It wasn’t until my siblings and I were fully grown that I realized the necessity of investing in your sons. I come from a family of three children, with me being that last in line with two older sisters. Growing up, I’d like to think that we were all raised rather fairly, without too much favoritism towards any one of us in particular.
But like most families, much of the preparation for raising children to become adults starts with the oldest child, and then down to the others. By the time both of my sisters had started college and had strained my parents financially, it was my turn to go to school and there wasn’t much help my parents could offer anymore; I had to work and pay for myself.
Now, I don’t want this to come off as a sob story; “Oh, poor me who had to pay for my own education!” But the results of the money my parents invested in my sisters first compared to their outcomes in life really struck me as to why it is important to invest in your son’s endeavors.
A Case Study
My oldest sister, the star child of the group with straight As throughout school, ultimately ended up getting a degree in journalism (no surprise in today’s climate) and has spent the last decade bouncing between odd jobs. By the saving grace of her recent fiancée (an engineer), she now lives comfortably doing whatever she pleases as he works as the breadwinner.
The thousands of dollars that went to her education have ultimately become a waste, and she seems to not have a care in the world about it. She recently lamented that she was “bored with life;” Oh, how hard it must be to have a man taking care of all of your bills while you sit around the house and aren’t out on the streets.
My next sister was the wild child. We were all surprised when she chose to go to college, but in the typical female-child mentality, she decided to get a degree in fashion design. Somewhere down the line, she became a repulsive hairy-armpit overweight vegan, and I shit you not, she now works as a vet tech taking care of cats. Obviously she had no backup plan when her dreams of being a fashionista were doomed to fail.
It happened to my sister. It can happen to your daughters too.
I guess the point is, it doesn’t matter what your daughters are going to do. The wild child is ultimately going to end up making poor choices and failing you as a parent, and even your little princess with the most promise will ultimately end up marrying a man who will turn her into a housewife anyway.
So this is why you should invest in your sons. I worked to save money, I learned two different languages, I paid for my own college education (international business), and I’ve spent the last five years living in both Tokyo, Japan and Seoul, South Korea while visiting another dozen countries to boot.
I can only wonder how much easier this process of getting to where I want in life would have been if only my parents had the foresight to understand how their daughters would turn out. Invest in your sons. They’ll get educations, they’ll open businesses, they’ll create wealth for themselves and travel and live the life of men with the world in the palm of their hands. Your daughters will become housewives at best, cat ladies at worst.
Read More: Sons & Lovers
Forethought, planning, budgeting, saving – how does all this help me receive instant gratification?
Were you listening to Dylan’s story? So you have no frame of reference here, Gundog. You’re like a child who wanders into the middle of a movie and wants to know…
He’s out of his league.
I like your style dude.
OVER THE LINE!!!!
He can instantly gain that gratification the moment he follows a budget plan and saves up money to fulfill it!
My son is building a computer system. New project of his. He came to me last week and asked my advice on motherboards, processors and help in finding the best values. My only question was “What budget do you have to work with” and he told me, and we went from there. He has purchased the motherboard and is now awaiting his next paycheque to purchase a CPU and a case. After that, memory and hard drive(s). Then power supply and video card, monitor, keyboard, speakers. He figures it will take two months all said and done, as he wants a really nice custom system. Never once asked for a dime of help, nor was any offered, he simply wanted straight advice on the best technical specs for price.
A Millenial. He so does not fit in with his peer group. heh
Mother. Boards. Heh. Heh. Heh…
Corrected, thanks. I have what the Germans refer to as “the English disease”, which is separating compound words necessarily.
I just hope he is not watching porn and playing video games all day. Most young fellas customize PC’s to fulfill a need that most parents have no idea.
You are essentially demonstrating to us, that despite your perceived lack of parental investment, you can turn out a well learned, traveled person.
I don’t think boys need ‘investment’ when they grow up, as you seem to exemplify. I can’t help but wonder whether ‘investing in children’ has resulted in the rather poor stock of men we have today. Men of my grandfathers generation who were sent off, essentially forced to be independent at a very young age and were not invested in in the slightest tended to be much more RP in nature than the beta’s we have today.
All in all, however, this reads like a bitter vanity piece.
Not at all. The investment that boys need not always means money, it means time and lessons that must be well learned. Many “betas” today are that way because they were literally raised to be like that. From the cradle where stupid mothers tell their sons that “violence doesn’t solve anything” and instill in them cowardice shrouded in “kindness” and “tolerance” to sitcoms and pop culture that depict all men as emasculated clowns, there are almost no role models. If there was something our forefathers knew that men needed was role models, either saints, heroes or both.
Today the girls, not the boys are subjected to over-investment in all forms, either form parents that think their princess will be a great doctor (hahaha) to NGOs and international aid agencies that strive to create environments where more women than men are educated and work. How has it worked?
He used anecdotes from his family to make broader cultural points. A bit of understandable resentment but it’s hardly a bitter rant. Cheers.
A strong son with investment can become a great man. A strong son without investment can still become a great man, but it’s harder work and easier for him to only rise to mediocrity. A strong daughter usually becomes little more than trouble and a career girl feminist, and we frankly have way too many of them these days.
I don’t disagree with you at all on your comment on women, what I do take umbrage with is your suggestion that a strong son without investment would more easily rise to mediocrity.
I honestly think the son who has to work his ass off to get by is less likely to rise only to mediocrity than the son who has his college education and other such things completely paid for. That’s just my opinion though.
Don’t confuse investment and help with providing him with a free ride. Free rides rarely turn out well for any parties involved.
My son is getting his college tuition and textbooks paid for, but has to pay his own car insurance, gasoline, rent, food and extracurricular money from his own funds. A half and half deal where he still has to work for his own basic needs. Since he’s had a job since the age of 16 he doesn’t even blink at this. To ruin him I would have given him a free Daddy’s Money pass like so many do, and would end up with a son who was easily brainwashed by socialists (since he would have no experience in work and independence) who loathed me and my gift.
And honestly, if you give no help to your son that’s fine, just don’t make a difference and fund Princess Cupcake (your daughter) out of some kind of compassion. If hard work makes for stronger men, so adversity will make for stronger women.
Good point, but don’t discount the fact that you had to work for and earn your education, rather than having it handed to you like your sisters.
I think this was more of a factor than the sex difference to be honest. Children don’t know the value of a dollar until they get a job, work 20 hours, and still can’t afford that pair of jeans that make their butts look slightly less whale-like. Women often don’t learn even at this point thanks to all their orbiter freebies.
Dylan, I bet your parents knew that your sisters were far less resourceful and needed more help and encouragement than you did. Like the parable of the shepherd leaving his flock to find his lost sheep, you can look at it as them doing you a favor. Like you I had to put myself through college, that’s why I know that you appreciate your accomplishments because you earned them all by yourself and no one can take that from you.
That’s sort of the point though; if you have a child who you know can achieve great things even in their own rite, then why not invest in them to make it even better?
The post was to highlight a larger cultural point that simply our sons are more likely to have the propensity to want to succeed, so why not put even more time into fostering that.
It’s like birds in the wild. If they have two weaker, sickly babies and one healthy one, they’ll bet on the healthier one. Could they waste their resources to keep the two sickly ones alive? Sure. Will the healthier one still manage to scrape by with less help because it is being allocated to the sick ones? Possibly. But knowing that the two sickly ones are more likely to be unsuccessful, they take a gamble on the healthier one, regardless of if he has the muster to do things on his own.
