Businesswoman Reprimanding Businessman

Letter to a young man: privilege-blindness

A young, new MRA recently spent days on Reddit asking feminists to explain to him what the term “privilege-blind” means. Many self-proclaimed feminists are fond of this term, but seem quite averse to anyone who ever suggests that they themselves are blind to their own privilege. Eventually, after watching the endless circular arguments that go on among privileged women talking about how oppressed they are, Girl Writes What wrote a missive to this young man that everyone should read. We reprint it here proudly with her permission and slight modification.–Dean Esmay

What does “privilege-blind” mean?

It means that in the culture, each gender has/had both obligations and entitlements or benefits. When you live your whole life with certain entitlements, you usually don’t realize that you have them, or the ways you benefit from them, or that the other doesn’t have them and cannot benefit from them.

Most feminists call traditional male entitlements “privilege.” They call traditional female entitlements “benevolent sexism” (because, like most people who benefit from their entitlements, they can’t really see they have them). They call traditional female obligations “oppression.” They call traditional male obligations “rights” (i.e: the right to earn income, the right to be self-sufficient, which was actually an obligation men complied with or else–and still is) or “patriarchy hurts men too.”

What feminism has really done in the advancement of women’s interests is take men’s patriarchal obligations, apply them to women, and cast them as “rights” that women can choose or not as they see fit. It–with the help of advancements like the pill–has also toiled to free women from their patriarchal obligations while holding onto as many entitlements as they can. Like removing the obligation to marry for life or provide their husband with children that are his in a meaningful way, while keeping the entitlement to his financial support.

And please don’t get me wrong. I’m not a traditionalist in any way shape or form. But I do live in reality, and I know what’s been happening over the last 40 years.

The problem with what’s going on now is that as women are released from their obligations (to men and to society), without giving up corresponding entitlements. Things are getting unbalanced. The system we had before sucked for a lot of people, but it was at least equitable for both genders–it afforded enough entitlements to offset each member’s obligations. When you remove obligation from one member while holding onto the entitlement, this places more obligation (and less entitlement) on the opposing member.

A great deal of women’s traditional benefits used to be provided by men on an individual basis (financial support, partnership, protection, etc), but now men have been kicked out of the house, so to speak. Because women have so much more choice now–because they claimed things like earning income as rights rather than obligations–and because they owe nothing to anything other than personal fulfillment… well, choices cost. They cost economically, socially and politically.

Men aren’t being allowed to fulfill those benefits on reasonable terms anymore. Women have broken the old social contract, and when we took away men’s benefits without replacing them with others, we soured the terms of the deal for men. Now we need more government, more social and legal enforcement and corporate structures to provide women with help, support and protection, or to extract those things from unwilling men. None of those structures are “non-profit”. They take a huge cut before what’s left trickles back down. They’re a very resource-hungry middleman, so we need more productivity on the ground in order to feed that. Most of that productivity comes from men, one way or another, even though their few remaining benefits no longer make it worthwhile to them.

That means we’re trying to chain men even more inexorably to their old obligations. There’s a reason everyone in the media is in a tizzy over men not “manning up.” Men have always either provided for women and children, or been economic generators for government and corporate coffers. They’ve always put more in than they’ve taken out–women drive 80% of consumer spending. Now young men are being asked to put even more in, and get less out.

Let me put it this way: Women make up about 60% of medical students right now. Very progressive. The government spends millions of dollars to train her, because paying to train doctors is a wise investment. Doctors earn out the wazoo. This generates tax revenue and economic activity, which helps recoup the cost, and doctors provide a valuable service to society that helps keep everything stable. Spots in medical school are finite because of the cost of training, and the woman beats out several male candidates for that spot in school.

But what’s this? She sees that career as a right rather than an obligation. She has virtually unlimited choice as to what she wants her life to look like. So, like about half of all female doctors, within ten years of getting her MD, she will be working part time or not at all. Her male colleagues saw their career as an obligation, and expected to be working 50-70 hours/week for at least 30 years, providing valuable service to society and generating all kinds of economic benefit.

