Hey ladies! The Men’s Rights movement needs you. Like, really, really needs you.
The Men’s Rights subreddit is a gift that keeps on giving!
In response to a woman pledging her support to the Men’s Rights movement, someone calling himself Nephilim_Hunter offers his thanks:
Because men have been relegated to a what of a what now?
Because males are already relegated to a position of non-participant in society
Because males are already relegated to a position of non-participant in society
Because males are already relegated to a position of non-participant in society
Because males are already relegated to a position of non-participant in society
Just wanted to make sure I understood that you really, actually did just say that.
Oh, by the way,I’m starting a new feature here at Man Boobz. It’s called: Random Pictures of Boards of Directors.
Here’s a picture of the board of directors of Wal-Mart:
Oh, and here’s the board of directors for GE:
And here’s the board of directors of Duke Energy:
Oh, and the board of directors at Dynasty Financial Partners:
And these fellas are the board of directors at The Rea Magnet Wire Company:
And, while we’re at it, here’s the board of directors of Man Boobz:
Like this:
Posted on March 11, 2012, in kitties, MRA, oppressed men, whaaaaa?. Bookmark the permalink. 314 Comments.
DKM, I was in an abusive relationship (through nothing more than sheer luck, I managed to leave while it was still in the honeymoon period). One of the ways my abuse manifested was that I was afraid to question him or disagree with him because he might get angry. But the thing is, in a normal relationship questioning or disagreement is allowed, and anger is permitted. The dynamics you are describing are not “how women can avoid abuse”: they are emotional abuse. Period.
I’m “bothered” by OVER-educated women, and their goofy girlfriends, because too much of either friendship or education ruins women for wifehood and domesticity, especially when she uses them, or is used by them, at cross-purposes against being a good wife, mother, and homemaker.
If she could be educated to be a better “domestic goddess” and her friends could encourage her to seek and find her fulfillment in her life with her man, there are no quarrels with either her “gal-pals” or her education.
If her friends could teach her how to be even more lovable or domestic, that would even be better! Of course, I bet that Ruby Hypatia et al probably see much more destructive goals for both education and woman’s social life.
So, uneducated women with no gal pals make the best wives, have the strongest marriages? I’m not buying that. You just don’t want women educated because, well, knowlege is power. And you want men to have the majority of power.
DKM: Does anybody STILL think that more than the most rudimentary education for women is a good idea?
Here we see the failure of your movement, past, present, and future.
Lots of people still think this, or women wouldn’t be getting educations.
There are still people who think there ought to be slaves, or that, “The races ought to be kept separate” (right Meller? It will be, “natural”, white folks will want to be “unmixed” and black folks, [if they have any manners] will just stay away; lest any of those white folks get their fragile feelings hurt), and a host of other inane, asinine and damnfool ideas.
But they are in the minority, and so the rules which allowed for that have been changed. If there weren’t any people who thought women ought to be educated, you would have some of your paradise; women would be ill-educated, and in thrall to men; because they’d be unable to fend for themselves.
Which is what you really want. Women who are dependent on creeps, such as yourself, to avoid starving in the gutter. Women who can’t afford to leave if the man they are with should, “stray, even though he knows, “the home fires” are more warming”, because to leave is to be adrift. She isn’t going to be able to know all the other men aren’t your sort of asshat, so “better the Devil she knows”, and you can cheat on her to your dickish content.
What pisses you off is women don’t have to put up with you, and the way you behave.
Oh, Meller: Women with educations make fine wives (partners, SOs, whatever they want to be called).
What they don’t make is good slaves. They will leave if you cheat. They will be able to go places without their mate, even when married. It means their partners have to treat them with respect. It means their partners have to be… partners, not masters. A marriage of equals.
Woman, says the Talmud, was made from man’s rib. Not his head, that she should lord over him, nor from his foot that he should be above him, but his rib, that they should be beside each other.
Education makes that possible.
Pecunium, I don’t have to worry, because being a man, you are going to eat your words sooner or later-sooner instead of later, if the modern women you seem to like so much are true to form!
