A bunch of links from In Mala Fide

This tendency to blame and hate women that arises in some segments of the MRA/MGTOW community appears to be a relatively recent phenomenon. I’m not sure why this is. It could be that traditional society carried an implicit recognition that women were fallen creatures too, but was also resigned to the fact that women were going to do what they were going to do, and given the necessity of men leading and women following, thought it more important to discipline men. (Incidentally, this would contradict the Roissysphere’s description of men as keys who will adapt themselves to whatever shape women choose their locks to take, but that is a topic for another entry.) And it could be that in modern society, even MRAs/MGTOWers have unconsciously absorbed the belief in female equality, so they expect women to make decisions on the same basis as men do, and become angry at them when they don’t.

Source.

Very true. Expecting women to reach the standards of men is a recipe for misogyny, because they’ll never reach them.

I have read both Roissy and Whiskey make the point that as society becomes more feminized, credentialism becomes more prevalent….
Unfortunately, our society is becoming more and more obsessed with standardized credentials, even as there has been a broad devaluation of the credentials themselves. This means that although it no longer means all that much to have a higher degree (due to affirmative action, grade inflation and other factors), the degrees themselves have become more of a necessity for even entry-level jobs that require few skills beyond typing and filing. This is preventing plenty of talented people – mainly young men – from obtaining positions in organizations in which they could potentially contribute a great deal.

Credentialism.

There are those that believe that by maintaining the old codes of chivalry, by sacrificing and accommodating feminists, that by not becoming the very thing the feminists say men are, that somehow men will prevail in the end by virtue of being nice….
It will not work with the feminists. It has been tried for forty years, and men are vilified more, not less. It is time to realize that niceness is the path to destruction for men, it is time to set that aside and become men, uncompromising and unsympathetic to the weakness and emptiness of our society.

Being nice is not a virtue

Here’s a good MRA blog:

Objectify Chicks

Sorry I’ve been AWOL

But apparently one of my co-workers decided to confirm all my convictions.

Yeah, at my office, a woman was put in charge of a vital department and allowed to work unsupervised. Then a few weeks ago, the boss discovered that, surprise! NO WORK WAS GETTING DONE!

She was fired, the rest of us have been working overtime to catch up on her backlog of undone work and mistakes, and I’ve been too exhausted to blog. Fortunately, we’ve now hired a couple of temps to work through this pile of stuff, so maybe it’ll slack off soon.

Those of you who’ve commented with links and stuff, thank you, I’ll look at them and post them when I have some time and energy, but right now I’m just swamped.

Addition to the Sidebars

I’ve just added a list of links to what I consider my best posts. It’s at the top of the sidebars.

Blogs I’ve just discovered

Vox Popoli was linked on another blog I follow because of his post on Sodini. I scanned the most recent posts and noticed many things I liked, including two in particular.

One, he obviously has a realistic perspective on the fair sex. Check out his posts on feminism – and those are just the ones that specifically use the word “feminism”. He recommends that people read Roissy et al.

Second, his subtitle delighted me:

Starring Vox Day, Libertarian and bête noire of ScienceBlogs

His objection to that site is the same as mine: it’s more about ideology and having a place to spew invective against people who aren’t far-left Democrat atheists than about science. It’s funny, the first time I came across that site, it was because I had read an article about diet that I wanted to check further. Scienceblogs had an item on that article, which basically consisted of, “That author is evil for saying this, but we aren’t going to waste time explaining the science behind why, because if we allow anyone who questions consensus to count as a ‘skeptic’, we’ll be stuck accepting global warming skeptics and alternative medicine advocates as skeptics!” Thanks, guys, that was real helpful. A few weeks later, I came across the site again when I was looking for something, and this time spent some time there, determining that it was a political site, not a science one. Most of the posts there don’t even have anything to do with science. And given their relentless irrational support for overwhelmingly discredited political schemes such as socialized medicine, socialism in general, government education, and feminism, why should I believe that they are more rational or honest in science than they are in politics? It’s not just the feminist bimbo I railed against a couple months back, every contributor I have ever looked at on that site is like that. Vox Popoli has also noticed this.

I don’t recall where I first saw a link to In Mala Fide, but it was within the last week or so. I had him in my bookmarks, intending to link him here, and then last night he commented here! Welcome, fellow traveller! He’s a PUA, an MRA, an MGHOW, a capitalist, and a realist about such things as crime and excessive immigration.

*looks at watch* Damn, I have to go. I don’t have time to properly introduce the next two, but they’re both MRA blogs, so check ’em out:

Novaseeker
Occasional assorted reflections on philosophy, theology, politics, feminism and its discontents, and the male experience in contemporary America.

Rebuking Feminism
To create a greater understanding of men and women and our struggle in todays society. Please feel free to contribute and offer your own writings and information in the COMMENTS section and at REBUKEFEM@YAHOO.COM VOTE IN THE SURVEYS I’VE PROVIDED. I DON’T WANT THIS TO BE A ONE WAY CONVERSATION!

Phyllis Schafly interview

Phyllis Schlafly at 84

As you know, nobody made feminists more angry than you did. At one debate, Betty Friedan said to you, “I’d like to burn you at the stake.”

In 1972 the feminist movement made the ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment their major goal, and they had every advantage. They had three Presidents, Nixon, Ford and Carter, [behind them]. They had all the governors. They had 99% of the media. They had organizations, they had Hollywood stars, movie stars, and they felt I was responsible for not letting them get what they wanted. So they were mad about it.



They also thought you were a hypocrite because you had a career yourself, but you didn’t seem to want other women to have one.