That female doctor has just taken out of society more than she’s put in. Someone not only has to pay for that, and take up the slack. We all pay, with our tax revenue, and by having to wait to see a doctor, and her male colleagues pay in the longer hours many will choose to work to fill the gap she left in her wake. And because women represent more than half of all doctors, the fewer males ones will have to take on even more burden in order to ensure you and I can get an appointment.

And I’m not saying that women shouldn’t be doctors–hell, my sister is one. But I AM saying that though women have made inroads into the male roles, they haven’t embraced them in any meaningful away, because it actually sucks to work 70 hours a week and barely see your family, whether you’re a man or a woman, and society doesn’t enforce this role with women the way it does with men.

You won’t find a single feminist wanting to talk about this stuff. They won’t even accept that women have, and have always had, female privilege. All those spots on the lifeboats while the men went down with the ship? That was just another form of oppression to them.

You’re young. You seem exceptionally bright and well-spoken. You have every right to feel dismissed and disregarded by the people on the AskFeminists subReddit, because those people are writers of revisionist history and revisionist reality–emotional reasoners who form narratives to explain their emotions, instead of living in reality. Please don’t get sucked in by them.

There are women’s issues, but feminism seems to mostly work at cross-purposes to those issues. How can you complain that women are not trusted in positions of political power–how even women won’t vote for them–and then in the next breath cast women in this role of needing perpetual help and support just to survive their own lives, all the while whining that their purses are oppressive? I’m a woman, and one of the biggest problems I have with feminism is that it does not give women any credit.

Anyway, I thought I would reach out to you away from the Reddit AskFeminists thread, because I don’t want to cause another shitstorm right now. I’m a mother of three kids, two of them boys. My oldest is 17, and I worry about the world he and his brother are growing up in. I know my daughter will be just fine. That’s gotta tell you something.

GirlWritesWhat currently has the most popular video on feminism on YouTube here: Feminism and the disposable male. You can subscribe to her channel right here. Please do not sexually assault her Paypal tipjar, she really hates it when you do that. –DE

About Karen Straughan (aka GirlWritesWhat)

AVfM Contributing Editor Karen Straughan "Girl Writes What" is a middle-aged divorced mother of three who enjoys talking about herself in the third person. Her writing and videography on gender issues features in classrooms in high schools and universities on three continents. But she still has time for the little people, like Paul, and those other guys.

Main Website
View All Posts
  • Kimski

    An awesome piece of work, and a special thanks to Dean Esmay to make it publicly accessible, along with the ‘slight modifications’.

    I like this headline.
    Much better, Mr. Esmay.

  • B.R. Merrick

    What feminism has really done in the advancement of women’s interests is take men’s patriarchal obligations, apply them to women, and cast them as ‘rights’ that women can choose or not as they see fit.

    Great way to show how social contracts are now completely off balance, while alluding to the never-ending semantic wars engaged in by the Left.

  • HieronymusBraintree

    Great stuff as usual.

    Once I was debating the great pseudo-enlightened hoard of flying monkeys at Pharyngula over the existence of THE PATRIARCHY(!) and, attempting to lay out a case based on facts and logic (because engaging in futile endeavors is a major hobby of mine), pointed out that slightly less than half of all new doctors were women. I got two rather strange responses. The first was the assertion that because the number of women vs men was not yet completely and totally equal, the patriarchy was still oppressing women, which, as far as oppression goes, is my idea of extremely weak tea. The other was that being a doctor was no longer regarded as prestigious so of course women were now allowed to become doctors since men didn’t want the job anymore.

    The will to victimization among these abusive boneheads is quite strong, no?

