Xenophon’s “The Economist” Holds Valuable Lessons On A Woman’s Education

I’ve read an interesting section of The Economist (sometimes translated Economics or Oeconomicus), one of the more controversial classical books. Xenophon (d. 354 BC at Corinth) wrote this treatise concerning how to manage one’s estate. It is one of the more practical-minded ancient philosophy works. In the famous section, a man named Ischomacus gives instruction to his new teenage wife about what her role is. Today, there is either bad information on sex roles (most of society) or good guesses (the Manosphere).

Let’s see what the wisdom of the ancients have to tell us. Granted, being archaic does not necessarily yield truth, but it’s worth considering nonetheless. Another reason I chose this book is because it’s about a man teaching a woman how to be a woman. Society has the opposite dogma about a woman needing to tame a man. From a casual glance at people, I find Xenophon’s view much more plausible.

In some ways, I’m more woman than most women. Many girls brag about their lack of cooking skills, but I can actually make mashed potatoes and gravy from scratch. A girl will lean on a microwave like a cripple on a crutch, but I don’t even own one myself. A modern woman will flee from a sewing needle as a symbol of oppression, but I can actually make basic repairs in my clothing. Knowing basic home maintenance is a part of being an adult, especially if you’re single. Ideally I’d like to have a wife to do that for me someday.

Unsurprisingly, The Economist is not available in mass-market paperback, unlike more dubious ancient works like the Satyricon. You can download a pdf or an ebook for free on Kindle. It’s also worth noting that in ancient literature, a chapter is called a book. This is because they were written on scrolls, and it’s not until the late Roman Empire that the bound book appeared, called a codex.

At first I thought about reading the whole thing, but book one begins with Socrates dicking around with word games as usual. I figured that was just a Plato thing, but apparently the historical Socrates really was that much of an asshole. The famous part is books seven through ten, so I decided to skip ahead. If you’re on Kindle, it’s location 488, and if you’re on that pdf, it’s page 97. I wanted to write a single article on it, but there’s too much in there to fit. So I’ll outline book seven this week and finish with books eight through ten next week.

Taming the Unshrewd

Socrates tells a story about running into his friend Ischomachus. He asks Ischomachus why he is able to afford time to leisurely sit outside. Ischomachus proudly tells him that it’s because of how productive his wife is. She’s never named, so I’ll call her Mildred. It’s interesting because he uses the phrase “without my aid.” Apparently there is some virtue to a woman’s self-sufficiency (sic independence), at least within the context of the home. Then Ischomachus begins to tell the story of how he trained her.

Book seven recounts the first conversation Ischomachus can remember having with Mildred. She keeps badgering him about how useless she is. Frankly it’s refreshing to encounter a woman who can admit her own ignorance. It’s like she’s committed to her husband or something. Mildred realizes that she has adult responsibilities beyond following her dreams even though she’s only fourteen. Ischomachus tells her about their shared property and future children, as though they were united as one instead of two who co-habitate. He says,

We need not stop to calculate in figures which of us contributed most, but rather let us lay to heart this fact that whichever of us proves the better partner, he or she at once contributes what is most worth having.

This seems counter to the feminist claim that women were merely viewed as cattle. In fairness, it’s also in contrast to the aristocrats in Plato’s Symposium. I suppose there’s a different way you talk to your wife than to your drinking buddies.

Then Mildred says, “My business, my mother told me, was to be sober-minded!” This by far the greatest piece of wisdom I’ve ever heard given to a woman, and it was given by another woman too! A woman’s business is to be sober-minded. I’ve just regained my faith in humanity. God hasn’t abandoned us after all! Someone find me a wife like that.

The Purpose of Women

Then Ischomachus prattles on about the nature of sex roles and domesticity. He even uses the word “duties” while making a long speech that men and women are designed to fit together. Although he doesn’t mention homoerotic relationships, it really flies in the face of the “find someone you love” ethic of today, which in itself is a product of the “be your own independent self” ethic that has spiked the divorce rate. It also enlightens on the “Men are keys and women are locks” analogy. But I digress.

And for the very reason that their natures are not alike adapted to like ends, they stand in greater need of one another; and the married couple is made more useful to itself, the one fulfilling what the other lacks.

Many red pill men ask why a man would ever want to get married. Xenophon seems to have anticipated that argument. What good is a key without a lock? Yes, you can live a happy life without a woman, but there seems to be something missing. Manosphere writers talk about how today’s career woman will become a lonely old spinster, but, and I know this is controversial, will today’s Red Pill man become a lonely old bachelor who stares at the check-out girl in a grocery store?

But in fairness, I get the impression that many men on these sites secretly wish for a marriageable woman but just can’t place that much faith in the modern woman. Perhaps the state of American women is so dismal that cheap hook-ups are the best a man can hope for. God help us all.

Feminine Virtue

The modern woman is anything but nurturing, and the red pill man tends to claim that this is by nature. But when Ischomachus tells Mildred that she will be caring for sick household members, he assumes that she will find this loathsome. Instead she says, “That will be my pleasantest of tasks, if careful nursing may touch the springs of gratitude and leave them friendlier than before.” It’s also worth noting that Ischomachus assumes that Mildred will enjoy the other tasks in the house. My guess is because it offers a measure of autonomy, responsibility, and hence self-esteem.

After hearing her eagerness to care for the sick, Ischomachus “was struck with admiration at her answer,” which is Victorian English for “He got a raging boner at her exuding femininity.” He goes on about how it will eventually be her job to teach other women domestic skills, which I guess is the ancient equivalent of finishing school. He says a woman who is “skillful, loyal, [and] serviceable” in “housekeeping or…service” is “worth her weight in gold.”

I looked it up, and unfortunately the weight in gold part is not an ancient idiom, but the point stands that a woman is valuable who can teach other women how to be feminine. So basically almost all modern women are worthless. Don’t you feel dirty just reading that? Odd how for a woman to pursue her dreams, a man has to give up his.

Ischomachus gives another interesting line, “But the greatest joy of all will be to prove yourself my better; to make me your faithful follower,” of course in reference to household management. He continues to speak how such respect and glory will follow her into old age. There’s something for you feminists who realize that there is some innate difference between men and women.

Do you want to make men look up to you as a great example of morality and prudence? Then be an awesome housewife. Nothing is more of a turnoff than a cut-throat business woman. They don’t make wives anymore; instead, there are she-dudes who co-habitate with males whom they may or may not breed with. Send me an email if you can get a hold of cyanide.

That’s the basic outline of book seven. Join me next Thursday for books eight through ten.

Source: The Economist by Xenophon. Translated by H. G. Dakyns. Published by Amazon Kindle.

Update: Part Two is now available.

Read More: The 20 Articles Of Traditional Sex Roles Week

205 thoughts on “Xenophon’s “The Economist” Holds Valuable Lessons On A Woman’s Education”

  1. “n some ways, I’m more woman than most women. Many girls brag about their lack of cooking skills, but I can actually make mashed potatoes and gravy from scratch. A girl will lean on a microwave like a cripple on a crutch, but I don’t even own one myself. A modern woman will flee from a sewing needle as a symbol of oppression, but I can actually make basic repairs in my clothing. Knowing basic home maintenance is a part of being an adult, especially if you’re single. Ideally I’d like to have a wife to do that for me someday.”
    Um.. being able to cook does not make one more like a woman. I wonder how many poor bastards, having to cook for themselves, forlornly felt emasculated doing it, and then ended up married because of that.

    1. For sure. Being able to cook is just a part of taking care of yourself and living well.

    2. I’m with you on this one. I’m a better homemaker than most mothers I know. Counterintuitively, I find it masculine to beat them at their own game.

    3. Nothing wrong with learning how to cook if you’re on your own. There’s nothing emasculating about knowing how to feed yourself when you need to.
      Male lions hunt for themselves for years before they ever get a pride of their own.

    4. Cooking your own food is simply genius. I haven’t met a girl yet to cook better then me. From my point, the girl has to be up to the task and learn a few skills if she wants to be kept around. If not, well, bye-bye.

  2. “But in fairness, I get the impression that many men on these sites secretly wish for a marriageable woman but just can’t place that much faith in the modern woman. Perhaps the state of American women is so dismal that cheap hook-ups are the best a man can hope for. God help us all.”
    I don’t think it’s so secret. I know there’s a lot of men on here who attack women on sight regardless of what they say, but there’s a lot who would like nothing more than to find a good woman to marry. One who understands marriage is a partnership and they’re supposed to be on the same team instead of competing with each other over everything, working towards a common goal, etc, etc.
    “as though they were united as one instead of two who co-habitate” in other words.
    Western women have lost their minds, though. Their goal was to prove they could be men and do everything men could do. They wanted to talk like men, dress like men, work like men, and act like men.
    Great. Except, no man is looking to marry what amounts to nothing more than a penis-less male. We’re looking to marry women. Real women. And marriagable, feminine women are in extremely short supply in the west.
    So other options are taken. Cheap hookups. Call girls. More and more looking to women from other cultures where femininity and family are still valued.
    Just the way the world is. If/when western women return to being real women instead of dickless males, western men will return to actively seeking to marry them.

  3. Men need sex from women. Women want resources from men.
    Want and need are 2 different things. I want a ferrari, but don’t need a ferrari.
    Before the industrial revolution, only men had access to resources. Therefore, women needed men for resources. And men needed women for sex.
    However, after the industrial revolution, things got screwed up. Women got everything that men have. Women now had access to resources that only men could provide them earlier.
    The one thing that kept men relevant in the eyes of women, was now given to women without men.
    Therefore, women no longer needed men. They only wanted, if at all, men now.
    However, men still need women, solely because of the sexual desire that only women can fulfill.
    So this is the way it is now – Men still need women. Women don’t need men anymore, only want them. (If at all)
    This disparity has screwed pretty much everything for heterosexual men.
    Not only do we have to work twice as hard to procure a woman and family now, we also have lost the assurance, the guarantee of the said woman staying with us forever, because women can kick men out anytime willy-nilly as well now.
    Nature, wise as it is, never intended it to be this way :
    The access to resources was meant to be with men, that women would need. And the access to sex was meant to be with women that men would need.
    The feminism cancer and the female worshipping western society is making it incredibly hard for natural selection to continue now

    1. Actually natural selection has been interfered with since the industrial revolution because of labor distribution. In the 1950s the average prole retard could make enough (40 to 45 bucks in today’s dollars per hour) to support a family of 3 or 4. Thus, America and much of the west is full of men who have bad genes. Throw in 2 world wars, and the best genetic stock has essentially evaporated in the West.
      The shift away from patriarchy has a lot to do with the genetic components of the men who are allowed to rule by virtue of the absence of superior stock. The weaker men tend to be more liberal, egalitarian, and passive… complementary slaves for the American matriarchy.

      1. The industrial revolution ushered in a shift, but the bigger shift took place with the agricultural revolution. The population suddenly had a less cooperative existence. Men had less of an incentive to cooperate in teams and women had less of an incentive to cooperate in child rearing. Independence became valuable, where it wasn’t in the past.
        Question: What sort of mating behavior is best suited to our future society?
        Pair bonding, like birds?
        Hierarchical, like chimpanzees?
        Matriarchal free love, like bonobos?
        Patriarchal, like gorillas?
        Opportunistic, like reptiles?

        1. Optimal mating is arranged marriages between intelligent warriors and beautiful women.
          Eugenics is necessary to uphold civilization.

      2. evolution simply doesn’t give a shit.
        if human consciousness becomes obsolete, it will be bred out.
        if the ideal human of the future is some sub-human naked-mole-rat that doesn’t have a single thought in its life, but perfectly suits the technocratic future, that will be the ‘most fit’ human. industriousness, talent, insight, reason, love, these things can easily be washed away with the times my friend.
        we can mock these SJWs all we want, but their genetic ‘inferiority’ doesn’t mean fuck all if they outbreed everyone else. idiocracy… i think that movie hit the nail on the head.
        not just trying to sound depressing here… i think my point is rather don’t get cocky… just be confident and try to survive.

        1. Well exactly. Evolution has nothing to do with quality, genetic or spiritual, it has everything to do with practicality.
          Effective behaviors within an environment are promoted, while others are not (thus bred out of existence).
          Idiocracy is dysgenic, but it’s still evolution.

    2. I understand what you’re saying and agree with you completely in regards to what you said, but I do think that aside from resources, there is another reason women need (or should need) men.
      Their children. Mothers are supposed to want and do what’s best for their children.
      Children of single mothers are statistically at a horrible disadvantage to married, stable households and even single fathers. Every risk category there is children of single mothers get the short end of the stick. Lower education, lower income, increased chance of ending up in poverty, increased alcoholism, increased drug use, increased promiscuity, higher occurrences of teenage pregnancy, higher incidents of incarceration, higher chance of being abused by someone as a child/teen, higher chance of ending up in an abusive relationship, emotional issues leading to higher incidents of disfunctional relationships, etc….the list goes on.
      There is literally zero advantage to being raised by a single mother with no father around.
      Whether or not these mothers want to admit it, children need their fathers which should mean women need men. While not all of them will want to admit that, some women will understand the need for a father figure and the value of men, and the children from those households will do better than the children where the woman goes it alone for whatever reason.
      Keep compounding the effects of single mothers raising children who end up as single mothers themselves over a few generations, and the difference between these single mom children and children raised in stable homes becomes so great that society is forced to view being raised in a single mom household as a disadvantage that needs to be adjusted for.
      Final outcome, society is forced to acknowledge the value of men in a very conspicuous manner. On every application for college, every application for financial aid, and every application for a job there is a new affirmative action question:
      “Were you raised in a single mother household?”

