemma,” Saturday Review, June 14, 1975, p.18

    “[The
    nuclear family is] a cornerstone of woman’s oppression: it enforces
    women’s dependence on men, it enforces heterosexuality and it imposes
    the prevailing masculine and feminine character structures on the next
    generation.” — Alison Jaggar, Feminist Politics and Human Nature

    “Feminism, Socialism, and Communism are one in the same, and Socialist/Communist government is the goal of feminism.” – Catharine A. MacKinnon, Toward a Feminist Theory of the State (First Harvard University Press, 1989), p.10

  • GORF

    He said in the comment section of another whiny “men must come to the rescue of women” article that he is a “fella”.

    But I’m sure to women like you, everyone is a woman. The ones with danglers are the defective ones.

    Amrite?

  • flight2q

    There is no “low key approach”. Any thought that doesn’t pander to the primacy of a female profligate and wastrel lifestyle gets rabidly attacked. So, take action that will help generate actual trust. Build a movement to get rid of women’s suffrage. Revisit the arguments over suffrage. All the concerns of those opposed to women’s suffrage came true.

  • Not Sure

    HAHAHAHAHA!!!!

    So now we ( men) need to except that women messed up and help them find their way again…. HA! it is not our job to raise you, or pander to your whims.

    your desperate plea is nothing more than entertainment at this point…

    we are MGTOW…

    you will not enjoy this….

    this will not be over quickly…..

    • coptic777

      Careful those last two sentences might be seen as a rape threat. That’s how bad it is now. I’m done. Women are not worth the legal and financial risk. MGTOW….

  • Lock up your daughters?

    Gosh Belinda ……So, not only am I a woman ……I am also lying !

    You are wrong on both counts, but that you state it as fact is most revealing.

    Was it your intuition or ‘divine advice’ which led you to this conclusion?

  • Lock up your daughters?

    This is a rare occasion on which GORF is correct.

    I am an atheist/humanist. I married a ‘good catholic girl’ nearly 25 years ago and we are at that age where our parents are in their 70s and 80s and are succumbing to ill health. I mentioned the reasons for my wife’s regular absence and unfortunately yesterday her mother received the terminal diagnosis that the cancer has spread to her liver including other things. We are hoping for a couple of months but our other worry is how her father is going to cope. Their Catholic faith may give them comfort through this process I hope. I suspect that faith and uncompromising priests were a contributory factor in the development of his OCD. Anyways the brain which once won him a private school scholarship is unstoppably sinking into dementia. A tragedy which awaits many of us. An old person’s fear is so much more upsetting than that of a child. A child is so much easier to comfort and reassure.

    Even at the bad times I try not to let life get depressing. When our parents have all died they will have left children and many beautiful grandchildren contributing to humanity. We all die, but IMO this is the mark of a life well lived. Other things are important [ideas, achievements etc.] but in comparison to procreational success they are but an ethereal puff of wind. That is my logic -even if it does not seem to be shared by many on this thread. Belief systems and even religion/religious-interpretation are amongst the things which have become democratised in the modern age

    It is natural for parents to be fearful of their son’s and daughter’s futures and the mistakes which they will inevitably make. I am reasonably confident that all my offspring have a good chance and we have been mercifully spared bad luck with any of them.

    The MR community DOES have a few legitimate complaints hidden amongst the rants. I have learned/appreciated a few things and I have saved snapshots of the ConWoman threads attempting to court this ‘community’ …….quite educational; might even show them to our older children.

    I think my time is better spent elsewhere but I might still look in occasionally.

    • GORF

      Go away.

    • Insidious Sid

      I think my time is better spent elsewhere but I might still look in occasionally.

      Translation: I got owned as a troll – maybe I should save myself future embarrassment and lurk?

      Yeah, I’d go with that….

  • furryfinder

    im not falling for that again (girl at school tried something like this saying she changed but it turns out she was the same and just being quiet so we fell out the next day and i left women did all this crap they all have group think and they never change dont fall for this call back to the prison for your mind we are all worth so much more than what woman can ever hope to give us id rather cry for the grave then give these parasites the time of day

    • GORF

      Preach!

  • The Prisoner

    Okay not going to post here anymore. Moderators censor any type of retort in order to satisfy their agenda. Belinda is nothing more than a feminist fraud like the rest. I have nothing more to say, she makes me puke in my mouth.

    • GORF

      Women are still very much under the impression they can change public opinion with censorship.
      Women are socialists by nature. Is it any wonder why the size of every government that allowed them the vote expanded dramatically and welfare states were established?

      • The Prisoner

        Well you know me bro, like a dummy I had the impression that this site was honest. As you know, one ounce of faith in a woman is an ounce of faith wasted.

        • GORF

          ” As you know, one ounce of faith in a woman is an ounce of faith wasted.”

          Likewise a minute and a dollar.

  • The Prisoner

    Hey sense my retort was censored when is it that Belinda will turn off the comments? After all she is a woman and therefore beyond questions. We know that women will do no wrong or at least be held accountable for any wrong doings. So when are the comments being turned off, tell us that if you will grace us with that information.

  • The Prisoner

    G.oing Y.our O.wn W.ay and look up The Prisoner to see the retort she was afraid to show.

  • The Prisoner

    MGTOW or GYOW are two others too look up to see the retort Belinda was afraid to have seen by The Prisoner. Heck you can probably google my name and get it.

    • Belinda Brown

      I’m not quite sure what this is all about but I am not a feminist. I’m not a socialist and I can’t turn off the comments.

      • guest

        Maybe you can explain how it came to be that certain comments have been deleted ?
        Like all womyn, you ask a question and when the answer doesn’t suit you, you seek to remove the answer in an effort to censor the truth from others.
        You are correct in that womyn have judased men and are fundamentally broken.
        Asking men to fix, or even to help fix what you and your mothers have destroyed is incredibly….. I don’t even have a word for the chutzpah you display.
        Wow, just wow.

      • GORF

        That is total BS.
        There is another article on this same site “men should stand up to feminists” that was heavily moderated. The author eventually disabled moderation.

      • The Prisoner

        Well I guess that it is strange that a retort I wrote never made it here. Don’t worry I was smart enough to copy and past it to another website for all to see, giving you full credit of course.

  • Insidious Sid

    A gynocracy with no balance from the male gender is doomed to self annihilation. It’s like a substance that cannot support combustion – you can hold the ignition source there but it will ultimately self extinguish.

  • Phil McCracken

    I don’t agree that men should be helping women, but other men .