As for VOLUNTARY separation of the races, I offer any large American city, Detroit, Chicago, New York, Los Angeles,Philadelphia, or any other after WWII, and especially since your much beloved ’60s. These cities, even in the 30s, during the Great Depression, were American and world showplaces, when they were largely under White ownership, management, and commerce. They were places where people from around the world came to try to live, even if it was “in the slums”-which in the late XIX and early XX century, were largely European, by the way, with Africans being a largely rural underclass safely kept in the American South. Today, cities are either burned out hulks, sad remnants of former days, like Detroit, New Orleans, or Chicago, or two “ghettos”, one small for the super-rich, and one (much larger) for a growing class of permanently unemployable, ineducable, drug and booze addled, and often maniacally violence-prone lumpen on other…
“Inane and asinine” ideas? When my kind of ideas prevailed, poverty was temporary, a large and growing middle class was THE PREVAILING NORM, a male breadwinner income was understood to be the financial support of a family, where the man provded financial support, and the woman provided domestic support. There were households where this program failed to operate, for some reason, but it was universally understood to be tragedy produced by EXCEPTIONAL circumstances, not the norm, and certainly not some sort of warped “ideal”, the way “single motherhood” seems to have been since the ’70s.
Some, maybe most, of my ideas are suggestive of restoring the sum and substance of our society as it was before WWI. Is it possible? Probably not. Should we still explore options in that direction? Yes,esepecially since the more advanced state of much ((civilian market-based) technology available today, or in the near future, would offer everyone a vastly better standard of living then that which prevailed a century ago (think air conditioning).
The wisdom of the Talmud that you cited is absolutely true-for the men and women of the time! No Rabbi or Talmudic scholar imagined that a nightmare world would ever exist like ours, where women were at war with men, where displacement of men by women would be considered “progress”, and where, without blinking an eye, women would eagerly imitate men, even in our less praiseworthy traits, anywhere and everywhere, in the name of “equality”. Yes, woman as companion, as a man’s beloved, and as his “nearest and dearest” is certainly and ideal to be endorsed. But it becomes impossible when woman is man’s competitor, man’s rival, and in some cases, his ENEMY!
Kind of “Clockwork Orange” meets “Brave New World”. No Thank you!!
Ever notice that highly educated men tend to go for highly educated women? Ever get the feeling that people in the MRM aren’t highly educated, and they’re pissed these intelligent women would never go for them? Meller, you must feel really small when you’re around women doctors, lawyers, scientists, etc.
Meller, our Western culture where women have the same opportunities as men may be your nightmare scenario, but it’s not for most people. Our standard of living is better than most people’s around the world, and throughout history. If you were more secure in your manhood, you wouldn’t be bothered by the thought of women being highly educated professionals.
Meller, you’ve been watching too much little house on the prarie again. Slums and ghettos and poverty have always been the rule of thumb. That golden age you talk about was a blip that didn’t happen for most people.
And so what if all those wonderful cities used to be so wonderful? The rich used them up and moved on. Poorer families and then Black people moved in because that’s what they could afford. Then the city politicians underfund services and after that assholes like you blame people forced to live in dumps!
Nice Meller…
Shorter Meller - as long as the husband is happy, who cares if the wife is miserable? If she’s not happy it’s proof that she’s been led astray.
(For “husband” in this instance read “creepy controlling oddball with a doll fetish.)
I don’t think Meller’s read “A Clockwork Orange” if “this equality business has just gone too darn far” is what he’s getting from it…
Also I’m curious where bi/multiracial people should live. Do they get bordertowns, or are we going by a “one drop” rule here, or oh god I feel terrible even joking about this shit.