    3. I agree. So many women these days are self-sufficient OR on social support.
      I was out with a woman and offered to buy her latte, and she said ‘no thanks’ and paid for her own. RESOURCES were the one thing we had over them…but now they can literally attain anything they want.
      Want to know who else is footing the bill for these girls? Their PARENTS…and most disgustingly, their FATHERS.
      Educations paid for, cars paid for, apartment bought out…’thanks daddy!’
      Yeah thanks a lot fathers of 21st century, you screwed us over big time.

      1. If you’re counting solely on your income as a means of validation with women, you are not for this world my friend.
        When you can make women PAY FOR YOU and have her addicted to you with game and awesome sex, do you really own women’s bodies and minds. Don’t set yourself up as a walking ATM machine, you should focus you’re money on your education, business or hobbies, not hoping to buy affection.

        1. I agree man, it was a simple latte. And it’s only because I borrowed her notes. But still, it’s frustrating that a latte in the past could have been an opening to hang out or talk. Now it’s ‘no thanks.’ Brings out her visa, taps it and goes on.
          And why am I frustrated? Because these girls are actually LTR material. They are quite chaste, dress very feminine, have long hair and wear makeup…but they do have a man supporting them, their Daddy.
          I met one girl in my school who studies 24/7 because her father is paying for her education, he put an investment into her and she wants to make him proud. Hookups? No way. Dating? No time. Relationships? No need. It’s on her basis when she feels she has time…
          It’s frustrating as hell!

        2. Don’t worry, their attitude changes around 25-27 when the harsh reality of being self sufficient hits them. It’s not just the logical amount of money they have or don’t have, they are mentally weak and can’t really handle taking care of shit without a man.
          That’s why a lot of the feminist ‘go girl! independent bullshit is directed at young college women – they aren’t old enough to know any better (although they don’t even acknowledge the fact that theyre living off their dad)

        3. I have to agree. Bringing money in as a top 3 validation with women is setting yourself up for disaster.

        4. She did you a good turn and shared her notes with you. She sounds like a really cool, stand up person – respectful of her family and dedicated to her commitments and aspirations. Why not be a little less covert and ask her out on a formal date where your intentions can’t be misconstrued? Here’s where you’re right and wrong about overachieving women….
          Hookups? No way.
          Dating? No time.
          Relationships? very much desired and amenable towards! If you have decent intentions and genuinely like the girl you’re pursuing, she will be intrigued. You do have to be direct though.

        5. Agree. Always set yourself up to “be the prize” versus looking at women as the prize.
          I do this often and I have women paying (versus money out of my wallet).

    4. I think you have it backwards. Women need resources from men much more than men need sex from women. Just ask any single mother out there not getting child support (resources from a man) or government assistance (different resources from a man) how well they are doing. Sure, there are exceptions. But women need men in a long term relationship a LOT more than men need women.
      For most men, the entire function of a woman, the most important part, can be aquired for free (via game) or for a low cost (via prostitutes). Women do not have that luxury. There’s no “prostitutes that pay” (which, incidentally, is probably while male prostitutes aren’t very popular with women.
      Men hold the thing that women most want (commitment/provisioning for children) and, if we can make more men wake up and realize it, you’ll suddenly see who has the power.
      When a woman’s entire worth to most men can be boiled down to a 10 second orgasm (that can be duplicated or perhaps even surpassed for a few hundred bucks with a pro) it’s a serious problem. Not for men, but for women. Women used to bring a lot more to the table, but, today, they bring their jobs (which most men care fuckall about) and their vaginas/mouth/ass. Feminine qualities? ROFL, yeah, right. A shoulder to cry on? Not if you want her to be around next week. Someone to depend on? 70%+ of divorces are initiated by women.
      They have focused so much on becoming men that they have reduced their value to basically a warm wet hole in the wall. And they don’t seem to realize that we need that hole a lot less than they need our wallets.

      1. Government assistance is taxes from the people. Nota bene: the people is a the public, which is composed of men AND women. It’s people supporting people. Not man supporting woman.
        Also, you have this idea that a single woman can’t raise a child by herself without the dad’s help. But could the dad raise the child all by himself without the mom’s financial help (assuming they are in the same general socio economic condition which they probably are given people marry into class)?

        1. Haha an idea? Check out the statistics of children raised by single mothers. You have a lot to learn, young lady.

        2. Additionally, may I add, you seem to have some time on you. I ask that you not let your age blind you with the arrogant notion that you cannot hear the opinion of a younger person after your years of garnering tidbits of wisdom.
          The statistics of children raised by mothers presumably indicate the children are under increased emotional stress as compared to the typical child raised in a two-parent household.
          Like I said before, you can try to point at single mothers struggling and tell me that they are proof that women need men. But you commit a logical fallacy and there is logical dissonance as a result of your laughable levels of sexism. The fact that single mothers struggle to raise their children alone shows one thing and one thing only:
          That raising a child alone is hard.
          In fact, a man would probably be even worse at raising children than a woman. So don’t point to a struggling single mom and tell me she needs a man. Point to a split family and tell me that families need to remain better linked because single parenthood is difficult.
          You have failed to refute my claim, and so my argument still stands.

        3. Agree….god damn…look at all of the useless betas out there, today, who were raised by single mothers.
          These “pussy men” – the sons of single mothers – are the ones that we’re trying to “reprogram” for the next generation.
          We have a lot of work to do.

        4. My brother raises my niece (single dad) and he’s doing just fine. The mother is worthless and she fled the state to avoid paying child support.
          He keeps the hand strong and he keeps an eye on my niece’s every move (teenage daughter). It’s how it is suppose to be….dad watching over daughter until a worthy suitor is found and approved (by dad).

        5. And which gender pays the overwhelming majority of the taxes and does actual work (not government mandated make work) to earn the money to pay them?

        6. “In fact, a man would probably be even worse at raising children than a woman.”
          You would be wrong. Single fathers do worse than stable households but better than single mothers.
          You are free to look up the statistics.

        7. Where the fuck is the “logical fallacy” and “logical dissonance?” Just because you assume that a single father would be worse than a single mother doesn’t make your statement true. Single mothers are the ghettoes of modern-day society.
          You seem to be ignoring every statistic shown about bastard children raised by whore single mothers. Yes, single mothers need a man. However, no respectable man is going to step in and marry a 3rd rate women with bastards from degenerate seed.

        8. A logical fallacy (i.e. dissonance) is when you conclude something in an irrational manner. Basically, it means you’re full of horse shit because your ideas don’t connect. You just jump to conclusions.
          And I know a single father is worse than a single mother because as a child I went back and forth between my parents. They were of same economic standing and both did prestigious, well-respected work, so I could evaluate which parent was better based on JUST ability, not which was better based on finances or social standing. I found my mother instinctually seemed to connect with me whereas my father, although living with actually quite nice, wasn’t quite as naturally able to parent.
          How dare you demote hard-working single mothers to that level? It bewilders me that anyone could make such disgusting generalizations and say such cruel things about women who have struggled so much. Get it through your thick skull. Say it over and over in the mirror if you have to. But just grasp this concept: you are not above single mothers.
          And what the fuck is this about a man not being able to love a single mother? What the fuck? My single dad was divorced twice but it’s not gross for women to talk to him? But when my mom divorces just ONCE is suddenly awful for men to pursue her? You are delusional for thinking it’s fair to impose these types of double standards.

        9. You speak of logic… And then use a personal anecdote. Single fathers raise more well adjusted children than single mothers. Go look at the data honey pie.

        10. “But could the dad raise the child all by himself without the
          mom’s financial help (assuming they are in the same general socio economic condition which they probably are given people marry into class)?”
          You are wrong about this. Median income for single mothers is 23k to 24k. Median income for single fathers is 40k.

        11. Just to add a few points, until early 1900’s, the father was awarded custody, since he was financially responsible for the children. This changed due to feminists and mangina politicians, allegedly “in the best interest of the child”. Today, we see custody being awarded to drug addicted women, while the fathers are financially raped in family courts. It is obvious they don’t care about the children, it is all about money.
          So, the premise that single fathers would be somewhat worse than single mothers is faulty, at best – except if we start from the (also faulty) feminazi premise that women are inherently better than men.
          Single motherhood is the result of irresponsible behavior, so these now struggling women are not heroines. There’s nothing heroic about spreading legs without any regards about future ramifications. And pushing that responsibility to men is just another point to show how changing primary custody laws had nothing to do with what is in the best interest of the children.

        12. Link me to it because the burden of proof is on you. You are the one making the claim that I would not be as good as you if we were single parents, honey pie.
          Also, my anecdote, while not proof, is unlikely to deviate from typical experience. Because by nature, chances are my experiences as a human are more normal than rare since normal experiences are more common.

        13. Have you considered this is because society (and people like you) push women away from work? Protip: if you discourage women from working, less work.

        14. Okay, so if this statistic is true, then women are only worse caretakers because they make less. Not because they are inherently inferior or anything. And the only point I’m trying to argue is that women aren’t worse at parenthood than men.

        15. But again, is the phenomenon that men typically pay more taxes really the result of inherent superiority? Or is it that modern conditions still give men a greater opportunity for socioeconomic mobility? I’ve seen the comments on this website. Men are discouraging women from doing serious work, and big work that pays a nice salary is where the bulk of taxes come from. So it’s only logical, that consequently, women would pay less tax.

        16. “women are only worse caretakers because they make less.”
          That is not necessarily true. There’s no way to infer that from their median income alone.

        17. Financial burdens significantly hinder one’s ability to take care of oneself and others.

        18. You’re talking about people making logical fallacies while you’re coming to conclusions that are either completely unsupported by any data or statistical measure, or are supported by a singular anecdotal recollection of your childhood, neither of which are a sound basis from which to draw conclusions about larger issues.
          I get why you’re arguing this. You’re a female so you want to defend single mothers, and you were raised by a single mother so it hits particularly close to home.
          The statistics are not on your side, and drawing strange conclusions from no data at all doesn’t help your case, it just looks weird.
          The fact is, as a whole, single mother children have it worse than any other family option there is. It doesn’t mean YOUR mom was terrible, it means that generally speaking, children of single of mother are at a huge disadvantage across the board.
          Rather than try to prove why you think this is not the case, when it clearly is, you should thinking about other things like whether or not it’s a good idea for women to continue on this course.
          If you want to tell me single fathers are not ideal as well, I’m aware of that. Problem is, single fathers are doing better at raising the child when they get it, and fathers aren’t the ones ripping apart the families in most cases. It’s the mother who either chooses to have a child when not married, or is one of the many wives who choose to file for divorce using the no-fault clause simply because they are “unfulfilled” and rip the family apart against the father’s wishes.
          One last thing, completely off topic, why do you have a picture of Sigrid Agren as your avatar?

        19. Sigrid Agren is my avatar because as seeing as my opinions are not popular on this website (I seem to be rather despised, in fact), I’m not sure it’s a good idea to reveal my true identity by showing my face. The specific reason as to why I chose her if that’s what you’re asking is because I look similar to her, but her face is obviously different enough that my identity is not revealed (we look similar to the point that pictriev found her to be my closest celebrity match– we had something a 60% similarity). Likewise, Anna Katherine is also a pseudonym, which although isn’t my real name, bears similarity to my name.

        20. Please don’t try to present yourself as someone who even knows how to point out and identify different types of logical fallacies because you’re not. I’m not saying you are illogical, I’m saying you can’t identify the different types of logical fallacies by name and point out where the disconnect lies.
          My personal anecdotes are logical and relevant not because I am using my case as a means for showing that all cases are like mine, but because my case is being used an example of how the other person’s argument didn’t always hold true, and that I (among many other people) are an exception.
          But please, which points would you like me to find data for? Let me know so I can link you to some studies.
          “The fact is, as a whole, single mother children have it worse than any other family option there is. It doesn’t mean YOUR mom was terrible, it means that generally speaking, children of single of mother are at a huge disadvantage across the board.”
          My problem isn’t with the fact that you recognize that single moms struggle. Because I know it’s hard. My problem is in the fact that being a single mom is stigmatized. My problem lies in the fact that being a single dad, on the other hand, is just fine. My problem lies in the fact that people only recognize how children of single moms are at a disadvantage. Children of single parents in general are worse off.
          “Rather than try to prove why you think this is not the case”
          But how do you KNOW? I am frustrated because you seem to think you know. How do you really *know* that women aren’t doing as well as single parents because they are naturally just inferior? Can you prove to me that if a single woman has the same income as a single man that her children will be worse off than if they were with the father?
          “is it a good idea for women to continue on this course”
          Which course are you referring to? Are you talking about raising their children if they are single?
          “fathers aren’t the ones ripping apart the families in most cases.”
          I’m not sure if you can really blame women for the fall of the American family. Society in general is just too fucked up for a healy family nowadays. But I guess I shouldn’t complain about society tearing families apart because I guess I am society. But so are you.
          And look– a lot of people are saying some really harsh things to me. There’s an idea that because I am backing up women that I am a slut, a bitch, and a cunt (simultaneously). But I need you to understand that I not only totally get where you are coming from, I agree with you. I think women should get their act together. But where I diverge from you in your thinking is that I think that
          1. Men also need to be held accountable for ruining modern society
          2. Berating women and bitching about them and generalizing them will a) do anything to change society b) is good for women.
          I also think that it’s okay for a woman to have sex with whoever she wants whenever she wants so long as she is totally private about her matters and leaves everyone else out of her decisions. As long as she is safe and is picky about her selection then why not? It’s her body, and it doesn’t make sense that she would be put to shame for engaging her body’s most primal and intrinsic drives for some sensual loving.

        21. Most single mothers aren’t really a proper role model, nowadays they are just their child’s best friend.
          No place there for order, discipline, grasp on reality, or vision.

        22. But even more so: lack of time.
          So you want both parents to take work outside home to ensure the best well being for their children?