    • Dean Esmay

      “Abusive boneheads?” You’re nicer than I am. I am increasingly moving toward thinking they’re simply hatemongering, bigoted Stalinists. I’m not even sure “Stalinist” is any more out of the question; I have little doubt that if these people were in power, they’d start killing people like us.

      • HieronymusBraintree

        Well, I wish they would move on to Stalinism since Stalinism was the Atheism Plus of its day and is now roundly discredited. So was Freudian psychology. There has always been a species of left-winger for whom extreme, unprovable beliefs that can be used as a cudgel to beat others with their supposed moral and intellectual superiority have held an irresistable allure. It seems strange now but for decades stuff like penis envy, dream analysis and the idea that all men were mentally damaged by the belief that Daddy had castrated Mommy (apparently no one ever had a sister) were held as firmly-established truths and that anyone who didn’t buy into this nefarious malarkey was dismissed as some troglodyte who couldn’t handle reality because they were daunted by their lack of the intellectual sophistication of its adherents (sound familiar?).

        Feminism is finally getting the backlash it has so long been begging for and, like homophobia, cannot long stand critical analysis. When the A+ crowd gets so staggeringly frenzied in its anger and desire to censor debate all they’re doing is tipping their hand far and wide that, when you get down to cases, they’ve got nothing.

      • harrywoodape

        They are in power already in certain parts of the world (Australia) and you are right Dean about them wanting to kill people like us…as agent Orange showed us. Hitler was fast but methodical in exterminating Jews. First steps involved legalizing abuses of Jews and diminishing Jewish influence in Nazi society. Basically hemming them in and removing them from power. Most of the German public went along with it wholeheartedly. The state media at the time filled the newspapers and radio with stories of Jewish crimes. Children were taught in schools how Jews were dirty and deceitful. Medical studies were commissioned on how Jews were inferior to non-Jews.
        This went on for a few years. All this time the Nazi’s had started a partnership with IBM to handle collecting data on the German population using Hollerith punchcards. It was a leader of it’s day in obtaining census data in great detail and speed than ever before. It was used to catalogue People that came from Jewish bloodlines. Watson of IBM was an admirer of Hitler’s and had no qualms about making money. Eventually after forcing most Jews into concentration camps and working them to break…Hitler just began exterminating them en masse. IBM was there to help with the record keeping at the concentration camps. The German subsidiary of IBM was called Dehomag and they serviced each Hollerith machine in each concentration camp right up until the end of the war. After the war ended IBM sought to collect the money from a decimated Germany.
        Why the long story? Because while the Nazis went away…corporations that helped them do what they did are still here and are bigger than ever.
        Hitler would have loved Facebook.
        I may seem like an extremist or crackpot to some but I warn that I think this is where it is all headed.
        All those precluding things done to the Jews are being done to men. Men are being legislated against, subjected to open bigotry, and our kids schools are becoming more anti man by the day.

        • sethster

          I’m afraid you are correct sir. All it will take is a major world war, and men will be rounded up like the Jews.

          The difference this time, however, will be that men will be enslaved rather than killed. Remember, society needs men for their strength. You will never see many women working in difficult conditions or third shift jobs They will still need men to fill those roles.

    • Kimski

      “(because engaging in futile endeavors is a major hobby of mine)”

      You only have to look at the differences in percentages of men and women attending higher learning institutions, to get an idea about what these people consider as ‘equal’. Noone ever mentions those vast differences, or try to find out why these environments have become so toxic to men. Pierce Harlan has the obvious answer to that in his recent piece.

      Want an education?
      Start selling crack to the people who will pay, ’cause you’ll probably be going to jail anyway.
      We call it ‘Male Priviledge’.

    • JJ

      Sadly, most of them know what they are doing. In fact, it has been my experience that most women know how the system works; it almost seems like planned parenthood does more than “ecudate” women about abortion but their “marital” options as well.