I believe the notion of “Well he’s resourceful enough, so he’ll manage on his own” is a passe idea. If you are already able to finance your children’s productivity/education, then you’ve already proven that you have the resources to invest in them. From there, it’s about assessing which are the best to invest in. The article simply attempts to stir some food for thought; If the average female is going to grow up to just be a housewife or ‘artsy-type’ with no skills anyway, maybe it may be more wise to invest in your sons.
Isn’t fat shaming week approaching?
Shame the fatties!
Shame on all the fat bitches that can’t keep their weight in check..
One thing I don’t understand about single mums is although women like masculine men who take the lead (regardless of what feminism says) single mums i’ve known nearly always emascualte their sons an set them up for a life of failure with women. I’ve never understood this, I think it’s been discussed here before but I can’t remember.
It’s because she teaches them how to be good ‘boys’. How she wants a good child to behave. Not how to be a man. And God forbid the little boy’s mother is a feminist. He’ll be able to look forward to a lifetime of shame, scathing resentment, and confusion. Let’s make a toast to our future!
good children behave. GREAT children take initiative.
I wondered about this in the past and can only come up with one reasonable conclusion. Women want to protect their sons from harm, so they instinctively know the evils of women so she raises him in a way that women would find him repulsive like an omega. Then they would leave him alone.
Other explanation is that women are fucked up irrational beings.
That first theory is interesting I never thought of it like that. I just assumed it was coz most women are incapable of admitting to themselves that they like masculine alpha male types or bad boy types because they don’t want to admit it to themselves that they like men who won’t pedestal them, so they they convince themselves to pass those fictitious beliefs of liking beta nice guys onto their sons. Like when women say they want a ‘nice guy’ who puts her on a pedestal but ignores or friend zones all the nice guys.
I actually made that theory up inspired by one of Roosh’s articles in the past about the destruction of men. He says that women are attracted to guys that other women like. So once she wins him over either as a boyfriend or husband, she tries to destroy him by lowering his self esteem and confidence so to make him unattractive to other females. While doing so, she also loses interest in him herself because she herself is a woman. Then she looks for another guy she’s attracted to, dumps the old one, and repeats the process.
Ever hear the girlfriend saying you’re already in great shape? No need to go to the gym. I like you just the way you are bullshit. She’s slowly wearing you down to become a fat slob so you can’t attract another woman. She’ll have you all to herself, which then even she doesn’t want you any more. If a woman ever pulls that shit on you, just say ok. Yes hun, and continue what you were going to do. DO NOT ever do what she says if it knocks you off your game!
That’s interesting an actually makes a lot of sense.
Single mothers get old. When old, they want beta bucks, but can’t attract even a half-decent beta. What better fall back than to twist your son into your own beta provider?
There seems to be no shortage of beta bux providers around though. Most single mums I’ve met still crave aloof alphas.
Yep… all too true..
I’ve been told many times by women that I am ‘too skinny’, or ‘already is good shape’, thus I can stop going to the gym, and stop avoiding dessert and noodles.
These girls want me to hit the peanut M&M’s hard, and get back into the beta-BMI range of 27+.
The last thing a woman wants is her beta to become an alpha.
It is driven by fear of abandonment. Women suffer greatly from this, likely from pre-evolutionary times. If the man left his woman for another, likely the mother and her children would die. So she will do whatever she can to keep you even though it is irrational.
Heartiste tells us to always keep enough dread of you leaving on the back burner and I completely agree.
Dread game good. Upvoted
Have you noticed that very few single moms past age 30 ever remarry (especially if they have kids, doubly so if they have BRATTY kids), and the few that do end up yoking themselves to the weakest fucking men ever. These guys will say too that they “love” her kids but you can tell it’s an act and that they actually pretty much can’t stand the kids.
There are so many damn betas out there, just like you said, and they will take whatever shit they can get even if it means settling into a situation with a coupla rug rats they have contempt for, being that they aren’t actually his kids. I saw this in my stepfather, I saw it in my own father when he re-married, and I see it in the gamma-boy my ex wife has been living with for 3 years now, and his shit attitude towards my boys (thank God they live with me).
I have noticed that.
women raise babies. not toddlers, not girls, not boys, not preteens, not teenagers, not young adults. just babies. they treat and raise all the same, it’s just that daughters emulate mothers, don’t get punished, and get terrifically rewarded for shitting everywhere. whereas sons emulate mothers, get punished, and obviously don’t get rewarded for infantile indoctrination. no need to make it any more complicated: they only raise themselves in others. as most do. if it happens to be the wrong sex to exploit terrible behavior, oh well, there is no other world in their heads but their own to preach.
rare it would be, the mother that raised a son, much less raised them to be steered out of ‘harms way’. rare would it be too, the mother that raises without some ration/reason below that of the emotional strong-winds of feminism. so women do raise, or attempt to raise, sons, moreso by raising baby daughters, like they do for everyone and everything. baby-speak is applied to all animals under their care.
“Women want to protect their sons from harm, so they instinctively know the evils of women so she raises him in a way that women would find him repulsive like an omega. Then they would leave him alone.”
There’s more than some truth in this.
Have you ever seen an overpowering Mother destroy and emasculate her Son in public?
I have numerous times. A relative of mine still has her 2 sons living at home well into their 40s.
The reasons why single moms do this stem from biology and the deficiencies of a one-parent system.
Children need nurturing, but they also need an authority figure to instill discipline. With two parents, the mother can be the nurturer, while the father can be the authoritarian.
Children are inclined to look to their mothers for nurturing, which means that they are disinclined to respect their mothers as authoritarians. Single mothers, having no one else to fill the authoritarian role, try to do so themselves. The results are:
a) The single mother gives up trying to be an authoritarian and falls back on her nurturing instincts, coddling and spoiling the child.
b) The single mother strives to affect the same results as the authoritarian, but without adopting the masculine approach of the authoritarian. She values her femininity, and so she tries to control her child’s behavior with traditional feminine tools like emotional manipulation and the withholding of affection.
c) The single mother embraces the masculine approach of the authoritarian. Because the child is still disinclined to accept her as an authoritarian figure, she needs to command the child’s respect through force, employing verbal and physical abuse.
Scenarios b) and c) prime a boy to grow up with an unresolved Oedipus complex, always worried about that a woman will take away her affection, or afraid that she will hurt him if he can’t make her happy. This is an express ticket to beta town.
I see a few single Mums every morning on the school run.
Nice people on an individual level – yet all of them failing to control their boys. This stereotype is 100% true
And for some reason, for single mums, they always seem to have boys. It’s like a cruel coincidence
It’s hard to for a woman that’s five feet nothing, that has a son who is anywhere from 6 to 6’4 200lbs to control him.
They can’t control 6 year olds
When those kids are 16 years old, 6 feet tall and 180 pounds they stand no chance of controlling them. The sad irony is, if the Dad is some alpha type who fucked off then the chances are the son will have inherited his physically strong characteristics.
Throw in a “learning disability” and the West’s habit of trying to manipulate behaviour with drugs, and you’ve got serious issues.
It’s at that point the single Mum gets depressed, starts drinking wine in the morning and begins her cougar era .
I pity the beta that takes THAT on
It’s not the boy’s fault.