        23. You’re attacking an argument I am not arguing on behalf of.
          I never said single mothers are role models.
          However, I do believe that the stigmatization of single mothers is harmful to society; most of the stigma seems to stem from gratuitous bitterness against a woman who dares deviate from the social norm (Heaven forbid!)
          Look, digra. I agree with you in that I don’t think single parenthood is optimal. I think divorce is generally unacceptable. But regardless of whether or not that is the case, you are not in the place to make these extreme judgements against single mothers. You are stereotyping and putting them into a category.
          Even if they all were terrible people in the past, they already have enough shit to handle, so you need to back off and let them pull their crap together. If you have any empathy at all, you will place yourself in the shoes of a single mother and realize they have it hard enough already.
          My main concern with your argument is this. You seem to think that just because a woman isn’t in a relationship (or just because she got out of one), SHE *must* be a fuck up. You also seem to think it is not possible the man did something wrong in the relationship. As if these first two things weren’t awful enough already, you also seem to think that women need men to survive.
          To me, suggesting such a thing is nothing short of unconscionable.
          Divorce should be shamed. But to direct the shame at just the women and for years after the fact and still only at the women…
          That’s just some new breed of nonsense.
          Fun fact: It’s Katherine. Not Karenina. It’s a double name, and not a last name.
          Fun Fact #2: Anna Karenina is a novel by that guy who also wrote war and peace (his name escapes me).

        24. I don’t understand why it would be impossible to manage one’s time so that both one and one’s partner hold important occupations while raising children. Seems perfectly feasible. I don’t know why or why not other people are doing this, but I must certainly will.

        25. The name Karenina was fully intended. Read Tolstoy.
          I’m not angry at single mothers per se – just the fact that single, childless working men like myself are left to shoulder the burden via taxes, and believe me, while not all single mothers are bad, there is a significant demographic of this subset of women who is a) promiscuous and b) having kids deliberately as a meal ticket, subsidized by the State. It is wrong on so many levels. The aftermath of these 2 factors combined has grave ramifications.
          I’m angry at the system, through which most people are disillusioned.
          It is a pandemic situation in the west. In addition to this, it gives men and women an unwelcome interference in the relationship dynamics. Like you aptly say, men aren’t needed. So why should we bother?
          Being judgemental is what separates us from animals. Women, and men, should engage their brain cells and judge better if they don’t want to be judged themselves. I for one will exercise that duty on anyone who wants to be a part of my life.
          Personal responsibility is what I’m espousing here. Male, female, if adult and with a functional brain, MUST be responsible. No free passes.
          Of course women don’t need men to survive. Nowadays they only need their nice houses, cars, the all the trappings of comfort and little things they take for granted, all the way to their smartphones… which are designed, made, and supported largely by ‘invisible’ men. Still want to alienate them?
          Congratulations. You succeeded.

        26. I fully sympathize with your concerns. I completely agree it is important to be responsible. I’m glad you said you weren’t mad at the woman per se. Because I think it’s important to condemn both parties involved in irresponsibly bringing about another human.
          “No free passes.”
          I couldn’t agree more. I’m not sure where the discrepancy in opinion lies here.
          But I will admit I have no idea what you were trying to get at with that last paragraph.

        27. That refers to the particular demographic of western single mothers I mentioned.
          If anything good came out of this mess, is that more men are wising up to these realities, and will not be enslaved nor manipulated no more. When these men reach a certain number, say, upward of 60% of the male population, the actual scripts will be rent asunder and there will be a real volte-face in the social policies.

        28. Oh, now I get why I touched a nerve: you’re a bastard seed of an unwanted woman. Makes sense now. I am far above single mothers, but now above “pursuing” them. I’ve pursued single mothers and ended the interactions the same way: leaving a cum-filled condom in an identifiable place, making sure the lesser woman has some awkward questions to answer in the morning.

        29. Because outsourcing the raising of your kid or throwing him in some government kennel is a clear sign your job is more important to you than your kid.
          Single mothers, with laudable exceptions, are a burden to society. The government produces nothing; it takes away from those who produce, via taxation. So the government handouts single mothers receive, through welfare, is money taken from someone else. The people being fleeced to cover up for these women’s fuckups have every right to complain and shame them, since NOT PAYING for their fuckups is not an option.

        30. “Oh, now I get why I touched a nerve: you’re a bastard seed of an unwanted woman.”
          I can dismiss this as an ad hominem. But for the record, I was not an accidental baby, and my parents had me after being married for a while. Also, I was badly wanted. In fact, was probably more wanted/born into a less degenerate family than you. Cry about it, bitch.
          “I am far above single mothers,”
          This is probably only true in the physical sense that you would be taller in terms of height. But despite your height you still fall short in terms of personality. Ya kind of strike me as an asshole. Just saying.

        31. Ahahahahahaahahahahahahahahahahahahaahahahhaahahahahaha.
          Oh Annie. I wish I had been here for this one. I bet you will cum back and say something.
          Are you sure you were wanted?
          Let’s be fair here. You could have looked at the statistics yourself, and I am assuming you already have.
          Fathers.know.best. Why don’t you take your beaver, and leave.
          Mrs Beaver is out of the house, because nowadays, she never gets to set foot in the kitchen. Merely leave her clothes on the hotel floor.
          I take it your mother bakes some mean “brownies,” humble pie, and possesses a killer recipe for Costco frozen pizzas.

        32. BUT, the femenine factor IS needed, a dad provides discipline, but a mom nurtures.

        33. It would be great to have both but many women (today) are being brainwashed by society. They become bored with their role in the world and they are being taught that men ‘have it all’ so they should have it too. They don’t understand that no one ‘has it all’.

    5. The thing is, women genuinely providing for themselves is mostly an illusion. Women, as a group still receive 75% of welfare payments whilst men, as a group pay 75% of the tax.
      Women, have affirmative action, huge social safety nets, state advocacy groups, women only shelters, state mandated preferential hiring, the list goes on and on.
      All, mostly, paid for with men’s labour. None of this would be needed if women could truly compete with men in the provisioning arena.
      But what we see around us is unsustainable. This huge transfer of wealth from men to women was a one-time deal. Feminism traded men’s goodwill towards women, built up by countless generations of women who came before, for a one time bonanza of freedom and goodies.
      But that’s over now. There is little wealth left to plunder from men and all the privileges that feminism has ‘won’ for women share a common characteristic; they either displace men from positions of wealth creation or push them to actively disengage from them. The available wealth has been spent and there is precious little coming down the line. These privileges have another thing in common as well; they all utterly rely on Big Daddy Government to enforce them. BDG needs to be fed if female ’empowerment’ is to be maintained.
      So now women face a stark reality – having tried, and succeeded, mostly via government mandate and rarely through ability – to displace men from positions where wealth is created and conserved, they now have to work like men if they want to enjoy a lifestyle anything like what they feel entitled to. They have to deliver at the same value, rate and duration as men. They have to take bold risks, they have to show the same inventiveness, they have to make the breakthrough discoveries, they have to put their careers above everything – for most of their lives – just to maintain where they are now.
      They will have to face a future of 50/50/50. Working 50 hours a week for 50 weeks a year for 50 years. And pay tax so that other women can receive their entitlements.
      How many women do you know that have worked like a man. I mean long hours, relentlessly, for 4 or 5 decades? I know a few, a very few. And we have had 60 years of feminism now – we should have seen at least one generation of women working like men – if that is what they truly wanted and were truly capable of. There aren’t many because women neither want to work like men nor, imo are capable of it. Moreover, how many women do you think will buckle down in this fashion to subsidize other women? Men may do this – women won’t. And yet, that is the only future for today’s women if BDG government mandated feminism is to survive. Because the men are checking out.
      Feminism is hitting an eternal truth; what can’t continue, won’t.
      As BDG starts to fail I suspect the future is going to be tougher than most people realize, for both men and women. I don’t expect a huge civilizational collapse, just a form of ‘crap creep’; everything steadily getting worse.
      For men who understand, this is a time of opportunity – a better life is open to you via red pill / self improvement. Nothing is guaranteed, but you do have a choice.
      For women – well with no BDG subsidies and little male goodwill – they will revert to type; figuring out what successful men value and trying to provide it.
      At least until the next time they are granted ’empowerment.’

      1. Exactly, just because a 25 yr old woman has a job doesn’t mean she’s truly self sufficient. Most are fucking terrible with their money and don’t intend to work a full 40 years. Deep down they know they need a man. They seem to realize this around 25-27 as the liberal bullshit they believed belies the reality of only a couple remaining years of beauty.
        Given the economy and various anti-male policies, the amount of men who can provide for them is dwindling down to few. Women already divorced baby boomer men dry and got their big paydays, but those days are gone as younger men don’t have that kind of money anymore. It’s ironic that most young women INSTINCTIVELY KNOW not to marry a man who makes less than she does. We have to teach a man to be red pill and enter a marriage with financial protection but its like young women naturally know this.
        when shit hits the fan, single women will have it the worst. A beta with a shit job can still be happy playing videogames /masturbating/drinking beer, but women are completely helpless.

        1. Yep. I have a son and a daughter.
          In our post feminist utopia what is the best advice I can give them – at it’s most basic?
          The best advice I can give my daughter is find a good provider and marry the shit out of him. And never divorce him.
          The best advice I can give my son is to fuck the shit out of as many women as possible. And never marry.
          A system where the best interests of men and women are diametrically opposed simply cannot continue.
          Men and women are born to be complimentary. Many modern women seem unable to understand this.

        2. I would argue modern men as well.
          You have to take ownership for the decisions in your life. To toss your hands up and say ‘It’s their fault!’ Is a pussy victim hood mentality.

        3. I tossed in the victim because that’s usually what they cry feminists have.
          They are both playing the victim card for their own reasons.
          But good point 😉

        4. Why wouldn’t you instill in both your daughter and your son the importance of securing a viable career path. Wouldn’t it be sensible to impart the wisdom that long gone are the days of the “fun, creative marketing/PR gigs.” Why wouldn’t you run against the grain and advise your son that HE TOO deserves work life balance and that he needs to be strategic and look for opportunities like PA school and so forth – same job would be equally lucrative and appropriate for your daughter too. How ’bout teach them both to marry the hell out of their respective partners and always be in a position of fiscal strength in their romantic unions along with being ethical and devoted to said unions? Kids pick utterly frivolous career paths and parents subsidize these poor choices by paying for their kids’ stupid, fruitless courses of study. Bad decision making is a genderless phenomenon that comes part and parcel with the folly of youth. Smart, good kids deserve the meritocratic fruits of their labor – should be applicable to both male or female students. I would deny my daughters no opportunity that they rigorously earned – even if it does up the ante of competition for men. We still live in a meritocracy in as much as there are bars of achievement that must be met for entrance into premiere learning institutions and graduate school programs. Perhaps they divvy up the entrance slots amongst the top male and female candidates – but there’s no way in hell that top schools don’t mandate requisiste entrance requirements across the board. You are babling conspiracy theories if you don’t believe women have to take the exact same MCAT that men do – and those scores unequivocally count for all applicants regardless of demographics. I’m sure the same holds true for all prestigeous academic programs. Everyone deserves an opportunity to live an industrious and autonomously navigated life.

        5. Women quit the workforce in much higher numbers, and career women are less happy than stay at home moms. http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Columns/2013/04/17/Why-Women-Are-Leaving-the-Workforce-in-Record-Numbers
          40% of female doctors quit within only 10 years of starting their career.
          The notion that you can ‘teach’ your daughter to be ambitious is basically a big fucking lie. She wont be happy with a career unless its something like a nurse 40 hrs a week. Any job over 40 hours a week she will be miserable.
          Men with power and high paying jobs work 60+ hours a week, women hate doing that. You are delusional. ‘gee, i’ll teach my little princess to work like a man!’ such a stupid point of view.
          The huge numbers of women who choose to quit or work part time shows your little gender equality utopia is a bullshit fantasy. Youre better teaching your daughter to find a good man to marry.

        6. Did you not think that I would notice that A) you’ve linked to an opinion piece and B) the preponderance of referenced workforce dropouts in that editorial piece were poor, uneducated slouches. There’s also absolutely no consideration in that article for the lopsided geriatric population we’re currently contending with (which has the aged outnumbering the young upwards of 8 to 1). Boomers are retiring en mass and they were the first round of equal opportunity employees – We have hundreds of thousands of women rightfully becoming pensioners (conveniently neglected to be mentioned). I loved building my practice more than life itself. Do you think that happens on a 40 hr work week? Not quite. It was the second greatest highlight of my existence! I’m in my mid 30’s and have just started my own family compliments of my having attained a level of success where I’ve hired several PA’s to hold down my empire. I’m an anomaly in that I got a free ride to med school for committing to practice in a severely undeserved community for 10 years. My more ego-riddled girlfriends and guy friends are just culminating their surgical residencies beneath a skyscraper of loan debt and I started practicing internal medicine in the black and have been doing phenomenally well for years 🙂 Strategy, discipline and not fearing a little privation facilitated my having it all. Brilliant, loving husband who I revere, who just can’t help himself from knocking his industrious little princess’ ass up every year for the past two glorious years. Ive written the perfect life script. My PA’s are also brilliant and strategic. I’ve got two sharp, young guys both with new young babies who love having a 40 hr a week schedule while earning 6 figures and I’ve got a beautiful, kind smart young female PA who just got married and who will have as much flexibility as she needs to negotiate the perfect work life balance with her and her husband. If I didn’t have the full ride to practice in my area – I’d have easily opted to go a PA route too. You don’t have to sacrifice your soul to the proverbial system in order to have a lucrative and cerebral career. You are wrong women love achieving academic and professional goals. Do you really believe all women (even at research heavy, nerdy institutions and in grad school programs) are only entering university to ride cock carrousels? You really do believe that, don’t you. How unfortunate that your purview is so myopic. It’s a beautiful existence complete with many levels of achievement just waiting to be attained. I would absolutely make sure my daughters and my sons are primed by both me and my husband to be conquerors and to live life magnanimously and ethically – with eyes wide open to avoid being simps.