      We live in a society where there is no shortage of idiots, PC police, DC types, state bureaucrats, and college campuses; among others, willing to turn a blind eye to anything females do wrong. Simultaneously blaming any male they can find, you/me, or not in existence; “patriarchy” for example.

      It has trickled down into our societal and cultural unconscious. The only thing I know, as prior military, that gets that out is a Company Commander in basic who knows hes got you for months of hell; and you know he is going to “make good use of his time in hell.” In other words, rattle their freaking cage. Belittle, put down, call them out on their crap everywhere; and point out everysingle flaw you can possibly find and make the person pay for it (usually pushups while the CC is eating ice cream).

      Obviously, that is not going to happen anytime soon.

      Their is another way though. Several maybe; but they all start from one place and thats activism. All of the different ways I could write up end one way throughout history that I have seen: one side deprives the other of something for so long; the other side capitulates or gets taken over.

      I no longer see any reason not to role “tanks down their metaphorical streets.” They will never just give it to us! It would be like arguing with the guy in a psyche ward who thinks hes Napoean Bonaparte that he is Steve from around the corner. You can’t reason with him; merely put him in a straight jacket and drug him.

      Sadly for “Napolean Steveaparte,” that is kindess! For feminists; it is absolutely necessary we take these criminally insane “knuckleheads” off the radar; they are clogging up any process in our ability to identify real threats properly. The only threats they care about are the ones they remove them from the government tit.

      If you gotta go, you gotta go.

  • Phil in Utah

    It’s a bit OT, but Michael Kimmel is gonna be speaking at my university a week from today. Could I have some suggestions on the best questions to ask to expose him as the chump he is?

    • Theseus

      Shit. Dude that’s a huge fucking list. We’ll have to narrow it down for you. I’ll have to get back to you on that one.

    • OneHundredPercentCotton

      Do some postering beforehand?

    • bulldogo67

      #Phil in Utah
      I see no one has answered you yet.
      If I had a chance to ask a question I would probably go straight on the attack and ask something like – my girlfriend/wife & I were arguing the other day about politics and she became extremely angry. Soon she was yelling and screaming in my face and threatening to throw me out of our house. At one point she became totally apoplectic and began shoving me backwards and saying things like “you pathetic little man”, “I fucken hate you”. In the end I escaped by ducking past her and running out the house. After about 2 hours of walking around the block I went back home. As I reluctantly & with trepidation knocked on the front door all manner of thoughts were going through my head – would I see my kids again, would they be OK, would I have a roof over my head that night?
      Mr Kimmel, would that be a good way to address that situation? How else could I have handled things?
      If I wasn’t going to attack I might ask how it’s possible that the feminist establishment is still pushing for pro-female academic programs when males/boys are falling so far behind?
      Of course, you will be an instant pariah to the audience & Kimmel no matter what question you ask. But, if you can get a question like that out there as early as you can, WATCH with amazement as the ensuing madness of hyperbole, princess victim BS explodes from the females there.
      Also watch with amazement as a substantial minority of males “GET IT”.
      I promise it will happen.

      • Sasha

        #Phil in Utah

        Great question! Firstly, I would say to him upfront that you asked on a forum for questions for him, and you have a few to ask. Also, it would be great if you could record the discussion, but that may not be possible.

        Anyway, here’s some questions I thought up:

        1. Mr Kimmel, could you offer a perspective on the reason why the US Dept of Justice refuses to fund ANY research into domestic abuse against men?

        2. Mr Kimmel, as a feminist who believes in equality, could you explain why feminists lobby against any attempt to create mens groups on university campuses?

        3. Mr Kimmel, in your book ‘Guyland’ you say that “when we say ‘boys will be boys’ we’re saying they are violent, rapacious animals’. I think most readers would associate the phrase with boisterous activity, can you tell me what study shows boys are uniquely violent and rapacious?

        4. In her recent book on her divorce, feminist author Rachel Cusk describes how she lost respect for her husband when he became a full-time stay-at-home parent. Do you think feminists are more or less likely to enforce traditional gender roles?