“Throw in a “learning disability” and the West’s habit of trying to manipulate behaviour with drugs, and you’ve got serious issues.”
Yes, sadly, yes.
Didn’t say it was.
That would be some serious labor.
Sorry, I disagree. It’s not physical size.
It has to do with inner resolve, body language, and tone.
They often can’t control kids a foot shorter than themselves.
In short, a woman has no authority. Common knowledge.
Great breakdown Jon Socrates.This may just be me, but I like things specifically defined & get confused when people talk about ‘single mothers’. For me, ‘single mothers’ are never married women with children from ‘who knows’ despite the fact that she has access to more than a dozen reliable methods of birth control, many free at the local health clinic. Then there are ‘divorced mothers’, some of whom deliberately drove their children’s father from their daily life for often trivial reasons. Lastly would be ‘widowed mothers’ & of course, no one can predict or prevent that eventuality. This may be of no consequence to some & likely has small bearing on the effect on the children, but it certainly helps me to know which of these categories I’m dealing with.
The scenarios I described would apply in the absence of a father authority. However, the presence of a father authority can vary, even in cases of widowhood.
1) Most never-married mothers raise their children without the presence of a father authority. Even if the father (in a biological sense) spends some time with his child, he does not fulfill the role of authoritarian. The scenarios I described in my earlier post would apply.
2) In divorce, mothers are put in charge of their children and their children’s lives. The father is stripped of his authority. If at the time of divorce a child is very mature (almost an adult, in both a legal and a psychological sense), then the father’s authority would have been internalized, enduring despite changes to the child’s environment. Most children at the time of divorce are not this mature, and so the father’s authority is neutered.
Rarely, some women are more cooperative in divorce, and so they accept and support their ex-husbands having some real authority in their children’s live. Sometimes children have a very close relationship with their fathers and are especially receptive to their father’s authority, despite the best efforts of their mothers. This, too, is uncommon.
3) Widowhood would allow for many of the trappings of the divorce scenario. However, if a child had a good relationship with his father, and if the mother loved and respected the father, then the father can still be a source of authority. The memory of the father can be invoked by the mother (“your father would be proud of you for doing X, your father wouldn’t want you to do Y…”). Additionally, the father could still serve as an inspiration, especially to his son.
We’ve foolishly prioritized the desires of adults above the needs of children for the past few decades…the suffering is inevitable, it’s crippled our civilization.
“dozen reliable methods of birth control, many free ay the local health clinic.”
They scream for free birth control, but never use it. Except convenient abortion.
I come from the second camp. A lot of stuff my father told me (May peace be upon him.) Make so much sense now and a lot of the things my mom told me don’t add up at all.
This should be an article itself
The single moms I see these days are selfish, twisted, hostile, mentally diseased victims. My daughter’s so called “mom” is one of them and her grandmother toes the fucking line against male involvement in the family.
I’ve noticed that women who separate or divorce from their child’s father usually have a relationship with their mothers who are usually man haters.
You know what’s worse? A single mum with the worst traits of feminine and masculine quality. She can act in an authoritarian way and be controlling without a regard for feelings of others yet when it comes to arguments, she is manipulative and inconsistent with logics. Arguing with someone like her makes you want to avoid the confrontation as much as you can.
Splendid analysis. As a single (widowed) father, and observer of mothers all around me, I wholeheartedly agree.
I don’t get why women don’t just find their sons a positive male role model? Enroll him in sailing lessons, fishing, martial arts. Somewhere with a positive male influence if there is no father in the picture or even if dad is some beta provider.
They don’t know the meaning of the word “positive”. They lack foresight. In particular, if it is for something greater than themselves, they blindly follow the herd.
They know the man who can make them tingle, and they know the man who they can manipulate to extract some benefit from – that is all.
In their minds, it’s all about… guess who? Not the child. The child is just another pawn in their game.
This is merely the failure of the father. A mother will always seek to mollycoddle her son because she knows instrinsically he is at greater risk of a violent death. She wants to protect him from the World. This is fine until he is about 5 years old but then it is time for him to learn to be a man.
A man who leaves a wake of bastard sons is no man at all.
Makes sense but by bringing a man up emasculated she’s putting him at more harm.
In the long run yeh.
In the short-term she’s protecting him from mostly minor risks.
In the long-term she’s condemning him to a life of beta hell.
More harm psychologically when he grows older.
Women have no idea what boys/men go through growing up. We usually do not have things handed to us just smiling and acting cute. We don’t get away with doing stupid shit like girls do. We have to earn things through hard work and discipline.
Which is why fathers should not abandon their children AND they should stop being betas in the household.
“Women have no idea what boys/men go through growing up”.
This is exactly it. The glaringly obvious truth that should form the basis of government policy.
Women have literally no idea about the male experience. Even good women think it’s basically OK to withdraw manly activities like football or rugby and replace them with friendly non-sports like weird netball-type games you see played in school.
They don’t get that males validate ourselves through physical competition. We feel good winning, overcoming odds, succeeding as the underdogs etc.
Why the fuck do they think films like Rocky are so popular?!!
It’s the same in the workplace. Women value repetition, procedures etc. Men value innovation and goals achieved.
It’s really that simple
Yet look at all these women attention whore-posturing about how much they love pro football (in other words, they love eating and drinking the goods males provide them on gameday while never looking up from their iPhone during the game and autopilot cheering when everybody else cheers too). Funny, isn’t it?
I agree. This is why raising a child requires both a mother and a father. Single motherhood is an unreserved crime.
Penis envy, or worse yet “being one of the guys”
Disgusting. Any time a girl arrogantly and smugly says “I’m like one of the guys” or “I’m a tomboy” I always assholishly say either “Oh yeah, that’s so attractive!” or “Wow, girl of my dreams!” or “Yeah, describe yourself with something that has ‘boy’ in it, I want you so bad right now!”
I have my own series of automatic asshole lines at the ready to fire back with whenever they say one of their predictable platitudes.
The issue here is that women are often emasculating their sons because they are rebelling against their husband/boyfriend or ex husband/boyfriend. What they want is a young man that they can easily control and when their sons grow up to be softies, they can blame the man and say that he did not do this or that. This is why you have to put your sons in tough sports like wrestling, football and different martial arts so they naturally toughen up. It is an unfortunate battle but often times the mother of your son is sumbliminally working against you.
The Hagakure had it right
There is a way of bringing up the child of a samurai. From the time of infancy one should encourage bravery and
avoid trivially frightening or teasing the child. If a person is affected by cowardice as a child, it remains a lifetime
scar. It is a mistake for parents to thoughtlessly make their children dread lightning, or to have them not go into dark
places, or to tell them frightening things in order to stop them from crying .
Furthermore, a child will become timid if he is scolded severely.
One should not allow bad habits to form. After a bad habit is ingrained, although you admonish the child he will not
improve. As for such things as proper speaking and good manners, gradually make the child aware of them. Let him
not know avarice. Other than that, if he is of a normal nature, he should develop well by the way he is brought up.
Moreover, the child of parents who have a bad relationship will be unfilial. This is natural. Even the birds and beasts
are affected by what they are used to seeing and hearing from the time they are born. Also, the relationship between
father and child may deteriorate because of a mother’s foolishness. A mother loves her child above all things, and will
be partial to the child that is corrected by his father. If she becomes the child’s ally, there will be discord between
father and son. Because of the shallowness of her mind, a woman sees the child as her support in old age.