        7. My mom is a full-time doctor who raised three children divorced, and has been a specialized medical professional in a highly competitive field for 20 years now. What were you saying again?

        8. Wow, looks like someone has a penchant for giving thier children shit advice. People like you ruin society.

        9. Because your plan doesn’t work. We’ve been trying it for the last 50 years. The results are in.
          For what is not often mentioned is that allowing women the same career ‘opportunities’ as men comes with an obligation – to work like men. That means working 50/50/50. NOT stopping once they’ve kids, NOT going part time, NOT segwaying into a lower paid job when it ‘gets hard’. NOT retiring early.
          Because any of these alternatives mean women ultimately have to lean on a man (or men in general via taxation) to support them. And men have been tapped out. They are not able to produce the excess wealth required.
          My wife is a childminder and over the years has looked after the kids from about 50 families. In that time, one – just one – mum has stayed the course career wise. All the rest have gone part time, or taken a step down career wise. And no, not because their husbands / partners were not pulling their weight at home, but because they wanted to.
          So, ime, around 2% of women want or are capable of the life plan you advocate. For the rest, most of the career ‘investment’ you suggest we make in our daughters will ultimately go to waste because the vast majority will never exploit it. And they need to be exploit it if we are to maintain our current standard of living.
          My advise to my children stands.
          My son has been guided along the path of self improvement and is thoroughly red pill. Even in his early 20s his level of romantic and career success has left most of he peers far behind.
          My daughter (younger) is, of course, being encouraged in her schooling but more than that she is being taught what men truly value in a women. And believe me, it’s not their bloody career.
          I take this approach not because I am an old misogynist throwback but because my life has taught me that these path are to most likely to lead to happiness and fulfillment. I spent the first 40 years of my life living the life you propose. It is 180 degrees wrong.
          I will absolutely ensure my children follow a different path.
          Ultimately I go with what works.

        10. Good for your mum, it sounds like she is working like a man.
          Care to point out the huge majority of other women doing this? Working ALL their lives?
          Compared to the mass of men?
          Care to consider the huge amounts of educated women not using their education? Care to consider how much effort has been wasted on them?
          As a society we have wasted huge amounts of money promoting women into the workplace and as a group, they are just not delivering the wealth we were told they would.
          They are proving to offer a poor ROI. Enterprise that offer a poor ROI go out of business. Female empowerment will not escape the same fate.

        11. But see– the whole point of my comment is that she isn’t working like a man. She’s working like a woman. Because she is woman. And she’s doing a damn good job at it too. Your simile undermines her femininity.
          In am at university right now, and presently, my observation has been that women are much harder workers. Most of the guys just kind of jack off and drink on the weekends. Whereas the girls are substance-free study bugs.
          And a woman not using her education is not having others’ efforts wasted on her. She is wasting her own efforts. She was the one who got the degree– not the professor.
          I feel women are a promising group and have a lot to offer to society, even if (supposedly) their work has not yielded the results we wish it did. I contend with no fear that science does not back me up that we are just as able as men to be productive, influential, and competent in the workforce. I contend that your mindset undermines female ability by planting the idea that we can’t do certain things into womens’ minds to build a dangerous self-fulfilling prophecy.

        12. My father was an entrepreneur my mother in top tier hospital admin. Both were phenomenally successful and both totally proactive, loving parents. Dad had the more malleable schedule as he was his own boss and mom earned just slightly more than dad. They’ve been happily married for 40 years and both are still hot and fit and smitten for eachother and a perfect template for how I choose to rock my own life. Dad having more flexibility with his professional schedule facilitated him having wayyyyy more time to be a hands on parent than mom did. Because of this I learned how to growl when I slide tackled in soccer. I learned to recite the mantra “I’m smarter than you and I’m going to get a better grade than you” in every competitive undergrad course I undertook. I had the best election posters for all of my high school, student government positions – Daddy raised a killer and I worship my pops for it. Mom was most certainly present and accounted for too! From her I learned how to embrace and celebrate my femininity and to exude poise and grace in my leadership stylings. I learned how to be a good, devoted wife by watching my mother dote on my father and I beam with pride over the perfect, modern, nuclear family that I hail from. Contemporary families require some malleability on everyone’s part. There’s plenty of room for negotiating respective gender roles within a healthy and mutually loving relationship. No one is completely dominant or submissive in their entirety and you simply cannot stifle someone with burgeoning professional and academic aspirations, regardless of gender. A fair partner works within the framework of their family to see to the realization of their loved one’s goals and dreams. It really does work. My family is not an anomaly.

        13. …and just to add, my mother kept an immaculate home and she was fitness and health obsessed and she doted on my father and lavished him with healthy, gourmet, home cooked meals every evening. She was very traditional and let my pops call all the shots. She also just happened to be a genius with a very well established career and she made my dad so proud and I aspire to fulfill my own beloved husband in the exact same way. Sometimes my hubby likes it when we get a little “switchy” too. Which is a challenge for me as a pure sub – but because my only goal is to love an honor him, I learned to deliver as requested. Gender roles are sometimes best served with a little fluidity. Being too rigid, you can sometimes overlook everyone’s needs.

        14. Agree…there is always the alternate path for the woman (to stop playing career and get married to be supported by a man).
          Men always have to “man up” – in society’s eyes – because who do you think is holding all of this shit together?
          Women may pay into the tax base but who do you think is also benefiting the most from it? Yes, women…in the form of any government assistance.
          If men try to do the above, then they are shamed by women and society. Women know that things will turn to shit once men stop “manning up” for their benefit.

        15. It doesn’t matter if you teach your daughter or not….it’s the path that many will take, regardless.
          Yes, how do you teach your daughter to “work like a man”? Many of them don’t really want to be equal and work like a man (how many do you see in construction or on oil rigs?).
          Women want to be equal and work in equal fields (for all of the good stuff) but never do they want to really work like a man (hard labor). I challenge any woman to point out how women (in droves) are running to sign up for hard labor (and be equal to a man).

        16. That bitch is delusional. Her mom (a doctor) did not raise three children…not with the time and study it takes to become a doctor (delusional thinking) – she didn’t have any help? And she is only still working because she’s divorced.
          See how the delusional female mind works?

        17. and there it is…someone, Anna, (usually young) giving advice to elders (who have raised kids). I love this shit. It’s like when I hear a couple talking about having kids….some kind of dream bullshit.
          They never really “know” how it’s going to be until they get there….but they’ll preach advice to you (like they know).
          Come back and see us, sweetheart, in about 20 years when all of your “ideas” and bullshit from school are faced with reality.
          It’s very different to be the coach from the bleachers then to actually be the coach on the sidelines.

        18. I believe there was once an article written on ROK (or somewhere else) that described behavior similar to this.
          It’s interesting to see the same defense tactics in the wild (when their argument is destroyed), the use of ad hominem attacks and other specifics that article described.

        19. It sounds like you were blessed with a wonderful family. It is good to see that you are self aware enough to appreciate it – too many people aren’t these days.
          But your story is largely irrelevant to what we are discussing here. Your parents found a way of life (mostly traditional) that worked for them and have encouraged you to follow in their footsteps – because it worked for them. This is part of their love and concern for you. It’s what all decent parents do for their children. But your story is a backward looking indicator. The life your parents had is not the one your children will be able to achieve.
          The time that your parents (and I) grew up and raised our families in not as a model for the future, but a one-time aberration.
          The ‘female empowerment’ of the last fifty years came at enormous cost. And the bill has mostly been paid by men – in money, broken marriages, estranged children, the criminalisation of natural male behavior, the stripping of men of all reproductive rights, the displacement from careers by affirmative action, the list goes on and on. All under the guise of equality. And all the time we were told that this will benefit society, that women were men’s equal.
          Well, now men, as a group, have been stripped of just about everything. But the system still needs to be funded – and it’s demands are huge, in no small part due to the fact that enormous state apparatus is required to enforce women’s ‘equality’ and benefits. So now it looks to these ’empowered women’ to replace the wealth that the displaced and dispossessed men used to supply.
          It’s not there.
          Turns out that the mass of women never wanted to work like a man – so they haven’t. Even with all this state support, they still generate too little tax revenue and worse yet, they consume even more.
          The system is broken – peak feminism has passed. My interest lies in seeking what comes next. I have a strong sense that it is going to be bad for everyone, but especially bad for single women – a cohort my daughter will soon join.
          The life your parents had, and the one I had, is mostly no longer available to young people. The future belongs to those who add value. Formal work, especially those safe and comfortable jobs favored by women, will become ever harder to find, the hours longer, the tasks more grueling and the benefits ever fewer.
          For those with the skills and the courage, self employment is likely to become increasingly common – and I suspect in a world that becomes ever more uncertain it will, as ever, be men who dominate this path. A successful woman will be one that attaches herself to such a man.
          Nature doesn’t care about human concepts of ‘fairness’ or ‘equality’. Nature only cares about balance.
          Feminism upset that balance – in favour of women. It’s happened before, it will happen again. And the fix every time? A return to some form of patriarchy. That’s the future I want to prepare my daughter for.

        20. Indeed.
          “there is always the alternate path for the woman (to stop playing career and get married to be supported by a man).”
          I’d change the ‘is’ to ‘was’. This is what is changing. This tactic only works if there is a plentiful supply of men of men willing and able to do so.
          I think we can all agree there are still many men ‘willing’ to do this. Thirsty betas are everywhere. But the only men that matter to women are the ones that are ‘able’.
          Feminism has now marginalised so many men that there are not enough ‘able’ men to meet demand. My work has (unexpectedly) brought me into contact with a number of women in their early thirties. All are decent looking to attractive, all are graduates, all are unmarried and childless. All are working less than stellar jobs. All lament the ‘poor quality’ of men available to them for a ‘relationship’ (marriage is the unspoken subtext imo). They may or may not have ridden the carousel but what they all have in common is that they sacrificed their ‘beauty years’ at the alter of education and ‘career’. It simply never occurred to them that there would not be a man for them. So they slog on doing basically low grade manual labour and admin roles. So empowered. Right now in the UK around 20% of women end their fertile years childless, but for female graduates it is 40% and every year it gets higher.
          And this trend will only exacerbate as more and more of the ‘willing and able’ men start to understand their options (as many are clearly doing) and move into the ‘unwilling’ camp.
          Women already sense this but struggle to articulate it – we see it in all those ‘Man up!’, ‘Where are all the good men?’, and the more desperate ‘The single woman’s life is awesome!’ articles. We see it in the ever more extreme shaming language that more and more women employ to try to keep men on the plantation.
          None of it will work. Feminism sold women a lie that they could have it all. It will leave them with less than they started with.
          And growing numbers of men simply no longer care.

        21. Well done. I’m sure you have rightfully won the admiration of many who know you.
          But Irrelevant to this discussion.
          Care to point out the huge numbers of female founded, run and managed businesses that are paying the huge amounts into the public pot required to fund BDG? Not organizations where women have been appointed to the CEO – businesses founded and run by women.
          If even 1000000 women have repeated your success, the amount of wealth they pay into the public pot would be risible next to the that created by the companies drilling oil and gas, mining coal, the companies building aircraft, the Microsofts and the Facebooks.
          Clearly women are capable of building successful businesses and careers. Clearly they are capable of climbing the corporate career ladder.
          That’s not the issue. The issue is the number of them. The numbers of women working who produce enough to be net tax contributors and the amount of those contributions is way too small to cover the amount of benefits they consume. And after 50 years of ‘equality’ we are seriously asked to believe it’s because they they are discriminated against? When universities have been churning out more female than male graduates for years. When we have affirmative action entrenched everywhere?
          Women make less money and start smaller businesses (and pay less tax) than men because of the choices they make. Choices that typically do not have wealth creation at their core. And this is a problem. Because for decades we have spent a fortune making sure women are ‘equal’ to men. But the wealth women, as a group, have created, has been anything but equal. The payback from women has been way too low. Women’s empowerment, your wonderful story notwithstanding, has, in general, been a poor investment.
          With your business experience, I’m sure I don’t have to explain to you what happens to enterprises that consistently underperform.
          State funded female empowerment is on life support. We should all give pause for what that means for the kind of world our children will inherit.

        22. Please enlighten me as to why I would make for a bad mother in the eyes of a man. Please enlighten me so I can change the error of my ways.

        23. Look at the way you carry yourself in a community of men. This discussion is over, introspective thought is a powerful force in expanding the self. Thanks for stopping by our home.

        24. I don’t understand why the way I carry myself is so horrid. Also, its’ not really a community of men if there are women here and there.
          So yeah, elaborate on why I am terrible.
          That way I can show you why you’re wrong.

        25. I win the debate if all you have to say is smily face.
          Never has an emoticon better represented a painless loss. I’m feeling pretty victorious presently.

        26. What? This comment literally doesn’t make sense. Solipsism is the theory that states that you can’t really know if anything else is real because you can only sense and really feel the things that are a part of you. Solipsism– as in collective solipsism– is the idea that we can only determine objective truth in the world around us when we confirm with others that they sense the same things.
          If you were trying to say that I’m full of myself for thinking my anecdote negates the other side, then you are all too wrong. I just feel my experience is not consistent with what the other person said. And that since my experience is not consistent with what the other person said, it shows that the argument presented does not always hold true.
          Cry about it if it offends you I told a true story that invalidates the point made.

        27. Yeah, you’re right. Y’all actually really are fond of the ad hominem attack. You guys are going to want to work on that.

        28. She didn’t study after she gave birth.
          Also, way to generalize, It’s pretty delusional of you to assume that I represent the way every female mind works.