        (follow-up) If feminists do not support traditional gender roles, can you explain why feminist and womens’s organisations such as NOW oppose legislation to introduce shared parenting, parental leave and other measures designed to allow both parents to participate in the care of their children?

        5. In your writing, you describe the things men can do to faciliate gender equality. These are; campaigning against violence against women in society, not raping women, and combating sexism against women at work. These are all things men can do for women. Why is this?

        6. Can you tell me what women could change about themselves to make the home and female-majority workplaces such as schools more welcoming to men?

        7. The proportion of women at college in the US today is much higher than men. Do you think programmes to encourage women at college are still necessary?

        8. A recent study showed a majority of mothers believe children naturally belong to them, and that they are best-placed to make decisions about childcare. How can mothers address the very negative aspects of gatekeeping so that fathers can be truly engaged with their children?

        9. Why are almost all divorces are initiated by women?

        10. Given that almost 50% of marriages end in divorce, that most divorces are initiated by women, that 40% of divorced fathers have little contact with their children after two years, and divorced and separated fathers consequently have the highest suicide rate of any group including combat veterans, would you agree that marriage offers a poor deal for men?

        11. Isn’t it naive to celebrate the ‘New Dad’ when ever-greater numbers of men are divorced by their wives, expelled from their families and reduced to seeing their children infrequently if at all?

        12. Do you think a majority of women will be willing to have lower living standards, as a result of fathers spending more time at home, and less at paid work?

        13. Some jobs that involve long and unsocial hours or working patterns, physical labour, or unpleasant or hazardous working conditions, cannot be easily balanced with home life, and are overwhelming done by men. Should we introduce quotas and inducements to encourage more women into these roles?

        Anyway, there’s a few to get you started. Hope that helps.

        • keyster

          He’s asked these questions all the time. His canned response is that “We certianly need to get better at _________ for men too!”…but yet he never identifies exactly who “we” is, and never does anything for men himself as this would alienate his feminist base of supporters.

          He wants men to behave more like women, accept feminist orthodoxy and acquiese to govt mandated gender egalitarian policies and foster feminist cultural memes.

          He’s essentially a social justice guy – – that men have been dominant for millenia and maybe women taking over the male role is not such a bad idea.

          • Sasha

            Yes, I’m sure he is. I think it’s still important to ask them as it might give other young men in the audience pause for thought, and it makes clear to Kimmel that the bullshit isn’t being swallowed by everyone.

            Also, I’m not really aware of any true ‘gender egalitarian policy’ ever being implemented. There are a lot of governments across the developed world who’ve introduced laws and policies to give women additional protections, rights and entitlements, but I’m not aware of any which provide equally for men.

        • Ben

          Great question list!!! We get speakers like that at our campus from time to time. I never have been lucky enough to ask them anything. They almost always only take questions from girls and hundreds raise their hands at the same time when the speaker pauses for questions.

          They all can’t wait for the mangina to give them a va jay jay tingle by telling them face to face over a microphone that they are so irresistibly sexually desirable that they are in constant imminent danger of sexual assault. You won’t believe how much college girls just look up at their mangina lecturers in total amazement.

          When Dr. Katz came here to hold “The Macho Paradox” a girl stood up and asked if he could comment on the rate of false claims of rape. He said, “Well, according to the FBI, it is less than 2 percent”. She was probably a plant. The bottom line is it is really hard to get any attention from a mangina in a room full of thousands of college girls who are accustomed to having the floor. So, I quit even going to those speeches at that point. That avenue seems to be blockaded; getting MRM rhetoric through there would be like carrying a Madonna “Like a Virgin” CD across the 38th parallel. Unfortunately, it probably just won’t happen, lol.