This… is brilliant!
I suggest every man read this book. Red Pill or any other color. Samurai (the real fastidious ones) had an Iron code and that shit really can apply today.
This is true. Im such a failure myself although im hoping to learn. (My mom raised be to be a beta)
Single moms are such a God-awful waste of time anyway.
Agreed. Gets you thinking like back in the day,girls were learning to be good mothers at home while the sons went to school.
But a big one should be, is to remove useless degrees and subjects in college, may as well be an online course book to learn for free.
Yep. Education in college and in schools should not be stupid things taught nowadays by leftist teachers.
indeed. it’s been said that women’s studies is: “where girls go to a room where they repeat what they already believe in a deeper voice.
totally,idealogy should be leanrt at home and online debates. college should be a place to get employable or tangible skills and facts.
Secretarial courses for males are a complete shame.
How the fuck do you become an overweight vegan?
Do not forget to invest in your daughters. Not money so much, but time teaching them responsibility.
Investing in sons is a smart thing. They will be the ones who help maintain your financial stability when you start to click out.
Investing time in your daughter’s upbringing may just save her future / life. Oh, and it might just save yours as well. Properly raised your daughters will be the ones that care for your emotional needs.
“How the fuck do you become an overweight vegan?”
My guess would be through a combination of eating lots of refined carbohydrates and not exercising.
As well as eating highly processed vegetable frankenstein foods like Quorn, and all those re-formed soy meals.
All kids should learn responsibility though.
Props to that, but people more naturally teach their sons that than their daughters.
Vegan desserts are quite a popular thing. Also due to a lack of variety, many are reduced to eating high carb/starch stuff like rice, beans, and grains for meals with any sustenance all the time (fruits and veggies only get you so far). It’s totally possible to be a fat vegan.
Guess I’ve never really met one. By te gods, to eat so shitty while not even eating fatty meats is astounding. An astounding lack of self control.
once my sister started being a vegetarian she balooned up to almost 200 lbs. she was 12.
vegan food contains a lot of carbohydrates and your body spends less fat energy processing it and has less material to produce muscle bone or anything else besides fat.
and all she ever ate was bread and veggie burgers and rarely any actual vegetables and NEVER tofu or any type of meat substitute.
here me my dad and my mom were eating delicious meaty delights and she was eating a wet floppy veggie burger.
“and she was turning into a wet floppy veggie burger (that smelled like old salami and cheese).”
There, fixed it for you, pal.
It’s worse when you consider the difficulty in getting balanced nutrients on a plant-matter diet. Lacking certain proteins, essential metals, and vitamins, the body develops cravings designed to satisfy the requirements. Because the vegetarian has limited the scope of possible nutrient sources, this often results in excessive calorie intake.
it could have been much worse. I’m surprised she doesn’t have scurvy. she was still growing after all. she still had the occasional scrambled egg, but it was mostly bread noodles and starch. she does eat meat now however.
if you’re going to be vegetarian at least eat some vegetables.
most vegetarian food is empty calories. it is not good to build any type of healthy body on.
My cousin, nor most of the women I’ve met, had that problem.
My cousin started because of the whole “meat is murder” tripe at 13. Something about that age I guess. She did stop for a bit in her late teens, but was a vegetarian again before 22. She doesn’t foist this on her hubby and kids, thank goodness.
She’s never weighed more than 130lbs at 5’8″, and is only 120lbs now (after 5 kids!) soaking wet. She did not fark up like your sister, she ate tons of veggies, very little bread, some fruit, plus almond & peanut butter / tofu / seitan / et al. Of course she needed to work out, and eat a good amount of protein to have decent muscle tone, as she was on the college rowing team.
Being a vegetarian can work I guess. Not my cup of tea, but whatever, shes healthy.
130 lbs is a healthy weight for a woman. Anything over 145 lbs at 5’8 is fat for a woman imo.
Amen
Sad but true.
My 16yo niece because a vege about 2 years ago, and has ballooned up terribly.
She is under the foolish idea that a plate of white pasta, covered in melted cheese, (and a glass of commercial OJ on the side), is heathy.
I’ve told her many times about the dangers of vegetarian food, but she reads so much trash on lifeftyle blogs and girls magazines.
Nearly all the women I’ve who are vegetarian or vegan are skinny but they were eating fruits, vegetables, nuts, tofu an rice mainly, having said that they were mostly non drinkers an into excercise too. Eating just pasta an bread an many of the meat alternatives will balloon a person up though.
and they hardly get any zinc in their diets bc the primary source is meat/shellfish. low zinc linked to cognitive problems.
low zinc for males is even worse; its linked to low testosterone.
She is too lazy to take the time to prepare a decent vege meal.
Easier to just stick the pasta on the stove and come back in 10 mins and eat it.
There’s a difference in ‘pre-packaged processed’ vegan & whole food actual balanced meal vegan. The first is more a fashion trend to impress.
Sugar and flour are both vegan. Just saying.
I’ve known a lot of fat vegan/vegetarian girls too…and some of the skinny ones were bulimic. WAY too many carbs & all of them I knew had a serious sweet tooth.
Sugar. Lots and lots of sugar.
That why here in Africa sons inherit all the shit. Son are also the ones carrying the fathers name.
Sound advice. Invest in the sons of the West’s nations. Nobody is going anywhere good without them. It’s advice that’s exactly opposite to American policy the past four decades.
Congrats on cat-lady pic. One like this came up to me in a store recently, obviously crazed from years of ’empowerment’ and yammering just to get my attention for five seconds. The desperate fruit of feminism.
I think the cat with the cone on its head is waving for help? He has that “She made me sign the confession” look on his face. So you people out there who love animals, pls consider adopting this cat. Let’s not punish critters for the psychopathy of modern liberated women. Free little Freddie!
Cheers.
” He has that “She made me sign the confession” look on his face.” ”
Sir, best line of the week, where’s the ‘upvote 1000’ button when someone deserves it…
The one on the right has gone limp and resigned its fate. So he’s out.
But Freddie is waving us down, his little mouth open shouting Help. Me. PLEASE.
Let’s find him a good home and lose the cone. Change and Hope [formerly “Hope and Change”] has to start somewhere. Maybe we can open a PayPal account for him?
Thanks for caring. Free Freddie!
Next time we see that picture, it better have a “Donate” button on it.
Cats feces contain a parasite that causes mental illness. Don’t keep then in your home. Cats are meant to be kept outside to keep rodents out of the gardens and the animal feed.
A mental illness that affects rodents, making them attracted to cats. If you have cats to keep down rodents, you draw in more rodents and maybe break even.
The whole thing is just one big cat scam.
Dunno about cat poop but the outdoor/indoor cats generally appeared healthiest, if occasionally a little beat-up.
I don’t have a lot of stock feed to protect :O) but keeping rodents out of the garden seems wise. Cheers.
I wonder if behind the feminist revolution, behind govt and media and school zombification, is a cat conspiracy. . . bunch of them meeting at night behind garbage cans, oh yeah, this feminist thing is working out great! Keep it up, ten of us have the run of the whole house! We push her out of her bed at night!
Who has benefitted more than felines? Kibble for thought. The REAL cat-scam.