        29. http://www.entrepreneur.com/article/226564
          I also cut my teeth at a privately owned, massively successful big pharma trials company – not just owned by a women under 50 but a former lingerie model for good measure – I’m a huge fan of strange dichotomies. Despite your massive propensity for confirmation bias, surely you have to see that you can’t turn a net positive into a vortex. Even modest proprietorships that are in the black yield resources. Even if as you say women are packing up shop premptively to breed, that merely facilitates opportunities for new competition to fill the void. I wanted babies and thus I’ve hired diagnostic extenders – brilliant, competent PA’s trained meticulously under my professional auspices. My clients who are partial to my MO for delivering care are now being served by professionals who not only conquered a grueling medical model of training for two years at a premiere medical graduate program – but who are my doppelgangers in terms of how I value patient dignity and holistic care.
          Because I wanted babies, now 3 PA’s are able to fiscally support their own families. It’s a win win situation. You assume that women with companies just opt to become flunkies and let everything go by the wayside. That’s patently absurd.

        30. Again, this isn’t about you.
          You have done very well for yourself. We get it.
          But your story is not representative of the vast mass of women.
          I’m sure many men will be impressed by your success, some may envy you, some may be inspired by you. You are successful from a man’s perspective.
          But from the perspective of a woman…..not so much. Using only the evidence of your own eyes, by observing the choices MOST women make (rather then what they say), the vast mass of women are just not that interested in building and running a substantial business. Most women prefer to focus all that energy on a family (if they can secure one).
          But why is this? Why do you think men are more inclined build businesses?
          Because building a successful business MEANS something, for both men and women. If you build a successful business you are likely to be successful in general, you are likely to have resources, be socially dominant and have more freedom of action.
          All good right? I’m sure you enjoy these benefits, money to buy stuff and the time to do so. Admiration from your peers.
          It means this for men as well, but these are just side benefits. For, despite years of ‘equality’ what this also means for men is the ultimate prize – sexual access to women.
          This is just about the most powerful motivator a man can have. Men will always be more driven to build great wealth than women. And in so doing they create enough excess to fund the public pot.
          Instead of understanding this, understanding that this dynamic benefits everyone, we have instead elected to spend our wealth on an expensive experiment to try to ‘lift’ the mass of women to a place most aren’t interested in and few remain at. And whilst we waste huge sums on women the irony is that men, left alone, don’t need any help at all – the promise of sex is enough of a motivator. Too much, in fact, for equality’. So we waste more money putting road-blocks in men’s way.
          And in the end, we all suffer. That pain, manifested at the moment by the huge debts individuals, companies and sovereign states are holding, is starting to spread. None of us will remain untouched by it.
          The current system is unsustainable. For the last fifty years the ‘rise’ of women has co-coincided with ever greater demands on the public purse for them to be ‘equal’ whilst simultaneously bearing witness to how little they contribute to it. In more recent years it’s all been held together by maxing out the BDG credit card – but now men, and the state are tapped out.
          In order to continue as is, women, as a group, should be delivering like men. I’m not seeing it.

        31. As per the link I included in my initial post… http://www.entrepreneur.com/article/226564
          “In the U.S., an estimated 8.6 million women-owned businesses contribute $1.3 trillion to the economy and employ 7.7 million Americans, according to an April report commissioned by American Express OPEN, the credit
          card giant’s small business division. What’s more, the number of women-owned firms with $10 million or more in annual sales has increased 57 percent over the past decade.”
          How does this reality coincide with your belief that:
          “The current system is unsustainable. For the last fifty years the ‘rise’ of women has co-coincided with ever greater demands on the public purse for them to be ‘equal’ whilst simultaneously bearing witness to how little they contribute to it.”

        32. That children bred in divorced homes on average gets a worse start in life than those bred in a two parent home,
          Your mother is an example, but I am not sure for what.

        33. But you are a dying out breedand as such not very interesting. Dying out simply because you refuse to get enough children for your genepool to survive. You may as an individual, but your ‘group of thought’ creates woman who lacks a future, because you more than other groups see children as a hindrance for your own ‘realization’. You die out. Listen to Eric Kaufman and his well researched opinions on the fact that the future belongs to the religious groups, because they get enough children.
          I wish I could find women outside the religious groups with an understanding how vitally important children are for nurturing and maintaining the philosophic pool they represent. But these type of women do barely exist,

        34. Unfortunately, the last half century of feminism has revealed that the vast majority of women appear interested in equality only when convenient, that is, equality of outcome as opposed to opportunity. Were this not actually the case, the plethora of misandric legislation that has been enacted would likely never have been created, much less implemented.
          t would prove most interesting to experience a political situation where women were actually forced to compete with men within a level field without the chivalrous hand-holding that permeates the political and academic landscape. It is unfortunate that feminism ventured the direction it did since it only reinforced, unlike what some individuals might believe, the contentions made by anti-feminists.

        35. “Ultimately I go with what works.”
          Indeed. One must emphasis what works as opposed to the wishful thinking of a particular political ideology. Otherwise one is simply kicking against the pricks as it were.

        36. Reality coincides in quite a harsh manor. Again, the issue is not that women cannot achieve and succeed, it’s simply that they are not doing so in the numbers that we all need in order for them to justify the money spent promoting female empowerment.
          The latest figures from the World Bank puts the annual GDP of the US economy at 16.8 trillion dollars. The link you quote celebrates that female owned businesses are contributing 1.3 trillion dollars or 7.7% of this.
          The latest figures from the US Department of Labor puts the number of civilians employed at a whisker under 144 million. The link you quote trumpets that female owned businesses employ 7.7 million or 5.3% of this.
          This is all that women, as a group, can bring to the table after 50 years of ‘equal’ opportunity, affirmative action in education, huge amounts of legislation to tilt the playing field in their favour and the complete re-tooling of the working world to suit their needs? 7.7% of GDP? After 50 years?
          Christ, after WW2 it took men only 20 years to rebuild the whole of Europe.
          But that’s not the worst of it;
          Pew Research Social and demographic trends found that in 2012, 49% of men and 61% of women had ever received payments from at least one the big six entitlement programs. The same report revealed that more women receive multiple benefits than do men, so the actual value of the benefits paid by sex will inevitably show a greater disparity. This figure is never published (wonder why?) but let’s say that by value, the benefits paid splits 35% male 65% female. The President’s FY 2013 budget allocated just around 1.6 trillion dollars to these programs, which means women are receiving approx. 10.4 trillion dollars.
          If we assume that 7.7% of female owned businesses are paying on third of their 7.7% of GDP to BDG as tax (they’re not, but indulge me) then they are paying in about 390 million dollars. Or about 10 trillion dollars less than what women, as a group, at taking out of the pot.
          It is clearly delusional to state that women, as a group, are paying their way.
          But it gets even worse.
          Whilst women, as a group, are being subsidised by men, as a group, to the tune of 10 trillion dollars a year, every year, we are all supposed to be chanting the mantra that women are men’s equals, that they must be respected like men, that they can perform and deliver like men.
          It’s sickening.
          Because the cost of pretending that women are equal isn’t just measured in those 10 trillion dollars.
          They are more truly measured in the broken men, exhausted women, fatherless children, fractured families and ruined lives it takes to keep a handful of women at the top.
          And for what? Bragging rights?
          Hell of a price to pay to a bunch of hot air.

        37. Religious groups are awful because they tend to grow exponentially (ten kids have ten kids each have ten kids each). But I think that the force of modernism is combating traditional religious views, so it really doesn’t so much matter that they all have children, because eventually they will all assimilate to a culture that will inevitably embrace atheism.
          Also, I assure you that one has to be overwhelmingly committed to an ideology for that ideology to prevent reproduction– our most primal, instinctual, and natural longing.

        38. They are more truly measured in the broken men, exhausted women,
          fatherless children, fractured families and ruined lives it takes to
          keep a handful of women at the ‘top’.
          Correlation and causation, eh? How does an educated woman’s credentials fracture her family? Unless she beguiled her partner and obfuscated the entire bulk of her work during young adulthood – it’s reasonable to assume she was selected by her mate on the basis of what she brings to the table. If she’s bringing 50K + to that table – that’s a union that is solidified in financial solvency. This is not just a good thing, this is winner! Relationships sans financial woes – work and work well.
          I’m also confused by your attempted amalgamation between welfare recipients and educated, salaried workers/business proprietors. You do realize that you aren’t on the dole when you have a career, no? Those “49% of men and 61% of women” receiving payments from the big 6 entitlement programs (excluding SS and medicare – an entirely different argument all together) are not the demographic you are tarring and feathering – you take issue with educated, viably employed women who pay (generally in conjunction with their parents) for their own education via loans and a minimal amount of grant money via public funds. Grant money is also a genderless entitlement and equally distributed per need. Poor boys and poor girls are equally staking their claim to student grants – It’s a pittance of the behemoth of entitlements available – it doesn’t break us to educate our denizens and they are on the hook indefinitely with the remaining loan money they secure (and if they complete their academic programs they really do become employable).
          The 1.7 trillion contribution from women in industry would be felt if it went missing from our GDP. How is this massive contribution somehow a negative to the economy? What costs are you attributing to the attainment of this 1.7 trillion? You’re trying to blur the lines by somehow inferring that educated, professional women who are not on the dole are the recipients of welfare resources – that’s preposterous. There’s no societal overhead for people taking out loans to educate themselves. Despite defaults, we still garner HUGE national revenue from student
          loan debt. Anyone with armed with a modicum of professional training and
          or higher education is exponentially less likely to require welfare
          I’d also be willing to bet that the beneficiaries of those 7.7 million jobs (proffered at the behest of women’s professional efforts) would take you to task for questioning the merit of those positions existence.
          Now if you want to argue that having an echelon of middle class and upper middle class women who no longer are dependent on men for their physical survival is unseemly and the only tolerable dynamic for women is kowtowing in relationships in order to not starve – Well we’ve hit the impasse. The compromise required of most middle class men now is to accept being desired vs. being “needed” in their relationships. To assume this means that men are no longer valuable in the eyes of their partners is ridiculous. I think its strong conjecture to assert this is ethically untenable for men. Most men don’t feel this is too great a compromise in order to be with a chosen partner who additionally has strong professional aspirations.

        39. I have to agree – no step children are married but all made the mistake of getting a girl pregnant – started before me – now I ensure to instruct the grandsons to learn from their fathers and uncles just how screwed up life can get if you do something stupid like get a girl pregnant – It is a poor choice for a viable society but a necessary choice for any man to have a decent life for himself – MGTOW

        40. she was a doctor before having children – do you realize how rare it is for a women to have the financial means to acquire help with children – most women can not do this – it becomes a disaster for the majority of single mothers who can not handle the stress alone.