Meller, do you really expect to convince any of us that racism is a GOOD thing?? ¬_¬
“Some, maybe most, of my ideas are suggestive of restoring the sum and substance of our society as it was before WWI.”
derp,
“Voluntary separation of the races?” Seriously? In LA, the city was not very segregated at all at the beginning of the 20th Century. This is why white folks instituted restrictive racial covenants prohibiting white real estate owners in certain neighborhoods from selling their property to African Americans, Jews, etc. There was nothing voluntary about it. Even though LA wasn’t part of the deep South, we had our share of cross burnings and intimidation both against white property owners who defied the covenants and against non-white people who bought the property and moved in. When white southerners started moving to Los Angeles during WWII, they tried very hard to bring Jim Crow with them, segregating parks, movie theaters, swimming pools, even pet cemeteries! African Americans (and others) spent decades fighting politically, filing lawsuits, organizing boycotts, etc. precisely to end this segregation. Meller is not just vile, he is wrong on the facts.
And I think Pecunium is shaking in their stylish, yet affordable boots.
You don’t know a lot about history, do you? If you did, you would know that the “male breadwinner” standard was just that - a standard. It was something that people were supposed to strive to, but a surprisingly small group was actually able to do it. Even in the lily middle-class suburbs, the middle-class lifestyle was usually too much for just one income. Even middle-class wives brought in income, if in unconventional ways. Some popular methods were selling tupperware, jewelry, or makeup to other members of the community.
Again, if you took history lessons from sources other than Leave it to Beaver than you would already know that.
Story of his life
Well, Meller, as you can see, the majority of the population does not wish to return society to its pre-WW2 form. Since America is a democracy, that means it isn’t going to happen. Too bad, so sad, etc. Feel free to seek moral support from your dollies.
Xeginy - Yep. As if “modern” women are the first ones to ever work. Let’s do a little genealogy here…
I’m an emergency medical technician.
My mother is a nurse.
My grandmother was an accountant.
My great-grandmother owned a corner grocery store.
My great-great-grandmother worked on a dairy farm.
My great-great-great-grandmother worked on a dairy farm.
At this point the records get a bit hazy but I suspect my great-great-great-great-grandmother worked on a dairy farm.
Maybe Meller isn’t a vampire, or he might remember that the Good Old Days, the ones where women never had to trouble themselves with work beyond washing dishes and feeding babies, never happened. In the 1800s my female ancestors were hauling hay and milking cows.
Then again, perhaps he’s just a very sheltered vampire.
What really gets me is Mellers lack of common sense. I mean really, entire cultures and races of people didn’t want to live in nice places like the white folk live in! The way he makes it sound, Black people deliberatly moved into slums and intentionally made it worse.
Melller, you have the internet, a gateway to just about any kind of knowledge you want. It contains vast amounts of history and sociology. For fucks sake USE it!!!!!!
Start with Black history, especially in terms of realestate and redlining. Then go look at what pioneer women did as work on a daily basis! Or you could read some of the great classics, especially those written by women which talk about womens lives and work. Then start looking up when things like the washing machine were invented and when they became common household items. And when you do that, just keep in mind that many households don’t have access to those time saving devices, many households are still washing laundry by hand. Christ! If it weren’t for fire codes many households would probably still be using wood stoves and well water!
He is also a clown, and the disturbing non-funny type.
Cue in his theme music each time he makes an appearance. (Trigger warning, scary clown picture, but it perfectly captures Meller’s ugly soul.)
I will never sleep again…
I won’t watch that…
Meller, this is where so many people ended up in that Golden era you talk about. If you skim through it, it will tell you when the poor house finally closed. A lot latere than many people expect.
http://www.ontario-travel-secrets.com/wellington-county-museum.html
I know there is so much wrong with Meller, and he is my favorite troll but:
Chicago as a cess pool? Do you ever leave your house Meller?
Back in the 70-80′s Chicago had some serious crime issues, now it’s at least my favorite U.S city. I’m there on average 3 weeks a year and am by nature a wanderer, in fact one day I got lost looking for the cemetery out by boy’s town and spent close to 8 hours walking through various neighborhoods.
Do you know why Chicago is so amazing and safe today? Well, there is Jane Byrne former mayor who moved into the cities most notorious public housing development for one. She did things like that her whole term, moving into the worst neighborhoods and reforming them from within.
Seriously pretty city David K, too bad your too entrenched in your hatred to visit it. We normally stay in Wicker Park, but there are probably too many women walking around unescorted for your tastes… and I don’t recall a doll store.