          • Sasha

            Hi Ben, don’t worry about that, just email him your questions in advance ( and say you’re looking forward to hearing him speak, appreciate you might not get picked to ask these questions, but if he could consider them you’d like to post them as a Q&A on your blog/website. Even better, tell him you’re an activist for men and boys, and ask him to record a video interview with you while he’s on campus, and here are the questions in advance, and it’s for your YouTube channel and you’d be happy to embed links to his book ‘Guyland’.

            I don’t think there’s a secret to a lot of this stuff. Act professional, courteous and matter-of-fact. Even if you get knocked back, that itself can be a story (look at how Michael Moore and Nick Broomfield make entire FILMS about not getting access to their interviewees). If he won’t answer the questions, find some fellow students and ask them the questions (with their permission naturally) – provoke a debate. These are all ideas, and I’m conscious that you already do a lot of activism, and only you can judge the atmosphere and reactions at your university, but I just offer them as suggestions.

        • Phil in Utah

          Thanks for the tips, everybody, but I think I’ve decided how I’ll approach this. Dr. Kimmel attacks the concept of the wingman as a mechanism that reinforces patriarchy. I’ll ask him why he considers it so harmful for men to treat each other well. If he dives into his hegemonic bullshit theories, I’ll just cite the state of life in Medieval Europe: peasants formed guilds, handshakes, and had a very strong, solid brotherhood. Nobles, on the other hand, were constantly at each other’s throats over who could be the King’s best asskisser.

          From there, I’ll proceed to demonstrate how he uses a bunch of Catch-22 feminist theory to paint any sort of traditionally male behavior as harmful and patriarchal, and use THAT to expose his anti-male agenda. Maybe get in a few of Warren Farrell’s statistics edgewise.

          And just to throw his guard off, I’ll wear my “Save the Pandas” t-shirt to the event. If he brings that up, hey, it’s a nice segue into how his whole Sensitive New Age Male Feminist act is nothing more than a power ploy.

          Sound good?

          • Theseus

            Sounds good. Sasha beat me to a couple of the things that I was going to suggest, and came up with a much better list than I would have on short notice.

            I really like # 13 on Sasha’s list though, because it really challenges his “gender equality” hypocrisy. It would be great to see Kimmel try to squirm out of a tight spot answering that one.

  • Theseus

    “Privilege-blind”. Bwaaa haa haaa haa!

    Kettle to pot. Come in pot.

    Great piece GWW.

  • Jade Michael

    Thank you for this article, GWW. A friend of mine is currently going to state-mandated domestic violence classes due to charges that have since been dropped by the “victim”. The state pursued the case even after the victim dropped it, but that is a whole other story.

    Anyhow – many of the “lessons” the state teaches (read: brainwashes) the men in these classes are based on the notion of “male privilege”. The level of which these men are taught to hate themselves is disgusting and what is even more repulsive is that my tax dollars fund these classes. It’s absolutely sickening, how many pots feminists have their hands in. Perhaps I need to turn up the heat and be the next MRA to make a flier run. A few posted near the building where the classes take place is the least I can do for these men.

    • Dean Esmay

      Do it do it do it! >:-)

    • addie

      I know this is probably really old (cant see)
      I actually went through that. personally. It was quite …illuminating, I had always though that my ex was a little off, but the “x stages/forms of abuse” were REALLY informative on how ABUSIVE my ex was.
      Both me and another guy there had similar experiences in that the incident was self defense, and both me and this other guy were completely scoffed at by the female counselor. The other guys at the group took our stories in (its essentially group therapy).
      But yeah you are right the male abuses female narrative is very strong in those meetings, we even had to watch a movie in which some sicko was regularly beating his wife and children to a bloody pulp (once were soldiers i think) to show us how bad we really are when all of the guys there had only pushed or slapped their exes.