Cheers.
lol
true, cats are shit.I prefer dogs 1000 times
Yeah, those cats looks pretty depressed about how their life has panned out.
Chances are that cone-head cat is a male, and the feminist owner collared his head to stop him licking his Johnson, thus denying him the only source of pleasure in his miserable world. Poor little fucker may as well be married.
make 99$ hourly@40:
you
Can Find Out HERE,
►►►► >>::http:.//CareersFullProviders..com…<<<
Someone block this fool.
He is spamming every comment with this shit
Dude… that’s just how its starts…
The article is pretty much what the author says it wasn’t: a sob story.
He might have been on to something with an article about the value of accountability and hard work in his own life. That would have been interesting and powerful enough on its own without throwing his sisters (and, by association, all women) under the bus. Leave that sort of thing to the SJWs.
It isn’t. I’ve made my own successes and I’m fine with that.
What I had hoped to get across was simply begging the question; What is wrong with investing in your sons when in all reality, it is they who will have the greatest ability to go on and do great things?
I used my sisters as examples because they’re a perfect representation. One on hand you’ve got the summa cum laude graduate who was ultimately made a housewife. On the other hand you’ve got the crazy cat lady. Opposite sides of the spectrum, same results. No noteworthy accomplishments to their names.
I can’t help but think of the young boys who we constantly tell to man up, and how our generation is turning into a bunch of blue pill pussies. Yet at the same time, we don’t throw them any ropes. I don’t care that my great grandfather worked on a road that helped commuters in the town; good for him for doing that, but that time is over. The boys of today will never be able to go back and do those same things that built the backbone of America. But the best we can do now is use those roads to get these boys to libraries and schools where they can learn and succeed.
Does this mean I’m saying “Ah, all women should go back to the kitchens, and schools are for men!” ? No. But if I know my daughter wants to be a hair stylist and my son wants to be a professor or astronaut or businessman, I’m not so sure if I could hold back my bias on where more of my money goes, at least initially.
.
Two anecdotal and biased samples don’t make much of a spectrum. The women in my family are educated and work full time professional careers even as they raise children. That’s true of most middle and working class, two-parent households. The role of housewife is one that usually only upper-middle to upper-class households can sustain without hardship or frugality.
For the middle class to stop shrinking, it is going to take families with strong men and women. Not one or the other.
But I totally agree that the last thing we need are more blue pill pussies. I’m just saying that men can and should rise above the status they’ve to which they’ve been reduced without needing women to subsequently fall. That just continues the cycle that produced the initial cycle of disaffected and embittered feminists that caused this mess.
And, considering that the same harridans occupy so much of the academic realm, women need present, invested parents who to provide a counterbalance to that influence as they pursue meaningful education.
It’s a good article and not a sob story.
I would suggest you get back onto the USS Reliant and head into the nebula.
This is common sense that’s not so common!
The wild child is ultimately going to end up making poor choices and failing you as a parent,
If my own family is any indication, if the wild child is a son, he may end up actually being more successful than average due to a carefree attitude, being willing to take risks, etc.. But wild daughters, yeah, probably nothing but trouble.
Yep – just banging druggo cocks, or becoming the groupie for the local pub band. Getting tatts and piercings, and making herself as unattractive as possible for 99% of ‘decent’ (read:Beta), men.
Well thanks to the major cunto-rama America has become I don’t have any kids.
At least “they” will never be able to call me and say “OK we’re at the school where your kids are. Turn in your guns that were outlawed last month or protected services will take them”.
I checked out of having kids a while back, this world is becoming to fucked up for my liking to bring kids into it. Plus the amount of money children cost an the low chance of finding a a decent women who won’t divorce rape you an the ensuing custody battle have further helped me make my choice. Having worked with special needs kids I’m also paranoid of having a child with an intellectual disability, not saying it outta judgment but people don’t know how difficult they can be an the affect some of these kids can have on a parent.
The world has always been too fucked up to bring kids into. We had one idyllic people in the 1950’s that seemed ok, but eventually those kids got shipped to Vietnam. There has never been a truly good time to bring kids into the world. Yet people do it, and we end up doing ok.
Yea there was never a utopia but progressive thinking ( actually counter progressive) feminism, demasculation, an extreme leftist politics, an white shaming has reached critical levels in the West. I feel if I had a kid I’d be constantly trying to un brainwash them from athe media, education system etc. Plus it’s not like there’s an abundance of jobs around in the world.
If you raise a son who is independent minded and with sufficient survival skills the chance of him sitting quietly watching his parents taken hostage are rather slim. Plus he would have his own guns to protect. At least that was my theory in raising my son, heh.
“Protected Services” will face armed revolt and hang from trees if they dare even try that. Mark my words.
Aw man just wish you could have had a word with my parents when I was born. Woulda helped significantly .
OP has a good point. If we want our boys to grow up strong, healthy and ready to take on the world, they need that support. Girls more require guidance and nurturing; to be shown the value of their femininity and their place in the nuclear family so that they more readily reject feminism and come to find a man to serve and submit to.
Its a mans role to seek an alpha and FORCE your daughter to get married to him.That is if you only wish for a genetic upgrade or if you want your offspring to acquire a boost in SMV. Alpha mindset wins in the end.
The world is full of over-educated deadshit women.
Social media studies, online journalism, psychology, arts, law, applied linguistics, and… our old favorite… gender studies.
Even if women worked for 10 years in the relevant field after completing these “qualifications”, then it would still be a massive mis-allocation of resources, given that the vast bulk of these graduates do nothing except make life difficult for other people.
But they don’t. 90% of the women who study this crap, clock out of the workforce after a few years, to nail down some beta, and punch out brats. Thus completely wasting virtually all of the education that has been provided to them by …. the state (male tax dollars), daddy, or husband (who is left paying back her student debts).
Perhaps one of the reasons many western economies around the world are struggling to maintain any kind of GDP growth, is because the majority of university places are being wasted on women, who will inevitably drop our of the workforce to breed.
Sure. And for forty years they’ve received the lioness’ share of valedictorian awards, scholarships, faculty entry positions, internships, on-campus jobs, and preferential status via AA into the outside work force, especially in govt ‘jobs’.
Even the wealthiest empire in history can’t toss away its resources so profligately, and expect a stable and healthy economy over long-term. When the economy of America was dominated by men, it worked, and the culture thrived. Now we’ve got offices full of HR Hags, Sex Harassment Program Presenters, feminist ‘educators’ and endless Equalities Officers and Human Rights Ombudsperson…. things. Doesn’t actually PRODUCE anything, except shame and perhaps submission in the males. It’s empty of trade/productivity generation which is driven by the Specialists and the Doers of humanity . . . men. Duh + Uh. Waste university spots on daddy’s precious princess who’ll keep her fabulous ‘career’ for four or five years, pin on her Feminist Merit Badge at age 32, and marry an established dentist. Meanwhile, the Evil White Males she’s leapfrogged her entire life are playing vid games or stuffing sacks at Safeway. Not exactly a formula for a Boom Economy.
Cheers.
Exactly – offices full to the brim with staff who do not contribute to the actual productivity of the company. They are there to manage, constrain, hire and fire.
Sure, their salary gets counted as GDP, but its not productive in the same was as someone who creates something that has utility beyond its own creation.
Consider the extreme example where 99% of university grads are female. What would happen ?