Your story seems to be that you cheated on your wife, she left you, so now you live with dolls.
Does that mean I should believe that all men do not take responsibilities for their actions or just you? Also considering all women are the same does this mean that most men have romantic attachments to dolls?
Meller: Pecunium, I don’t have to worry, because being a man, you are going to eat your words sooner or later–sooner instead of later, if the modern women you seem to like so much are true to form!
Lot of hope you have packed into that if. My partner took me to Paris this week (I’m in the 13me arrondissment, even now, with a kitchen, some new pans [thanks Lu, was easy-peasy], a slab of terrine de lapine in the fridge and plans to get a cafe au lait, a pastry and some herbage to make omelletes later, even as I type this). Will we last forever? Who knows.
But never, in all my years, and all my relationships, have I had the horror stories you preach about happen. I’ve had older lovers, younger lovers, short term ones, and long term ones. A couple that ended badly, and most that ended well (sad for the ending, but glad for the spending).
And it was all with modern women.
The, “burnt out hulks”, are far from it. I walk around New York every day. Lots of people. Lots of them not white. Lots of them (even white ones) coming from other countries to make it here. I’ve been to Chicago, same thing. Detroit isn’t suffering because it’s not white, it’s suffering because the businessmen you praise so highly abandoned it.
And it’s vibrant. It’s got some of the best actual libertarianism in action happening in the country today. And it’s not lily-white.
San Francisco? Happening place. Got gays, and leather freaks, and hipsters and immigrants and the Pacific Stock Exchange (yeah, I know you hate them, but they make money), and just down the road, is Silicon Valley.
None of it lily-white, and all of it doing pretty well.
When my kind of ideas prevailed, poverty was temporary, a large and growing middle class was THE PREVAILING NORM,
Really? Read the Jungle? How about Nelly Bly? What about the Triangle Shirtwaist Company? Read any Dickens? How about the rookeries of Victorian England? Why were there so many people risking their lives to form unions? Why did Marx feel the need to write Das Kapital?
If everything was peaches and cream, and no one was suffering… how did it all go so wrong? The perfect people were in charge? How did they lose control? Maybe they weren’t so all fired smart as you like to pretend.
The wisdom of the Talmud that you cited is absolutely true–for the men and women of the time! No Rabbi or Talmudic scholar imagined that a nightmare world would ever exist like ours, where women were at war with men, where displacement of men by women would be considered “progress”, and where, without blinking an eye, women would eagerly imitate men, even in our less praiseworthy traits, anywhere and everywhere, in the name of “equality”.
Never heard of Esther have you? Or were you comparing Ruth to David? Because he was a paragon of virtue that one… had a man sent to die so he could steal his wife.
How about Samson… he killed children because they weren’t his kind of people.
Like I said, I’ll take my women (note the plural) walkig beside me, talking and arguing and even proving me wrong, to your world, Hobbes’ war of all agaisnt all, and the Devil take the hindmost, with the women all slaves and too ignorant to be able to speak.
I’ll take the Lady Whortley Montagues (who have done more to save mankind, than you will ever admit to knowing) to the simpering lady lovelies, any day of the week.
Dickens, “The Jungle”, and other such muckracking were fiction! The Triangle Shirtwaist factory fire was a tragedy, but the responsibility then, as now, rests with the failures of enforcement of i.e. building codes, fire codes, emergency evacuation procedures, health and safety inspections and other responsibilities of the Municipal and State government. One may argue about, or even disagree about WHETHER OR NOT these considerations are properly the responsibilities of government on any level, but as long as they WERE, the deaths, injuries and losses, to both the workers and the employer, was the results of government failure and corruption, not business, as some people then and later have alleged. Both the lives and limbs of the workers at the Triangle Shirtwaist Company and the losses inflicted upon its management were the fault of New York City and State governments, not “private enterprise, not “Capital” and not even labor agitators! There is also the collection of essays edited by Hayek called Capitalism and the Historians citing how the middle class was much larger, and much better off, then you and other XX century observers and critics have been led to believe. Treat yourself to them sometime.