      One of the best stories I heard there was during the time he was in the intervention program one other dude was going to pick up his kid from his ex. The ex had found out he was starting to see another woman, she then got on top of his car and starting wailing on it with a golf club breaking the window and roof and all (got to see the car yeah had chunks missing from the roof where the golf club went through) he sat in his car and called the police. When the police got there she was STILL on top of the car hitting it (some endurance) they asked her to get down and asked her to stop doing that and then drove away. No arrest. “patriarchy”

  • shmiggen

    I can’t adequately write here how well written this piece is. I’m not actually sure what can be done, either. I’m inclined to believe we will all just have to wait and see if society can withstand such an imbalance. Will women one day see that they are literally choking on entitlements, and apologize? Will that ever happen, or will it be, as GWW says, “run away, run away, run away…disavow, disavow, disavow”. I suspect it will be the latter.

    But this does raise an interesting point, and one that is front and center in this area of the men’s movement. How will society actually run if we are all on flex-time, service workers, and part-time? Without boots on the ground, feeding the system, how will this all work?

    • Dean Esmay

      As more and more jobs become automated, I find myself wondering of part time/flex time isn’t going to become the norm for most of the population.

      • Skeptic

        GWW is repeating what Warren Farrel was saying in his seminal book “The Myth of Male Power, Why men are the disposable sex” way back in 1993.
        Still it’s good to hear it coming from a woman.
        I’ve waited many years for that. It’s one hell of a relief.
        Folks can download a PDF document recent interview with Warren Farrel by searching for it – just drop this into the search bar –…/download/35/36

        Sorry, I’d give the URL but it’s massively long.

        If reading’s not your bag and you prefer listening to a podcast/video instead here is part one of a recent three part interview with him about the book –

        I agree with you about robotics.
        I suspect with future trends point towards robotics and other automated systems producing more and more, including replicating themselves (robots don’t need lunch breaks, holidays, parental leave, sick days and will work 24/7/356 ad infinitum) there will surely be massive changes.
        Add in the male birth control methods currently being developed and I suppose we’re looking at massive depopulation.
        As I said in a post to aVfM pending publication perhaps there’s to be an upside then to feminists pissing off so many men – Men will shun reproducing on feminists’ terms and go their own way with the imminently arriving male contraceptives. Depopulation means less pollution and improved ecosystems. To me that’s a win.

        • Dean Esmay

          I am a big admirer of Warren Farrell’s, have been for years. Indeed, it’s difficult to describe what it was like being aware of his work, supportive of it, and the work of the late Asa Baber and a few other pioneers like him, and feeling like I was lost in a wilderness of people who had no idea about any of this… only to find that suddenly, in the last year or so, there’s an explosion of awareness.

          I honestly believe a lot of this is generational. Those of us who are now entering our 30s and 40s are the generation that came of age after 2nd wave feminism had its big splash, and we’re seeing the damage of both that and the (often wrongminded) “traditionalist” backlash against it, and calling bullshit on all of it, without any of the hangups and guilt trips that the Boomers and earlier generations were hung up on. The younger folks (mostly younger than me, I’m 46) have grown up seeing the fallout from everything Farrell talked about all those years ago, and the times, they are a-changin’.

  • Tawil

    @GWW: “A great deal of women’s traditional benefits used to be provided by men on an individual basis (financial support, partnership, protection, etc), but now men have been kicked out of the house, so to speak.”

    The issue of protecting women from physical harm has gone through an interesting evolution. The husband used to be her main protector from physical harms. When men were kicked out of the house as GWW so eloquently puts it feminists had to find another way of protecting women – and presto, we are getting propoganda trying to force male strangers to “not stand by idly while an unknown woman is threatened with physical harm.” This novel experiment will of course fail… men will not become bodyguards for female strangers, nor even for women acquantences. The white ribbon campaign’s major stumbling block is that males are not signing up of thier own free will, and those who have signed up to be women’s protectors are coerced into doing so by the feminists – eg politicians, TV and football personalities who are afraid they will lose thier jobs if they don’t pretend to go along with the charade.