Aside from the issue that a lot of university is bullshit, and men are better off learning a trade, there are still some degrees worth having. Engineering, teaching, construction, medicine, dentistry, maths, science..etc.
What would happen to the collective progress of mankind if 99% of these degrees were awarded to women, who would inevitably quit these fields after several years to shack up with a beta and have brats.
Within 20 years, after all the men have retired (after 30 years of work in that field), you would have a situation there the majoirty of workers are only in that field for 7-10 years, the workforce would decline, and the turnover would be huge. What would be the effects of this ?
Most breakthroughs come from patience and knowledge and experiece that is generated from decades of research and learning. Kiss all that goodbye.
In addition, the stark lack of achievements by females in any STEM related discipline in the past reflect the fact that men are the thinkers who make these breakthroughs possible. Women may parrot back the textbooks, but they fail to apply this to new and novel technologies. So kiss more progress good bye.
I’m sure you can all see where this is heading.
While 99% is a number that would never be reached, the extreme situation demonstates the truth of a small increment.
In summary. Pushing vast numbers of women into university is the greatest waste of educational resources of the last 50 years.
You will be surprised that most females give no shit about career, all they care is alpha cock in their early 20’s and guys who have more money than alphas ( beta bucks), most males have a hard time swallowing the redpill. FEMALES ARE HYPERGAMOUS, they give no crap about male hardwork, Males are tools just to enable their hypergamous instincts.
Invest in your sons. I support this. Although if you have daughters first I can see saving the education money for the first son only to be a tough sell (to your wife).
That said, most education, outside of a (British) private or Public school is bullshit. So either send the son only to a private school or make it your mission to educate him yourself.
Public High Schools are nothing more than a giant day care center.
Yes which I mentioned British Public Schools. Not at all the same thing.
I wasnt trying to argue with you about that.
Yes which is why I mentioned British Public schools. Not at all the same thing.
My Only hope is that the father gives shit about his sons. Most fathers are dysfunctional.Being the first born i needed great advice and direction from my father only for him to neglect my ass till i finished campus.I sometimes suspect am not his son.
What business is it of the wifes anyway?? The fuck if my wife has any input in regards to the expectations I have for my children. My daughters are punished if they play with academic toys and their brothers have full permission to spank the fuck out of their sisters if they catch them playing with their chemistry sets, reading their books, playing their video games etc. The girls can politely help their mother in the kitchen and they can learn to clean the house and play with dolls and essentially master the only roles they have open to them in this life. It is time we harken to the feminists credo and “Man up” the only problem is these cunts aren’t going to like what that entails. I don’t tolerate disobedience under the roof I paid for and neither should any other man in his right fucking mind.
the best thing my father taught me was so invest in myself.
The best thing i learn in LIFE IS NOBODY GIVES SHIT. Your life path is ultimately determined by yourself. The day i learnt that fact i stopped depending on my brother and farther for any support.
RoK gives a shit. that’s why we’re here.
Women don’t have to work, don’t want to work, and shouldn’t be forced to work. Seems to me like women working is what killed the economy and the family. Plus created all these annoying male feminists who think they can apologize their way into getting laid.
Women are not adapted to compete with men; their main adaptation is child rearing, they only work when the men fail to WORK. My mom works alot because my Dad failed to lead the woman. Men need to take charge and women will follow by default.
Only addendum I would add is that women shouldn’t be ALLOWED to work. Other than that, spot on.
I agree, invest in your sons. 100%. Not just monetarily, but also with a correct and good upbringing that teaches him through instruction AND example good masculine traits and habits.
and even your little princess with the most promise will ultimately end
up marrying a man who will turn her into a housewife anyway.
This seems to me to be a great thing, what’s wrong with that outcome? She has “great promise” to turn into another high octane low morality Strong, Independent Career Woman and instead ends up devoting her energies to home and family? Dude, I’d give an awful lot of my time and money if I could guarantee that it would result in all such women making the right choice instead of the feminist choice.
As to sons, there’s an unfortunate tendency to consider strong sons as capable of taking care of themselves and thus receiving financial neglect from their families, while simultaneously giving lots of support to Princess Cupcake who clearly “needs the help, and besides son, we were never worried about you, you’re strong”. Ok, that may not be a bad thing per se, but it does strike me how this difference is made. If a strong daughter exists and a weak son, then Princess Cupcake *still* receives the support with “Well, we know she at least has a shot in life, unlike loser boy there”. At least that I’ve seen, which is not to say that this is some general trait in society.
I believe that the point he was making is that in this case, putting girl#1 and girl#2 through college was a waste of time and money. The degree was certainly not necessary for daughter#1 to be a housewife.
My observation from up here in the cheap seats is that the problem is not so much sons vs daughters, but useful degrees vs. useless ones. Engineering? Here’s the check. Gender Studies? You’re on your own.
When parents stop subsidizing useless degrees, the problem will be at least 75% solved.
Agree.
Parents identify offspring that maximize gender characteristics intrinsically. Stronger males are given priority in feeding whereas feminine females are awarded maximum protection( for the sakes of the species), all humans know this.Males possessing higher IQ are given priority inheritance since Intelligence is a ” special factor”.
Absolutely. Thank you, finally an article that addresses sons, namely, Father-to-Son development. Right now boys, ahem our sons, are under constant assault and are being deliberately targeted by systemic institutionalized sexism in its purest form. Today, feminists will sliver and slime with petulant glee that girls are, apparently, doing better than boys in school and, so it seems, in other walks of life. And, by some of the stats i.e. the college admissions this cannot be denied. BUT, here in the Red Pill community we must have the proper perspective and the explanation for this apparent girl > boy gap is glaringly obvious. Simply, schools have been re-constructed to focus on girls and this is causing massive consequences namely for boys but for everyone. Indeed, using the canard of “equality”, feminists have and continue to insist that everything be re-engineered so they’re the focus and with special emphasis to neglect the boys. The rational is simple and feminists know it best, that if they don’t hold back boys, even with girl-focused programs et al, boys will still outperform. Its not good enough to give a femo-boost, no, they have to cut down the males…its fucking evil and pathetic.
And, beyond the obvious impact on boys consider that a girl-focused education is the kind of environment where common core arises and, literally, were 2+2 = 89302323…so long as it is properly emoted by the student. Pause, for a moment, Orwell used that as a literally device, but, we really truly live in a world, right now, were its been documented that 2+2 doesn’t equal four. ??? Can you see Winston? This is a world were reading ahead is punished, honors dinners are eradicated (and so is recces)…fucking merit itself is being attacked.
Our sons deserve better, this world deserves better and the truth, however inconvenient or politically incorrect, must be allowed to surface. If we normalize the education system, and for that matter everything else, i.e. remove barriers to males and pro-femo focus etc…if we return to teaching practical studies and 2+2 once again can only equal 4, then boys would be doing just fucking fine. Trouble is, they’d be doing better than girls. This is why we say that feminism is based on envy and jealousy.
I think common core has an ulterior motive- to ensure you cannot help your young kids with basic homework, thus creating an earlier than usual disconnect from your kids. the way they are teaching kids basic math is insane to me(and I wouldnt be able to check their work).
We solved this math issue by teaching them the correct way to do math which, properly applied, allows math to be done in the head. Which meant a bit of rote table memorization (oh nooooooes! Rote learning! Sacrilege! Eeeeek!) and then the simplest path to adding, subtraction, multiplication and division. They translated this seamlessly into their idiotic and far too stupidly over-wrought “matrices”.