        41. The thing that most struck me when I read your most recent response was how similar it is to the response I would have written five or six years ago. Equality, sharing the burden, the same opportunities for all……it all sounds so, well, so bloody sensible, doesn’t it?
          Trouble is it doesn’t work.
          “Correlation and causation, eh? How does an educated woman’s credentials fracture her family? Unless she beguiled her partner and obfuscated the entire bulk of her work during young adulthood – it’s reasonable to assume she was selected by her mate on the basis of what she brings to the table. If she’s bringing 50K + to that table – that’s a union that is solidified in financial solvency. This is not just a good thing, this is a winner!
          Relationships sans financial woes – work and work well.”
          They do….until they don’t. The problem, as ever, is hypergamy, the one instinct that ultimately rules all others. Women’s desire to pair with a higher status man drives everything we, as men and women, do. How women measure a man’s status varies from woman to woman and also varies according to what sort of relationship she seeks – but still, for the vast majority of women a man’s provisioning performance (or clear provisioning potential) is the key metric for a LTR / marriage. Despite all the ‘equality’ we have, we still rarely see that newly qualified female accountant swooping down and husbanding up that good looking guy stacking shelves in the supermarket (unless he is clearly studying for the future).
          You ask how does an educated woman’s credentials fracture her family. You would be better asking those men discarded when their partners status started to rise well above their own. Or the maybe some of the men divorced when they lost their jobs and were unable to secure new employment quickly. Hypergamy is real – for all this talk about men being intimidated by ‘strong independent women’ this is simply the natural male response to a high status women. In terms of LTRs SIW are romantically repulsive to men, in the same way that a weak, unambitious man is romantically repulsive to women. This is morally neutral – nature knows that such pairings are unlikely to persist – because of hypergamy.
          The reality is that a modern man likely has to compete for status not only with others in the workplace but also with his wife at home in order to maintain attraction, at least until she ages out of her beauty years. Some men will fail, and their relationships will likely follow. (As an aside I know some canny women – probably unconsciously – sensing this risk as well. As they climbed the corporate ranks they started to seriously out-earn their husband. So they went part time. Although higher up the rung they ensured that hubby remained the primary breadwinner. Effectively they sacrificed income to preserve their attraction).
          More ominous though is how this dynamic is playing out with female graduates. I think I mentioned before how the rate of childlessness amongst female graduates is double that of female non-graduates (and is now standing at 2 in 5). Of course if you stick to the feminist boiler-plate this is because they have chosen to lead their lives without children because they now have a world of options to them. But if you actually take the time to speak to them, most will often admit to have wanted a family, but that they never ‘found anyone’. And they are not lying. Simply by raising their status, they eliminated a lot of men from contention as partners.
          “it’s reasonable to assume she was selected by her mate on the basis of what she brings to the table.”
          There is soooo much wrongness in this I almost don’t know where to start. However, I have found this to be such a common view in women that I’m truly not surprised. This view is simply projection – because most women view a good stable education / income as romantically attractive in a man they assume men will view theirs the same light.
          Quite simply we don’t. As far as sexual attraction is concerned a woman’s education / career / income rates as neutral to negative. TL;DR – a woman’s pay check never made a man’s dick hard.
          It is maybe best explained in terms of that great guy you found who is good looking and has a great job and treats you well. He has a fantastic sense of humour as well. The sense of humour is nice, but would you dump him if he didn’t have it? No. If he was a grumpy bastard, then yes, but just an absence of a sense of humour, then no. In terms of sexual attraction a woman’s income is like that to most men – nice to have but it’s not important unless it is a lot higher or lower than the man’s. Female debt however, might be a deal breaker.
          “I’m also confused by your attempted amalgamation between welfare recipients and educated, salaried workers/business proprietors.”
          Allow me to explain. You have to see the bigger picture. In our wonderful post feminist world the option for women to become traditional housewives has been all but eliminated. The ‘option’ for women to join men in the workplace has been replaced, largely, by an obligation to do so. This is wonderful for the top tier of women such as yourself but most women do NOT want to work 50/50/50. And in fact most don’t, so, in order to maintain the illusion of equality we have to fund huge entitlement programs to make up for the provisioning they are unable to procure for themselves.
          There are currently approx. 28 million American women on Food Stamps. Before feminism most were married or part of a close family and were provided for. One of the many toxic legacies of feminism is a much greater in-equality between women themselves. For every women like you that it has enabled, there are 20 women surviving on handouts. This is not a co-incidence.
          But where are the men in all this? Well, ‘female empowerment’ weaves it’s malignant spell on this side of the equation as well. The reason that those women can’t find a man to commit to is largely down to our old friend hypergamy.
          As women are promoted into the workspace, as they raise their status, they still keep looking ‘up’ to find men. More and more men find themselves out of contention. Men need a motivation to work hard. As women rise (either through hard work or artificially via affirmative action – the reason matters little at this stage as the end results are equally destructive) more and more men have less motivation to push hard. Without the traditional reward of sex for provisioning many men opt (or are forced) to an easier, mostly celibate life. Mostly they are not happy about it but they have made an effort vs reward calculation and found women to not be worth it. They have made themselves unattractive to their female peers who, ever under the spell of hypergamy, now see BDG as a better provider – because he is.
          But for increasing numbers of high achieving women the picture is turning cloudy as well. For as the top tier of men that most women desire becomes ever smaller, more and more of those men start waking up to their options – options that no longer need include marriage or commitment. And if it does they pretty much have their pick of women – only the most attractive need apply.
          So, the short answer to your confusion;
          A more male dominated workspace = more men that more women find attractive = more stable LTRs / marriage = more wealth.
          A more female dominated workspace = less men that women find attractive = less LTRs / marriage = more poverty.
          And the biggest tragedy in all this? For many women the status they have gained via education, career only counts in the workplace. If they started as a ‘6 out of 10’ in terms of sexual attractiveness to men, after years of education and career advancement they will still be a ‘6 out of 10’ (if they are lucky). But in their heads they are now deserving of a higher status man – the very men that now have more options. No wonder we are on the cusp of a spinster epidemic.
          “I’d also be willing to bet that the beneficiaries of those 7.7 million jobs (proffered at the behest of women’s professional efforts) would take you to task for questioning the merit of those positions existence.”
          This only works if you believe the lack of a penis was essential to create or perform those jobs. If those jobs needed doing I think we can agree the lack of a vagina would not have stopped them getting done.
          “Now if you want to argue that having an echelon of middle class and upper middle class women who no longer are dependent on men for their physical survival is unseemly and the only tolerable dynamic for women is kowtowing in relationships in order to not starve – Well we’ve hit the impasse.”
          Then we have, indeed, hit an impasse. For whilst it pains me to say so (I have a mother, wife and daughter that I love very much) it is clear that when women, as a group, are freed from their dependence on men, society starts to unravel.
          When men had the ‘power’ – the ability to throw their wife out on the street, default child custody etc. divorce was very rare and most children grew up with both parents. Now women have the ‘power’ we have a 50% divorce rate, 1 in 3 children growing up in the US without a father, plummeting marriage rates with 40% of children being born out of wedlock. And all these trends extend every year. They produce a whole host of social pathologies that no amount of money can ever address – doesn’t stop us trying though.
          “The compromise required of most middle class men now is to accept being desired vs. being “needed” in their relationships.”
          It is widely accepted the men need to be needed. I know what that feels like. I also know what it feels like to need and I know what it feels like to want.
          I want to sit around all day and watch movies. But I need to work to earn money. Guess what wins – I don’t do what I want, I do what I need.
          I want a BMW Z4 but I need a car big enough for my family – guess what car I have? (hint; it’s not a Z4)
          When want and need go head to head, need always wins.
          Men understand this at an instinctive level. A woman who wants you is not as valuable as a women who needs you.
          But the thing is, this instinct wasn’t born in a vacuum – men would not have evolved to be needed…..if women hadn’t evolved to need.
          Because the truth is that despite 50 years of equality women still need men for, well, just about everything really. Take a look around you right now – I bet almost everything you see is designed, built and maintained by men. Feminism has managed to create an illusion of equality by inserting the state between male provisioning and female consumption but even today the majority of production comes from men’s labours and the majority of consumers are women.
          So where does all this female empowerment, all this ‘equality’ leave us?
          It leaves us with more debt than it will ever be possible to repay.
          With the lowest marriage rate in history.
          With more children growing up without fathers than ever before.
          With more people living alone than ever.
          With record numbers on food stamps.
          With one in four women in the US on psychiatric meds.
          With suicide being the second most common cause of death for men aged 15 – 24 and the most common cause of death of men aged 25 – 34.
          Women are burning out and men are checking out.
          It’s not sustainable. This is the world we are bequeathing to our children. Instead of cheerleading the triumphs of ‘equality’ you should stop and look at the bigger picture. Everything has a cost. Female empowerment isn’t worth the price.
          And it will be our children who will end up paying for it.

        42. Thanks – clearly I’m showing my age. Just found this on the Oxford dictionary site;
          In British English, a billion used to be equivalent to a million million
          (i.e. 1,000,000,000,000), while in American English it has always
          equated to a thousand million (i.e. 1,000,000,000). British English has
          now adopted the American figure, though, so that a billion equals a
          thousand million in both varieties of English.
          Who knew the British definition of a billion had changed – obviously not me!
          I have made the correction in my above comment. These figures are mind boggling.

      2. I think a crash is much more likely than crap creep. If the topic interests you I’d recommend When Money Dies by Adam Fergusson, The Money Illusion by Irving Fisher, America’s Great Depression by Murray Rothbard. I think a German style hyperinflation is much more likely than a Japanese crap creep or a Depression style deflation. And those monetary problems don’t even touch on the problem caused by all the men who simply are no longer interested in being productive to have the state steal have of what they have earned. Add in the men who were raised by single mothers and don’t have the capacity to be productive. It isn’t a pretty picture.
        Civilization is built on the surplus labor of men. I often wonder what it will take to entice men to once more take up the yoke of patriarchy. They certainly won’t come back in numbers for a slightly better version of what they have now.

        1. Thanks for the recommendations.
          I am a regular reader of Zerohedge but I have to limit my time there lest I get too depressed. I suspect the average ZHer would agree with you regarding a crash. I remain to be convinced – maybe your books will do the trick.
          I certainly agree that increasing male disengagement from women and society in general has reached a point where significant numbers of men are beyond turning. As you point out, patriarchy is a yolk for men, a burden to carry and a load to bear.
          The old incentives were frail enough – kept effective mostly by willful ignorance – and feminism has killed those dead.
          It will take a lot to get the mass of men to pick it up again. I just hope we don’t have to wait for something truly catastrophic before women come to their senses.

        2. feminism, In freeing women of their traditional role also inadvertently freed men of their traditional roles – No longer will men view women as precious – they are now equals with all the advantages and disadvantages that come with that – Chivalry is dead, decency is dead, even common manners are having a hard time – Men no longer desire to be a utility for women and are walking away – MGTOW

    6. Don’t be a fool. Be purposeful, have your mission in life and be successful and there will be hoards of women throwing themselves at you for a relationship. Don’t want to be disposable? don’t marry, and enjoy the boon the 21st century has given you. We don’t NEED women for sex anymore, because we don’t have to commit resources to get our dicks wet anymore. Sluts are in abundance. You can have your cake and eat it too. Do you want a son who will have a mother? search for women with domestic qualities. When you have paper, you have the power of choice, not the other way around. And get good at fucking, it speaks to women on a whole other level. Everything is not doom and gloom. Men can still find manhood and be men without submitting to the whims of ‘womyn’.

      1. So much truth in your reply, YB.
        It’s all about a man’s outlook. Mine is legitimately not giving a fuck.
        My ex from 2006 is still paying my phone bill and deposits a few hundred dollars into my checking account every so often.
        She does this behind her current boyfriend’s back (I don’t ask her for the favors, nor do I need them. It “makes her feel good”).
        My current girlfriend knows about this and doesn’t question me, even though I know it annoys her.
        That is certainly having your cake and eating it too.

      2. The sage spaketh, and much wisdom was departeth.
        Hensceforth, thee young menz did know, and learn from the books of lore, and gifted into the bosom of soo many maidens the cursed thought of a life lived poorly, without children, and many, many domesticated animals that only yearned for food, and plentiful belly rubs.
        And yay, though they not knoweth, the menz did reply in kind to “da Rules” written in the year of our Lord, 1996, that did offend them so; and thusly, game was rediscovered, and weaponized in unsaintly form.
        The plague of loneliness, The Curse of loveless affection, the trap of sweet whispered nothings, the pit of lonely, childless despair. These were thus granted women who neither felt they needed men, nor cared for their womb the thought of having children suck at their breast, nor a man to hold them faithfully.
        Now hear, thee harlots, bend thine ears you wistful young lions wishing for a life of pleasure, and the deft fleeing of every slight emotional pain’s risk.
        Everyone’s time must come. We are dust on the wind.
        If you fail to establish your time, however short, the world will still turn, and the sun and moon will rise in their time.
        All will be forgotten about you in due process.
        If you are wise, you will do well. If you are a fool, the wisdom of ancients has yet to fail.
        If you piss in the wind, what do you expect?
        I wish we still wrote that way. I love standards. But they leave something….to be desired.

    7. Your post obviously struck a chord, but its too despairing.
      Sex roles have been abolished theoretically and to a lesser extent in practice (as per marxist attacks on the division of labour extended to the sexual division of labour), but they will return in time. They may not however return on the basis of necessity as you describe, at least not in the same way. They will return rather on the basis of what is freely chosen, or at least what appears so.
      There’s a paradox with women. They are paradoxical creatures in case you hadn’t noticed. They wish both to choose and be compelled. The future will depend on how that paradox is resolved.
      they will choose again what they now reject in the belief it is compelled

      1. Yes look at the anti-feminists.
        But unless you make a lot of money these days a dual income is required. When women go to work and are ’empowered’ this repeats the process all over again.
        How is that we can have them work but also crave the family life?
        Is it even possible?

        1. that’s true. It’s not viable to think about going back to sole male breadwinner, even if men, women or both wanted it. But that’s been the case for a long time. Women have worked in some form for other for generations – indeed it isn’t even a post-industrial phenomenon – women have always laboured in some form, but under bourgeois victorian mores, women gentle folk were expected to stay at home while their men provided for them. In other words it was always based to some extent on romanticised victorian ideals of the home as a sanctuary away from the male defined notion of work. The innovation here is the expectation that there should be no sexual division of labour, that both sexes should work full time, and equally and without reference to gender roles (i.e. what feminists call stereotypes), or for that matter that the woman could be the breadwinner, and the man the nurturer for example (so the woman can concentrate on her career). This is an entirely artificial and socially engineered situation, which will never make any sense for the majority of couples or for the majority of women.
          To return to some semblance of normality, one need only erode the foundations upon ‘equality of outcome’ is being engineered. Its foundations theoretically are incoherent and weak, and economically can easily be re-framed as the burden it is…….economics is ultimately about society, and its reproduction through nurturing new generations (as opposed to endless immigration). The present situation is unviable, but that doesn’t mean we’ll be going back to the 1950s either

    8. Natural selection comes down to the heartless business of nature saving those heredities that work, and rejecting those that don’t.
      Western heredities don’t work anymore. Hence, we have a aging (and dying) population.

      1. Western liberal heredities are aging and dying. Right wingers have above replacement.

    9. Thus no man should ever be forced to pay vaginamoney ever. No man should be forced to pay for a child that is not in his custody ever. And lastly paternity fraud should result in very long jail terms.

    10. Women don’t need men anymore*
      *Until things get the teensiest bit difficult.
      End Transmission,

    11. So basically, what you mean to tell me is that:
      1. Women don’t need sex.
      Women have sexual desires only a man can fulfill. It is in our instinct– hardwired into our very DNA– just as much as it is in yours.
      2. All women want out of men are resources.
      (Call me old fashioned but I [and countless other women] want love, not money. Although not marrying someone without any practical skill would be nice since I don’t want to be the only one working. And that, my friend, is ONLY fair)
      3. Because you are horny, I am not allowed to have nice things. Why ever would you force someone to be in a state of neverending need at all for your selfish want for sex? Kind of greedy, isn’t it? There is nothing more vile than poverty, and everyone is entitled to be armed with weapons (i.e. education, material objects) to combat poverty, which is often coupled with disease, depression, and death.