Well, that’s ridiculous because obviously I’ve had a wonderful life and I’m an example that women can do whatever they want to do. I’ve had it all, but I’ve had it at different times in my life. I spent 25 years without any income, a separate income, raising my six children. And after that I had time to go out and engage in politics. The feminist movement is not about success for women. It is about treating women as victims and about telling women that you can’t succeed because society is unfair to you, and I think that’s a very unfortunate idea to put in the minds of young women because I believe women can do whatever they want. Feminists don’t honor successful women. You never hear them talking about Margaret Thatcher. Take Condoleezza Rice. She’s a remarkable, successful woman. You don’t hear the feminists talk about her or Carly Fiorina or Jeanne Kirkpatrick. They don’t talk about them because they are just determined to preach this idea that women are unfairly treated in our society and they need legislation and government and taxpayers’ money in order to get them a fair break.

The Fantasy Genre has been taken over by women

Twilight at Comic-Con: The Feminization of Fantasy

This marks another, mostly male sphere, that is now switched to a mostly female sphere. However, the problem for publishers, writers, and the entertainment industry at large is that males will simply withdraw from something so absolutely, and irrevocably female. Making fantasy a tough sell once the tween fad runs out (as mega-stars Leif Erickson and Scott Baio). Which means in an extended recession/depression, the regular income streams that male readers used to give fantasy publishers simply won’t be there any more. As males consider fantasy just another female-gay ghetto, and tween girls inevitably grow up, and move on to the next fad. The cultural damage, both to girls views about men and male behavior, and the erosion of the male-heroic fantasy, are far worse than the commercial impact, of course.

I’m fond of fantasy and sci-fi myself, and I’m certainly tired of how much feminism has infected the genre. I’m constantly coming across essays and rants about “women in fantasy” or “feminist science fiction” yada yada. We’re asked to believe in feudal societies in which women are soldiers and archbishops. Or in utopias ruled by women.

Even military sci-fi is infected with feminism, even though this is a thoroughly masculine genre. There’s still co-ed armies and other such nonsense.

Quite aside from how insulting this is to men, belittling their abilities and achievements by pretending that women are just as good at male pursuits, it’s also very bad for women’s self-respect. These days women are constantly exhorted to do things which are far beyond the abilities of most of us. And of no interest to most of us. Play sports. Study the sciences. Pursue a demanding career. Beat up a room full of men like the chicks in Charlie’s Angels.

I pursue a demanding career, but I’m a dyke. I don’t have the option of being supported by a man, and I have a higher testosterone level than most women, which shows up in a couple of physical ways. (The book Taking Sex Differences Seriously went so far as to put women into two distinct categories, high and low testosterone. Feminism is basically a handful of high-testosterone women, mostly lesbians, trying to force normal women into pursuits that only we are even slightly interested in or remotely capable of.)

I have no interest whatsoever in sports, and even intensive training can’t enable women to beat up men. I mean, there are exceptions – a highly trained woman might beat up a scrawny, untrained man – but the male skeleton is so much more powerful than ours that it’s a quixotic pursuit for most women. But here’s all these stupid movies, where male actors are paid to pretend that Ashley Judd or Renee Russo is beating them up, leading women to believe that they can defend themselves from men, and thus to get into dangerous situations where they’ll be raped or murdered or mugged. Or, in less extreme cases, making the 99.9999999999999999999999999% of women who know they can’t do these things feel inadequate.

Before feminism, the world praised women for doing things that are within the capabilities of nonfreak women. Creating a home. Raising children, the most important job in civilization. Being chaste before marriage and faithful after it. I could go on with the list but I won’t. Now these things, which are absolutely indispensable for civilization, are denigrated and women are told they are worthless unless they succeed at male pursuits, which almost no woman is going to be any good at. This has destroyed women’s self-esteem, which is why eating disorders have become commonplace under feminism; they were almost nonexistent in the days of patriarchy, because women were happier.

The inventors of the conscience

The Editrix has this to say about my antisemitic trolls:

By the way, in Germany it used to be “Jews back to Palestine”, 75 years or so later it’s “Jews out of Palestine”. It’s not what Jews do, but what they ARE. Jews have given monotheism, the Decalogue, the conscience, to humankind. Every time a God-less person sees a Jew, he reminds him of his God-lessness and he won’t sleep before the last Jew is eradicated from the face of the earth.

All other explanations don’t hold water.

Very true. Of course, liberals have to disguise their antisemitism as “anti-Zionism”, but it’s the same thing and for the same reason.

WTF?

Do I have to state “antisemitic comments will be deleted” in every single post before people quit making them? Until last week, I hadn’t gotten one in months. Now suddenly they’re coming out of the woodwork. Are the recent feminist trolls making these comments to bait me? Did some antisemitic forum link to me and send these people my way?

Editrix, I fear one of them may troll you as well. I deleted his comment, but it was specifically aimed at you.

Before I stopped reading latte island, she pointed out that antisemites who attack Israel are defeating their own purpose. The existence of Israel makes it possible for Jews to live separately from gentiles. That’s what antisemites want, right? I mean, the ones who aren’t deranged enough to want to kill them all. (And by the way, antisemites have been trying to kill all the Jews in the world since ancient Egypt, so I suggest you not waste your time. God wants them to continue, no matter what you want.)

Oh, brother.

Just deleted another antisemitic comment. Like I’ve said, those were the reason I started moderating comments in the first place. I haven’t gotten one of those in a while. I knew it couldn’t last.

Note to regular readers

I have a backup of this blog at wordpress.