In all events, it was considered normal and almost inevitable that the children of the employees would do better economically and socially then the parents in those times. Contrast this with the prevailing mood and ethos since the late ’60s-just when your damned feminuttery was taking hold in a big way-that it is problematic, if not hopeless, that the new generation will do better than the previous one.
DKM: Because fiction has never evar been used to hold a mirror up to the ugly reality many people don’t (or refuse) see, right?
DKM is opposed to “The Jungle” and making excuses for the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire?
I am now seriously 100% convinced he is a vampire.
Okay, hold on a second, lemme get this straight; You’re holding the government responsible for failing in duties you don’t hold the government responsible for? But private enterprise isn’t responsible either? So who is? Anybody?
Dracula: The WOMEN, duh! They were dumb enough to want to earn money instead of staying at home and letting a man take care of them, they deserve what they got!
/sarcasm
You brush off Dickens and The Jungle as fiction, but Gor is an instruction manual?
Upton Sinclair’s” The Jungle was a fictionalisation. The events were real. It was the subsequent investigations that book sparked which led to the standards we presently have (even as poorly as they are enforced).
the deaths, injuries and losses, to both the workers and the employer, was the results of government failure and corruption, not business, as some people then and later have alleged. Both the lives and limbs of the workers at the Triangle Shirtwaist Company and the losses inflicted upon its management were the fault of New York City and State governments, not “private enterprise, not “Capital”
What?
Who locked the doors? The fire inspector? Who put the tables cheek by jowl? The cops?
No. It was management. It was the owners. It was THE BUSINESSMEN.
You are so full of shit.
Dickens’ writing did much the same for the poor of England, where it was pulling teeth to get child prostitution made illegal, and police weren’t created until Lord Peel, in the 19th century. They still had indentured servitude (in the form of bonded apprenticeships, or starving in the workhouse). There were any number of people who had to get new apprentices every couple of years because the orphans they had “hired” died.
I wonder why that was. No, actually, I don’t. The employer starved them to death, because it was good business.
It wasn’t expected that one’s children would be better off; not until that pesky regulation (and Social Security; by making it possible for parents to not drain their children’s livelihood in their old age, which made it possible for people to expect to send their kids to college) came along.
But, as regulation is stripped, the, “Good Old Days” are coming back, and you don’t like it, but you are blaming the messengers, not the perpetrators; and pleading for more power on the part of business to bend you over and fuck you hard. No lube, no reach-around, not even a, “thanks for the ride”, just a, “NEXT!” when they get done with you.
Do you know why those governments did not have those codes? It was because of people like you who thought government should butt out. The same people who also threw a fit when taxes were assessed to finally pay for the inadequate inspections we have now. Because heaven forbid an employer do the proper thing in the first place. No that has to be government’s job. A job that you follow up by saying is not their job.
The employers did not die. In fact they barely were harmed at all by the entire disaster. When one of the owners was found later to be doing the same thing-locking the doors on workers-and he was fined $20. In today’s money, that would be a fine of $474. The payout from the deaths was $75 for the actual victims and $400 per person for the owners. That means the owners made a profit on the deaths they caused by locking the doors in the first place. A profit in today’s money of $845,000.
Here is the kicker, again, YOU and many of your ilk think that government has no duty and responsibility to prevent these deaths. Yet you blame the government for not doing anything and absolve the business owners of any liability. Your position makes no logical sense. What is next, saying “keep your government hands off my Medicare?”
In other words, the business owners would have totally not locked the doors if if they had no choice but because they did it is the city’s fault they caused all those deaths.
No thanks, if this is the kind of “logic” that Hayek espouses, I wish no part.
I got in an argument with MikeeUSA once, who was in the process of spewing the typical MRA claim that “women use the prison system to control/enslave/dominate men”, etc.
I made the counter-claim that prisons are a business, and the contractors that build them and keep them stocked with all the proper equipment have men for CEOs. He came back with, well, you know… “those men are traitors/white knights/manginas”, and so forth. No True Scotsman fallacy. Did it ever occur to him that maybe - just maybe - these people like having lots and lots of money?