My science pupils here in Africa are primarily boys ,,Girls don’t give shit to technicality.Girls are more interested in dressing and physical appeal whereas boys have a logical incentive to overcome.Boys care much more about quantum physics whereas females are less astounded. Females think is all propaganda, i focus my logic and attention to males while teaching females give no shit in invention or exploration all they care about is child rearing and communication( read crab theory)
If not, the new crop of Funded ‘Beta Male teachers’ being promoted on the new, improved Twitter will be their main influence:
Which is why she will never ever shit test you by demanding that you tell her why you love her.
“I pay the mortgage.”
“I buy you and our family food.”
“I pay for electricity that keeps the house warm.”
If the fiancee engineer has any sense, he won’t wife the “I’m bored with my life” sister. If he does, it will be as good as putting the noose on his own neck..
If the lady has any sense, she should do something else with her life than just spend her days being “bored with her life”.
That’s the problem of the first world Western women. Hand them an education, a house, a loving mate, and everything else. They’re still dissatisfied.
“You know what women want the most of all? More!” -Dante Nero
Housewife to an alpha man and many quality children is the best a woman can do.
If you are a quality man yourself the best you can do is produce several quality children who you raise yourself (not the goverment, nor the woman alone) and who you teach what you feel is right.
I noticed the difference between class and how they raise their children, both having their pros and cons:
In middle to upper class families, parents are like, what Dr. Wayne Dyer said, “helicopter parents,” always hovering over everything they do. It’s like a micromanagement system.
“Don’t touch that stick, you don’t want to poke your eye out.”
“Don’t run up the slide, you’re going to slip and fall and hurt someone.”
“Stop running in the playground, you don’t want to bump into anyone.”
Always on them, always stifling them and their creativity, reckless abandonment, and development.
The pros are the children live in a safe environment and get all the benefits one from a lower class would not get. Cons: they live in a bubble.
In lower class families, they let their children roam around, whether it’s in the streets or at home. Their affect is almost careless, especially if they have several children to take care of. These kids learn self reliance, knowing that they are going to have to fend for themselves, and they learn to live with reckless abandon, which if fostered in a right way could enhance creativity (but that fails very quickly due to the ignorance of the poor mentality).
Pros: kids do what they want. Cons: careless parenting breeds kids doing what they want with no structure, routine or quality nurture, causing children to be prone to anti social behaviors, breaking rules of the house to breaking laws.
The poor parent, that’s a given that the children will behave in that manner. It’s the middle and upper class whom I dislike their ways of child rearing.
You always figure with class comes wisdom and intelligence, a savvy mind that wanting the highest good of their child. But that “helicopter” parenting makes me want to vomit.
Not a fan of class warfare or class rhetoric.
Upper middle class here. We were not helicopter parents by any stretch. We also were not negligent to the point of allowing the kids to learn wild abandon without restraint.
“Middle class” families used to teach hard work and self reliance as well. We did. Remember, many middle class families are formed by two low class/lower middle class families joining through marriage and then working to have more than they had growing up. Social dynamics are still quite fluid in America, which is why generalizations many times don’t fit.
Because your daughters will live life with bumper guards on all the way till death. They can always fall back on a man, or the government. The opposite most definitely is not true. Men are accountable for their own mistakes AND everyone else’s since their hands are forced to the flames. Both of my older sisters have never faced life altering adversity that could have dropped them a social class, or put their very lives at risk, since their husbands were always there to save them at each snag.
Here here! Coming from a family of 6 kids (2girls me 2 boys and 1 girl) I can see some mistakes my parents made. Overall they did ok. The oldest got married to a hard working man and has 3 kids with one on the way. 2nd was wild child and of course the disappointment. Leaves me and my bros. I got to travel to Brazil and now and in a trade school while the next is currently living in Japan. The boys will definitely make dad proud bc he spent time and money investing in us.
If women get no education and no working skills they will end up living on welfare because sites like this encourage men to not get married… There’s nothing wrong with being a vet tech by the way. It may be a bit harder than being a rich housewife but more interesting. Pets need to be taken care of.
“they will end up living on welfare”
Is that not what they’re doing anyway?
“There’s nothing wrong with being a vet tech by the way.”
What is wrong, in case you missed it, is that she studied to be a *Journalist*
It’s the other sister who studies to be a journalist. The one who is a vet tech studied to be a fashion designer. It’s not just about not working in the field she studied. The article paints vet techs like dumb unattractive desperate girls.
Yes, yes, yes.
Father to son, Father to son. Nurturing your patrilineal line is the most important aspect of ensuing that your family prospers.
Your sons who carry your surnames will go on to achieve great things bearing your surname and the Y-chromosome you endowed them with.
A disturbing aspect of the single mum with boy is the incest-like vibe that can develop when the sexually frustrated woman subconciously treats her son as a her substitute lover.
This article should be called “Don’t invest in your daughters” instead of “Invest in your Sons”.
That works for me 🙂 Only investment a girl’s father needs to make is her dowry and toy stove and a couple of belt whoopings when she mouths off.
You caught onto something great with this article. It reminds me of the discussion in the book THE RED QUEEN, where women are described as safe choices biologically for a couple to have because they are almost guaranteed to reproduce. On the other hand, men are a gamble evolutionarily. Many men in the past didn’t reproduce, and the ones that did often had multiple women.
Investing in sons is a wise decision. You invest in your daughter by selecting an attractive mother to produce her. She only needs her beauty to get by in the world. An emotionally supportive father helps too. But sons need mentorship, and a leg up getting started as they venture out into the world.
That’s too bad to hear about your birth order. But you know what – that shit will make you stronger in the end. If you can find a way to make something of yourself, it will mean that much more. You will be stronger than you ever could have with all of mommy and daddys help. It’s a risk. Get through it and it will pay off.
This is personal to me, especially when I did not grow up with a father figure throughout adulthood.
I wonder if my mother and my maternal clan were proud of raising a potential Norman Bates, which I consciously refuse to become.
Seeing the shape of the gynocratic Anglosphere, I’mma let them finish self-destruct, to the point I’m enjoying the decline.
Nothing is more important than empirically weighing the value and importance of one’s progeny accurately. After swallowing the redpill it’s amazing how many disgusting vestigial traits you see even in female toddlers. I have a special bond with my sons and they will inherit the keys to the kingdom and their sisters will inherit their biological roles, make no mistake about it. As a father to daughters don’t get sucked in by their wiles. They will try to play you harder than anyone when it comes to getting what they want. They are shameless creatures and so useless and bestial. They are born that way AWALT. It is not easy to bond with female children.
Oh I’m sorry M’Lord, I was unaware that we were still living in the 1200s, not an age in which all are expected to have equal opportunity. Never had I ever thought I would encounter ignorance of this caliber firsthand, yet here I am presented with some blindly ignorant fool who is under the impression that his sons are more worthy of inheriting whatever he has earned in his life than his daughters, simply on the basis of their gender. Might I suggest you use your superior masculine intelligence (I should point out I am male as well) to invent some form of time travel so you can return to the years of feudal bigotry, an age where you clearly belong?