      1. I would only argue that your 2nd contention does not hold true for all women. I’m an internist and my husband works as a freelancer in a tumultuous and unpredictable industry. His love and guidance whilst I was plugging ahead with school was and will always be the most invaluable gift anyone could have given me. I would think nothing of being the sole breadwinner in my family should my husband’s career flatline. Nothing would diminish his boundless masculinity and sex appeal in my eyes. He’s a lion and I’m his lioness and nothing would ever change my reverence for this man. He works tirelessly and I know he personally would be devastated if his career tanked – but I personally would never be phased by this and would remain steadfastly loyal and appreciative of his love and companionship. I’d probably just invite him to run all of the business aspects of my practice and I’d merely operate as a hired gun MD if he should ever lose his day gig. Just wanted to point out that not all women demand equity in terms of annual income. It means nothing to me. I worked as hard as I did because I wanted to be able to protect us as a family. All I care about is that our team floats no matter what 🙂

        1. I think you may have misunderstood me (or perhaps I was misleading). I don’t at all demand equity. And nor do most men. But I see equity is generally the effect of ambition. I cannot deny that I am attracted to ambition. Not for it’s monetary yield, but because there is something so sexy to me about a man, who like me, sees the importance of diligence.

        2. I’ve often ruminated with my husband about how it isn’t necessarily one’s compensation that should merit pride but the caliber of their body of work. Better to create something utterly fucking cool than something contrived and well bankrolled. I truly respect authentic integrity when it comes to creation and work ethic. I concur, there’s a huge difference between a broke layabout and broke man building his dreams with little more than a couple nickles. Anyone pursuing their calling with guts and integrity deserves all the respect and support in the world 🙂

        3. You are attracted to ambition because it is in your innate biology to extract resources from men.

        4. You don’t know that, sir. You don’t feel my feelings or see the world from my perspective. I wish I was multilingual. Because as it is right now, there is no word I know of in the English language to express how wrong you are and how irrational and arrogant you are to assume you know me better than I do. Newsflash: you aren’t God.
          The only thing that is intrinsic to my biology are the characteristics of my body that mark sexual dimorphism.

        5. They extrapolate a lot of conjecture from physical anthropology on this site. They cite in blood conclusions that the academic researchers themselves clearly assert as being hypothetical guesses. I’d like that fellow to point us to the literature that definitively points where in our organelles the gold-digger protein is being synthesized.

    12. Resources aren’t the only thing that women need.
      Women need attention. They need someone to listen to them, care for them, and validate them.
      What has replaced this in modern-day society is social media. Women can now put on a virtual princess-show on Instagram and Facebook. They can continue to validate themselves through corporate environments and social media.
      Men who actively use social media and like women’s pictures are insane. It will NOT get you laid, in fact it does the opposite.

    13. I hate to break it to you but sex is a “want” not a “need” and it is so for both genders And it is a HELL of a lot easier for a guy to get the resources he wants (sex) than it is for a woman to get the resources she wants (money, financials security, etc) from a guy.
      And you have it wrong. Men and women were on pretty even footing in terms of value provided before the AGRICULTURAL revolution NOT the industrial
      revolution. In fact, women’s role as the “gatherers” provided 3/4 of
      the calories for their communities.
      Although I totally agree that what men and women want are totally different. http://dawsonstone.com/men-and-women-want-different-things/
      “Iversen and Rosenbluth (2010) suggest that agricultural intensification
      created ‘a premium on male brawn in plowing and other heavy farm work’ (p.32). This led to a division of labor within the family in which the man used
      his physical strength in food production, and the woman took care of child
      rearing, food processing and production and other family-related duties. The
      consequence was that women’s role in society no longer gave ‘her economic
      viability on her own’ (p.32)”

    14. The feminism cancer and the female worshipping western society is making it incredibly hard for natural selection to continue now

      Feminism, femtards, femiecommies are destroying male-female relationshisps. In the end, both sexes (not “genders” which is another leftard/libtard, Cultural-Marxist, Orwelian newspeak) are screwed with femminism which is product of Communism.

    15. You people are forgetting both men and women NEED relationships, not just fucking and money, you talk like robots, women having authority over men or being the same undermiens the way relationships work, as in men dominant, women submissive. If you people want to talk shit about feminism, which it deserves, then STOP with the “enjoy the decline and fuck all yuo want” men need women, women need men, and if you don’t want to be a hypocrite you will stop this shit about “enjoy the hoes”. Women are MADE not searched for, not meeting the perfect match, except women today have no home education, so you’ll have to work with turning that shitty material into women worth fighting for.

  4. Need, beyond material support, health, and general purpose, is weakness. Emotional needs are the most destructive, thus coining the term “love is blind”. You can see where that path leads.
    Too men think they “need” a life partner, sex, beer, pizza, donuts, a new car, lots of friends, social approval, a swimming pool, or a vacation. These items can add texture to life, but do not effect it’s fundamental substance. Everyone thinks they are entitled to everything, with minimum sacrifice.
    I don’t think men and women can “have it all”. That’s the delusion of the American Dream …

  5. I taught my ten year younger wife to iron our clothes regularly. Before me, she would wear a shirt unironed and consider it not a big deal. I see a lot of young people going scruffy these days. I taught her to wear feminine clothes and let her hair grow long. Before me she would have this boyish look about her. From time to time, she would still throw her clothes on the floor and picks them up in an instant when she sees the look on my face. I basically taught her how to run a household and look after children.
    I taught her how to be a real man’s woman. Luckily she’s a natural red pill so she obeys without too much fuss.
    Women = young children. One needs to mold them into real grow-ups.

    1. Good for you, I’ve only seen this a couple of times (for men my age). This should be so much more common, but this sick society has robbed us of it because most women’s brainwashing runs too deep to change.

      1. Exactly. When you treat women as an equal and not an adult child, that’s when you set yourself up for some bad shit.

    2. I am thinking the same thing, although I am 24 I will definitely be marrying someone younger than me.
      The plan is to finish school and go into medicine-related field and court young women in undergrad during their first year in a science or a heavy intensive field where you need to study 24/7 or you fail.
      Wish me luck!

        1. It’s not my idea…it’s one of the residents who has a hot girlfriend who is in undergrad.
          He told me the plan is to get them in the first year…even before FROSH if you can. Offer support for their studies, or if they need help navigating the school…and then give them your office/lab number.
          If a girl is in science this’ll make her panties go wet.
          Also invite her to any talks you go to/are present in. MANY undegrads do not have the privilege of going to these things/knowing about them…but it is free access.

        2. That sounds like quite the cool boyfriend. How awesome to have someone who you love and who you can gravitate towards for wisdom and professional advice (This is coming from an MD with a brilliant husband who was my rock all throughout school). Kudos on a good plan. Hope you land a brilliant and appreciative girlfriend and the two of you launch an empire together! Best thing about the joint, kick-ass earning potentials is that you have SIGNIFICANTLY less to squabble over when financial woes are nil. Fortunately those who work hard academically and professionally tend to invest the same level of commitment in their relationships too! Doctors like to look good and feel good and that generally translates to lots of happy, sexy years with a lucky chosen partner! Bonne fortune, monsieur!

  6. Good stuff Blair.
    I agree, most men would be happy to marry if women could take on their proper role.

  7. “But in fairness, I get the impression that many men on these sites secretly wish for a marriageable woman but just can’t place that much faith in the modern woman. Perhaps the state of American women is so dismal that cheap hook-ups are the best a man can hope for. God help us all.” So much truth.

  8. The advice in this article is well worth remembering for modern women. They want to believe they know it all, but even as a local study shows, they still need to be handheld and told what to do. According to this study, 8 in 10 women drink during pregnancy. 8 out of fucking 10. And their excuse??? “Confused and conflicting guidelines” on how much to drink. Even though they have been told for generations not to drink, the feminist propaganda machine went into overdrive and condemned the male doctors for telling women what to do.
    Women will destroy everything they can unless they have a strong man with his balls intact to tell them what to do

  9. Jeeeezzzzuuuussss….where were you 3 years ago…. my last ltr ended…. bitch couldn’t cook worth shit…..once she got a friend of hers to cook a roast beef dinner… invited my parents and some friends around…. they were all complimenting her an her cooking skills…. I knew the truth…I wasn’t laughing…. women are being brought up without any sense of responsibility….

    1. If you want something done right, you gotta do it yourself, right?
      Honestly, I always thought that the cooking chops of women were suspect–judging from my mom (when she was alive), my step-mom, and every girlfriend I’ve ever had since.

    2. If she didn’t have a demanding job or wasn’t a full time student – that’s pretty lame. One thing to consider, unless you just like being annoyed and having an opportunity to disparage your partner – why not suggest the two of you take a culinary class together? Buy her a fun cookbook and make a date to hit up a farmer’s market. Is the goal just to find the worst in someone and to fixate on that – or is it to solve the problem and develop a love and a skill in cooking within your partner? She did take the effort to garner a friend’s assistance to provide a nice meal for your family, no? Is she that awful a person that subterfuge is the only motive you see in her? If so, good thing you dumped her. If not, perhaps you’re a bit too judgmental and just tooling for an opp to grumble..? who knows?

        1. What’s nice about having a partner who can financially contribute to the relationship is that you too get surprises and your rent gets cut in half and perhaps she bumps your credit if you get married and you can refinance yer car at a cheaper rate – and then if she cooks for shite, you can make it a fun hobby that you strike up together. I really don’t see why there’s such a flagrant character assault on us career girls on this site. I constantly surprise my awesome husband with rare comic books, fun novelty items, vacation surprises and when he wants us to learn new skills, hobbies he always surprises me with fun adventurous classes in learning to refinish vintage furniture, how to reupholster stuff, gourmet pastry making classes, etc.. When you choose someone who has no vested interest in contributing to your collective lifestyle and who hasn’t taken the measures to ascertain a solid career or who isn’t aspiring to build their own empire in some way shape or form – it’s a pretty safe bet they’re going to be a lackluster partner and friend. Smart, educated, successful girls are not the enemy. Just sayin.

        2. I never said they were….I agree with you…. just some people are very good at hiding their true motives in relationships…..” smart, educated, successful girls” would on the whole come from stable patriarchal homes.

  10. “But in fairness, I get the impression that many men on these sites
    secretly wish for a marriageable woman but just can’t place that much
    faith in the modern woman.”
    Perhaps. An important point to realize is that men’s fear of marrying women is not actually a fear of women themselves but rather what comes with the package, i.e., the state. Modern marriage in certain respects has become a polygamous affair, with the state acting as the woman’s enforcer for attempting to acquire what the latter desires as opposed to a man’s home is his castle, as it was in past generations. The political ideology of feminism has caused women allowed women to commit to an adulterous relationship with the state in order to forcibly extract the desired resources from their victim: the husband.
    The most dangerous point within this polygamous relationship of husband, wife, and the state is the point where the woman decides to cast aside her male partner (who typically rests below not only the children–if any–in their marginal desired scale but also below the state since the latter can be utilized as a professional thief and kidnapper for the wife’s selfish desires) aside for any number of reasons; typically selfish.
    In today’s political and cultural climate a man is potentially enslaving himself by agreeing to marriage and is at the mercy of a woman’s emotions. It is typically akin to being placing one’s life in the hands of a destructive, emotional teenager via government contract.

    1. Why pray tell, the backlash against those of us who knuckled down and garnered our advanced degrees in order to be viably contributing partners in our relationships? Who is less of a threat to your life’s work? The partner without any financial wherewithal or the spouse who has a high earning capacity too? I garner over 6 figures – trust me, with my income I not only miss the proverbial “wall” I fucking own it. I’m in my mid 30’s and have had a personal trainer for over a decade and all the corresponding skin care regimen to make most girls 10 years younger than me eat my dust. I worship the ground my husband walks on because he always lets me know how proud he is of me. Means the absolute world. We have so much fun and he’s so loving and protective – worship the man 🙂 Sometimes I earn more than he does (he’s a freelancer). Sometimes he out-earns me. Awesome thing is, we have our bases covered and when you don’t have financial stressors you can focus on looking hot for your partner and making life an adventure together. It really shouldn’t be that nuanced a concept. Women crave accomplishment in equal measure with men.

      1. “Who is less of a threat to your life’s work?”
        Ultimately, the threat is the state and those who would utilize the state apparatus for vindictive and other nefarious purposes. Unfortunately, and in general, women have utilized this institution for nefarious purposes and effectively poisoned the institution of marriage, possibly beyond repair.
        “Women crave accomplishment in equal measure with men.”
        Were the above actually a reality 95.5% of all patents would not be owned by men, the vast majority of inventions would not have been created by men, nor would they have been responsible for the creation of virtually every civilization in history (exception to the rule always have and always will exist however). Biological reality virtually always trumps political rhetoric and personal opinion.
        Men and women’s worth are indeed equal (to dispute otherwise would be quite absurd), but their function is and should be different. This is an extremely important distinction that is often overlooked on this subject, which has led to considerable confusion regarding “who is better”, which is an unnecessary and foolish question.
        “Just to add – I’m totally pro MRA. Fuck circumcision, fuck lopsided
        family courts and YES women should be conscripted alongside men :)”
        Under the current politico-economic and cultural paradigm conscription of both sexes into the military is probably the most sensible direction to go. However, it would be wise for the sexes to remain in separate units since it tends to hinder the unit when under fire as males are instinctively protective of females. There is considerably more than could be expounded on this issue but it beyond the scope of this post.
        Your feedback is appreciated.

        1. “Were the above actually a reality 95.5% of all patents would not be owned by men, the vast majority of inventions would not have been created by men,nor would they have been responsible for the creation of virtually every civilization in history (exception to the rule always have and
          always will exist however). Biological reality virtually always trumps political rhetoric and personal opinion.
          I don’t know what to tell you? How many patents are you in possession of? Personally, my research has been published in several established outlets. I’m additionally an exclusive copyright holder for an extensively licensed body of creative work that I still garner substantial royalty payments on to this day. I can only address my own efforts and I’ve done myself proud complete with an acquired MD, a healthy catalog of published research and all the accolades for my own original, creative work prior to entering the medical field. Capitalizing on creation is not endemic to one gender. I begrudge no one the fruits of their labor. Kudos to the 95% of patent holders… if you aren’t among their ranks, why aren’t you working harder?