Why can’t you just let people be who they are? Why can’t your sister be a hairy-armed vegan if she wants? I don’t care if you think it’s unnattractive, it’s her choice to be that way and you are ignorant for disrespecting that. I think it’s disgusting how on this website women are scrutinised based on their perceived characteristics and their aesthetic beauty – why are we not treated like humans? And also, this kind of hatred is damaging to men too. The whole idea on this website is that boys should grow up into ‘real men’ and be ‘strong’. What about if they are vulnerable or depressed or scared? It is absurd that you think you eradicate this – that it’s somehow unnatural. Why are men in society today not allowed to feel those things? It’s so, so painfully obvious the harmful effect this has. For instance, most men between adolescence and late middle-age who die will do so at their own hands. This doesn’t mean they are failures in any way: their families, their friends, their colleagues, their communities have failed them for making them believe that they can’t be taken seriously if they ask for help. It’s sickening, utterly sickening the way you treat anyone who doesn’t fit your ideals of ‘perfection’ (which doesn’t exist, by the way). It’s tragic that you think that anyone who is not male, white, heterosexual, rich, physically fit and unemotional has no value. I don’t know what has filled you with contempt towards people who aren’t all of those things, but I suggest you broaden your gaze. A culture without flawed people cannot exist. It is high time the ‘flaws’ that up until now have seperated us, are celebrated.
Your right to do what you want with your body does not trump my right to find something displeasing, no matter how loud you want to shout it. If you want to be fat or hairy or tatted up, that’s your free choice. It’s also my free choice to not take you seriously. Please stop with the narcissistic fascism.
And there’s a difference between being emotional and being weak. Men write songs and poetry and write literature and create art. Men can express emotion, and we do it all the time. What we don’t advocate for is that every time you don’t get your way, you feel the need to cry. This is your false equivocation. We see the way women scream and cry and kick when they are displeased; is that the way you’d like us to act too? When women do this, they’re not being emotional. They’re being weak. Men do not value this, nor do many women for that matter. Women are just as likely to call us pussies if we cry in front of them. That’s why men don’t do it.
But we can be emotional.
The rest of your “must be white, male, rich, blah blah blah” is just conjecture. It’s your fascist conditioning that makes you feel the need to say that anyone who does not value your opinions is a racist-sexist-homophobic-classist.
Feel free to not take me seriously, but I expect you to respect my choice, and understand that your opinions can be hurtful to people.
You are making gross exaggerations. You form opinions of the way you see some women behaving, and apply it to all women universally. Women in general are very brave people. You know why? Because we deal with people shouting rape threats at us, people telling us we should ‘get back to the kitchen’, sexual harassment, gender discrimination. No wonder we are displeased, we’ve had enough of inequality! No, I think you will find, again, that that is an assumption you are making. The majority of women wouldn’t call you a ‘pussy’ for crying. In fact, feminists want to stand up for men’s right to be emotional and vulnerable in this way, like I just said in my above message, as you would know if you had actually read it instead of making assumptions. Again.
No it’s not conjecture. I firmly believe that everybody should be equal. And I am not a fascist. Do you even know what that word means? I suspect not, since fascists are extremely conservative, intolerant people, often against liberalism and equality. So, out of the two of us, you are actually the most likely to be fascist, due to your obvious hatred of women.
And I would never, ever use my beliefs to complain just because I thought someone disagreed with me. I’m not an unreasonable, fickle, air headed girl spoilt by western society. Very very few are.
May I conclude by debunking some myths for you. Feminists do not hate men. At all. In fact, feminism tries very hard not to hate anything. The definition (look it up on google to confirm this if you wish) is: “advocacy for the equality of the sexes”. That’s what 99% of feminists believe in. You may be confusing real feminism with something called ‘radical feminism’ -where women actually do hate men – but the traditional feminism movement disagrees with these ‘radicals’ and in no way affiliates with them. Why would you hate feminism when it wants to champion the rights of men too? (hence – equality. Yes that’s ‘equality’. Not some kind of feminazi man-hating torrent) And if the answer is still “Yes, I hate feminists”, then I suggest you watch this speech: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gkjW9PZBRfk, where Emma Watson argues for feminism much better than I do. Believe me, not all women will scorn you and hate you and appear to be deliberately difficult and unattracitve. There are many of us who just want this men vs women struggle to be over. We. Want. To. Be. Equal.
It’s amusing that you present Emma Watson as a figurehead for feminism and men being not needing to be strong and be emotional when her current boyfriend looks like he stepped out of a Ralph Lauren catalogue and she likes being with him *because* he’s strong and masculine and makes her feel safe.
Anyway:
“May I conclude by debunking some myths for you. Feminists do not hate men. At all. In fact, feminism tries very hard not to hate anything. The definition (look it up on google to confirm this if you wish) is: “advocacy for the equality of the sexes”. That’s what 99% of feminists believe in. You may be confusing real feminism with something called ‘radical feminism’ -where women actually do hate men – but the traditional feminism movement disagrees with these ‘radicals’ and in no way affiliates with them. Why would you hate feminism when it wants to champion the rights of men too?”
Feminism does not oppose radical feminism. It is part of the same movement. I have yet to see any so-called ‘moderate’ feminist actually call out (and be heavily supported by other so-called ‘moderate’ feminists) Catherine Mackinnon, Andrea Dworkin or Kate Millet’s views and pronounce that their ideas are wrong. You cannot even bring yourselves to condemn or oppose modern movements that say all intercourse is rape.
If feminism wants to champion the rights of men — and by what right do you presume to do so? — it has to combat those who would destroy those rights. Your movement has been entirely cowardly on that front, as is apparent from feminism’s actions and repeated desire to destroy traditional heterosexual marriage and families. It has been sufficiently cowardly for most men with brains to realise it’s deliberate because it benefits your real cause: the elevation of women above men, not equality.
Your words mean nothing. It is by your actions you are judged. Feminists by their action want men subjugated, not equal to them.
Honey she is LITERALLY the united nations ambassador for women, I don’t think you could get a better figurehead for feminism? And she isn’t defined by who she’s in a relationship with. Nobody ever is.
Well I did in fact just inform you all that it is NOT the same movement. How could two opposing beliefs be part of the same movement? Well I’m a moderate, liberal feminist, and I think radical feminists are wrong. We are not the same thing, I say it again, although I don’t think you will listen to me. Just because a woman stands up for her rights (and yes, funnily enough the vast majority of governing bodies do say we have rights) does not make her a man-hater.
And yes we do try to champion men’s rights. As you will know if you watch the clip of Emma Watson (I’m not holding my breath), she says that if men didn’t feel like they had to maintain the image of a ‘strong’ man, women would benefit too. So you see our rights aren’t mutually exclusive, they depend on one another. As she herself says ‘if men weren’t taught to oppress, women wouldn’t need to be oppressed’. We don’t want you guys to suffer either, that is not what we’re about.
Well let me tell you about our actions. We want men to be able to express themselves, to not to have to feel like they have to fit into a certain stereotype in order to succeed. Men have a horrifyingly high suicide rate, and many attribute this to the convention that men would look ‘weak’ if they asked for help. Well get this: we want to help, we don’t want anyone to suffer anymore. Social expectations are damaging for both genders, and we realise this. And my god, wouldn’t it be easier if we could all work together to solve them instead of insulting each other. This isn’t hatred, this is an INVITATION to join us and help us battle inequality FOR BOTH MEN AND WOMEN. If you don’t understand that, then I don’t know how else to say it.