        2. “Personally, my research has been published in several established outlets.”
          To repeat, you are making this personal, utilizing your own experience as an example. This perspective is quite irrelevant. In short, this comes under, “the exception to the rule” scenario. Additionally, given the endless and unfortunate hand-holding women receive due to politically-correct legislation who knows what women have actually earned their position? Quite frankly, this injures the exception’s reputation as well as women as a whole.

        3. This isn’t about you.
          He wasn’t asking about you. He was asking your opinion as a clearly successful woman on the the huge disparity between the numbers of men and women at the top of professional fields.
          We know you are awesome. But please answer the question.

        4. Thank you for the added clarification to the conversation. Either my writing skills require further refinement or her emotions are inhibiting her ability to properly ingest the content of my posts. It is likely the latter since I often find, particularly when discussing what appear to be controversial subjects to many individuals, that many women are prone to completely misunderstand the content of my post or act as if they never read it in the first place.

        5. I had made a subjective statement “Women crave accomplishment in equal measure with men.” His retort to that was that all patents possess penises and that civilization rests on the ingenuity of men. No one’s debating that. I don’t begrudge or belittle the success of others. I’m assuming that his argument to my contention is that per the historic contributions of men there can now be no acknowledgment of the drive and corresponding agency behind contemporary female accomplishment. Do you really think we’re so banal that the only reason we invest our souls and the bulk of our young adulthood into learning and achieving is because of some pissing contest with the opposite sex? You are mad to assume this. I’ve craved a deep, substantive and experiential existence since childhood. I always thought of men as part of humanity and thus viewed them as my inspiration to achieve and contribute. We grow, learn and contribute to further humanity, no? It’s sad that I have to clarify this for you – That it’s so far fetched to you that those of us with internal genitalia have aspirations beyond the pedestrian and ignoble – i.e. just wanting to prove we can keep up with you? Are you really that myopic?
          He didn’t address my point. It was a subjective statement. So I reframed the argument back to my point and addressed his notion that my agency doesn’t count per the contributions from antiquity. I merely wanted to know how do his statements practically apply to his own efforts – In addition to showcasing that the victors of antiquity are not the arbiters of contemporary accomplishment. He still hasn’t disproven my point that the drive for genuine professional and personal achievement courses just as strongly through me as it does him.

        6. “all patents possess penises and that civilization rests on the ingenuity of men.”
          The most interesting and persistent part of the above statement is related to the word, “all”, a word that I never used. For whatever reason, when men utilize words such as “most”, “many”, or a simple generalization most women translate this into all. Guest, keep in mind that there have indeed been women who have provided us with valuable inventions and have indeed acquired patents. However, my statement was attempting to distinguishing the different functions women and men have as a general rule as opposed to presenting it as an absolute.
          “I’m assuming that his argument to my contention is that per the historic contributions of men there can now be no acknowledgment of the drive and corresponding agency behind contemporary female accomplishment.”
          As noted above, not at all. You are also assuming that accomplishment only originates from traditionally masculine pursuits which in my opinion degrades a considerable number of women who have not followed such a path.
          ” I’m assuming that his argument to my contention is that per the historic contributions of men there can now be no acknowledgment of the drive and corresponding agency behind contemporary female accomplishment. Do you really think we’re so banal that the only reason we invest our souls and the bulk of our young adulthood into learning and achieving is because of some pissing contest with the opposite sex? You are mad to assume this.”
          Oddly, you admit that you are assuming my intentions while questioning my sanity on a statement I never made.
          “We grow, learn and contribute to further humanity, no?”
          Of course. Just not necessarily in the same fashion in most cases.
          “…i.e. just wanting to prove we can keep up with you?”
          To reiterate, the above was never suggested.
          “He didn’t address my point. It was a subjective statement. So I reframed the argument back to my point and addressed his notion that my agency doesn’t count per the contributions from antiquity. I merely wanted to know how do his statements practically apply to his own efforts – In addition to showcasing that the victors of antiquity are not the arbiters of contemporary accomplishment. He still hasn’t disproven my point that the drive for genuine professional and personal achievement courses just as strongly through me as it does him.”
          Quite frankly because it is irrelevant to the conversation since this debate is not related to a personal comparison of our respective achievements. My original arguments were never attempted to make a personal comparison between me and you but rather the dangerously incestuous relationship between women and the state, particularly as it pertains, though not necessarily limited to, the family and the cultural decay that has occurred due to the empowered ideological monstrosities that currently plague the West.
          My chief concern is the continued destruction of the family by first, the state, and second, the special interest groups that have destroyed masculinity and femininity respectively via indoctrination. Both are now so confused (though most would vehemently insist otherwise) that a productive discourse on the subject between two individuals of the opposite sex are typically heated and virtually always unproductive provided one of the parties does not tow the current ideological/cultural narrative.
          Hopefully, the preceding is a bit clearer.

        7. No, it’s not you, it’s women in general.
          This is a bit off-topic but you will frequently find the same dynamic when you debate broad concepts with women.
          It’s important to understand women are, in general, more narcissistic than men. They have to be. The basic trade between the sexes (even after centuries of civilization and decades of feminism) is the man trades his utility for the women’s fertility. The man trades what he does whilst the woman trades who she is.
          Seen in this light you can maybe understand why women tend to turn debates into discussions about themselves. At a core level, they are programmed to self promote because ‘themselves’ is what they have to trade.
          It can be frustrating and as men we often get pulled into their frame and start discussing THEM, rather than the issue at hand – which was their (often unconscious) intention all along.
          ‘Guest’ is no different, but she does deserve props for at least (so far) resisting the use of over emotional shaming language. As a consequence she provides some insights into the female mindset, which is something I find fascinating.

        8. “do you really think we’re so banal that the only reason we invest our souls and the bulk of our young adulthood into learning and achieving is because of some pissing contest with the opposite sex? You are mad to assume this.”
          “Oddly, you admit that you are assuming my intentions while questioning my sanity on a statement I never made..”
          “…i.e. just wanting to prove we can keep up with you?”
          “To reiterate, the above was never suggested.”
          I wonder why someone might be hypersensitive and leap to this conclusion when addressing gentleman on this site…. *sarcasm alert* 😛
          Kudos on a reasonable discourse my friend, by the way.

        9. “Kudos on a reasonable discourse my friend, by the way.”
          Thank you. It is certainly preferable to a [keyboard] shouting match. Have a good evening.

  11. Epilogue: The Wife of Noble Character
    10 [b]A wife of noble character who can find?
    She is worth far more than rubies.
    11 Her husband has full confidence in her
    and lacks nothing of value.
    12 She brings him good, not harm,
    all the days of her life.
    13 She selects wool and flax
    and works with eager hands.
    14 She is like the merchant ships,
    bringing her food from afar.
    15 She gets up while it is still night;
    she provides food for her family
    and portions for her female servants.
    16 She considers a field and buys it;
    out of her earnings she plants a vineyard.
    17 She sets about her work vigorously;
    her arms are strong for her tasks.
    18 She sees that her trading is profitable,
    and her lamp does not go out at night.
    19 In her hand she holds the distaff
    and grasps the spindle with her fingers.
    20 She opens her arms to the poor
    and extends her hands to the needy.
    21 When it snows, she has no fear for her household;
    for all of them are clothed in scarlet.
    22 She makes coverings for her bed;
    she is clothed in fine linen and purple.
    23 Her husband is respected at the city gate,
    where he takes his seat among the elders of the land.
    24 She makes linen garments and sells them,
    and supplies the merchants with sashes.
    25 She is clothed with strength and dignity;
    she can laugh at the days to come.
    26 She speaks with wisdom,
    and faithful instruction is on her tongue.
    27 She watches over the affairs of her household
    and does not eat the bread of idleness.
    28 Her children arise and call her blessed;
    her husband also, and he praises her:
    29 “Many women do noble things,
    but you surpass them all.”
    30 Charm is deceptive, and beauty is fleeting;
    but a woman who fears the Lord is to be praised.
    31 Honor her for all that her hands have done,
    and let her works bring her praise at the city gate.

  12. Thank you for taking the time to write about one of my favorite pieces of Classical literature.
    I encourage those interested to read the work in its entirety, otherwise you will miss out on the humorous and ironic ribbing of Ischomachus, Critoboulus, and [obliquely] Aristophanes. Also, if you neglect the rest of the work, you will be missing out on quite the education in what it means to become the “perfect gentleman,” or rather the “fine and good man.”
    I hope I’m not anticipating your next article by mentioning this here Blair Naso, but one of the prominent ironies in this work, which should be kept in mind the entire time one reads it, is that Ischomachus’ wife scandalously destroyed her family and its reputation by defiantly carrying on a love affair with her son-in-law (reminiscent of Euripides’ Phaedra in the “Hippolytus.”)
    The question should always be asked, “can virtue be taught?” In other words, we should wonder if Ischomachus was able to teach his wife much of anything at all, or if it was rather his presence, bearing, power, etc. that merely controlled her at any given time. This relates back to the original conversation-within-a-conversation, which was between Socrates and Critoboulus. It seems that Crito–the father of Critoboulus–wanted Socrates to inspire some diligence and prudence in the impulsive and negligent Critoboulus, hence the “Oeconomicus,” and some of its humor.
    Alternatively, we are presented with the humorous response of a Xenophon to the comedy of Aristophanes (which places Socrates’ head squarely in “The Clouds”). What kind of a man could be called “detached” or “too abstract” who deigns to learn from another reputable–and above all practical–man?
    This is THE Socratic discourse, which involves Socrates as the student–one who learns from a teacher. Repeat that last sentence for emphasis.
    Ischomachus, don’t you know, had a reputation for being the “perfect gentleman” before Socrates sought him out. Ischomachus teaches what it is to become a good farmer, a good husband, a gentleman or “fine and good man,” a teacher, a good household manager, and finally a man who practices the Kingly Art.
    Kingliness, in the end, is what we’re pushing towards. What is the Kingly Art? What does it mean to be a King? The question, I think, is a pressing concern for the readers of this site (myself included).
    This moment for Socrates can even be thought of as a turning point, wherein he confirms political philosophy as a distinct and more pressing concern than philosophy merely.
    There’s much to uncover here. The Agora Edition is fantastic (for those of you who enjoy physical copies). In addition, you will be rewarded with Xenophon’s “Apology of Socrates” and his “Symposium.” If you’re excited about these things, then stick with Agora and round out your collection with Xenophon’s “Memorabilia” (another favorite of mine), his “Cyropaedia,” and his “Anabasis.” If you keep going, then check out the Landmark Xenophon for his “Hellenika,” but I would honestly recommend the Landmark Thucydides instead.

    1. She cheats on him!?! Just killed the article.
      Although books 7-10 is all about when they were newly married and the advice he gives then, so it’s probably inconsequential.
      Good insights, Admetus (not sarcasm).

      1. Well, maybe I should have clarified that point. I don’t think she cheated on him, but after his death she moved in with her daughter and son-in-law–the infamous Callias–and ultimately ended up bearing his son. The scandal was well known and the family became a point of public ridicule in Athens. The shame ultimately caused Ischomachus’ daughter to make a suicide attempt.

  13. Okay, so: nurturing, able to admit shortcomings, capable of taking care of a house, and able to teach femininity to the next generation.
    Just those 4 things are needed for a good wife, anything else?

  14. Finally another angle to women on this website besides the usual “all women are worthless whores that don’t deserve marriage” or “female nature is why they are so fucked up” nonsense we here all the time around here. We all know that women have some value to them, which is why we talk about them all the time. Of course modern western women are lunatics but in the modern world with advance technology that creates this artificial environment so how women behave in this artificial environment can’t be due to “female nature”. MGTOW would have a different view of women if they knew how women were in the past because it is nothing like how women behave today. Which is why I’m not an MGTOW, i haven’t given up entirely on women yet.

  15. If one were to suppose which group has this problem worse? Is it racial? This problem is confined to the White race but not to non-Whites? It is economic? The middle-class and wealthy have this problem but not the poor, working class and, especially, immigrants?
    While some here play the “the next generation is lost because we can’t connect with women” other groups of people are making babies in their fertile primes and wonder what all the fuss is about. Certainly whatever group has this disconnect problem will become genetically extinct.

    1. The white race became so successful, safe, and comfortable compared to anyone else that white women have become unbearable cunts detached from valuing hard work and accepting consequences for their choices. Given the economy keeps tanking for millennials, they will learn the hard way

  16. “Odd how for a woman to pursue her dreams, a man has to give up his.”
    That’s a good quote for men to learn

  17. I’d rather “become a lonely old bachelor who stares at the check-out girl in a grocery store” than marry a modern Western woman.

  18. the Bible has a similar instruction – titus 2:3-5 – Likewise, let the older women be reverent in behavior, not slanderous, not enslaved to a lot of wine, teachers of what is good, 4 so that they may advise the younger women to love their husbands, to love their children, 5 to be sound in mind, chaste, working at home, good, subjecting themselves to their own husbands, so that the word of God may not be spoken of abusively.
    – women today do not see the value of learning from older decent women – mistakes are amplified and relationships sundered.

    1. The Bible is full of. Things telling women to obey. The mangina pastors won’t say them though. He can’t anger his biggest donors.

  19. Every society that has allowed women to have more. Money and status than men has fallen. Women will not marry down and they are hypergamous. The ancients knew this. Fact. . A society with emasculated and poor men who can’t or. Won’t start families is doomed. Feminists have destroyed men and society is going to fall as a result.

  20. But in fairness, I get the impression that many men on these sites
    secretly wish for a marriageable woman but just can’t place that much
    faith in the modern woman

    I don’t think the issue is so much that men don’t want a woman around or to be married, it is that marriage carries with it such risks of ruin it is difficult to justify.

Comments are closed.