    • John A

      last time I looked only 28,773 ‘Australians’ have sworn for White Ribbon. A pretty piss poor performance considering the promotion and our tax dollars they have shovelled into it. It’s all about Michael Flood, of course, his petty little self-indulgence.

      I have to disagree with your last point though, a lot of those guys are scrambling to be the one good man. Actually, it’s nauseating seeing these men trying to enlighten us bad men, to change our ways, to be good like them, at least if we could try…

      At least it’s good to see that they have stopped beating their wives – something that I can never do. (For simpleton feminists out there, I can’t stop what I haven’t started – why do I even need to point this out?)

      • Skeptic

        Oh jeeze. I was settled in for a cozy read and you just had to drop Michael Flood’s name in!
        I met Michael Flood in person once way back in the 1990s. He had at that time oh so proudly started a Pro feminist Men’s magazine called XY.
        I feel disgusted remembering his whiny self flagellating arse licking of feminists. Shit, that guy is one twisted individual, like his compadre Manboobz.

  • TheBiboSez

    Oh, crap – I just cross-posted this on the “Don’t complain about the wiminz” thread before I discovered it was already an article here. My bad.

    Stellar work yet again from GWW. Watching her take a sledgehammer to the gnats is almost, but not quite, enough to make one feel sad for the gnats.

  • Aldir

    Great work, GWW. We can clearly see that the reason why feminist bigots keep saying we are privilege blind is because they are GENDER BLIND. They have this sort of selective blindness, where they can see when men are majority in the national congress and as CEOS, but they can’t see men are a vastly quantitatively larger majority in sewer cleaning, policing streets, dead or surviver soldiers, road construction workers, garbage collectors. As men were the pyramid building slaves, the generation of babies murdered when Moses and Jesus were born, in the Bible narrative (that feminists see is a report of multi-millenar women’s abuse by men, while written by vaginophobic… men, again). And Feminists’ marketing specialty is to take society to a whole new level of GENDER BLINDNESS. After all, gender is a feminist construction. lol

  • TigerMan

    Excellent piece of writing and analysis. What I like about it is it’s fulcrum on the common good – something that is noticeably missing from “rights” obsessed feminists. :)

  • keyster

    The other issue not talked about often enough is woman’s sexual power over men and how that influences privilage.

    The 2nd wavers pushed Betty Freiden to the back and trotted out a sexy and articulate Gloria Steinem, using Ms. Magazine as her vehicle. She gave good face and got all the publicity.

    As long as women OWN reproduction, and men’s sexual interest in women is stronger than women’s sexual interest in men – – women will be practically omnipotent within society, and true equality can never be realized. We’ll only drive ourselves insane trying to tediously manage a perfect balance where no one complains.

    • BioCan

      Sexual interest differences are major factors at play. I always felt it was one of the core issues that men face. That’s why I think MGTOW is that important. It may not be as powerful as activism, but if many men do this and opt out feminists will have even fewer reasons to legislate our freedom for their perceived “well-being” or “safety” because of the propaganda that all men are violent brutes. Perhaps, it can expose them even sooner as the charlatans they are. However, what ultimately ties us to feminist power is their funding by the state. As soon as you cut off funding, they have a smaller chance of getting their bigoted programs pushed onto society.

  • knightrunner

    Awesome article.
    However, I read the part about your paypal “tip jar” a little too late. Sorry.

  • rebtus

    Many women become “control freaks” once the man has become committed to them. If you dare to disagree, you are accused trying to provoke an argument when you simply express different opinion.

    One thing I never understand about men. While the sites like AVFM tries to be conciliatory, men in power like police officers like to beat other men’s brains out. What has made public aware that appellate court upheld publics right to videotape police action in open view.

    • BlueBlood

      Most jurisdictions allow filming of anything in the public view, excluding of course child exploitation material.
      Anything you film, though, can be seized as evidence.
      I appreciate you want to get your point across that its ok to film Police, and, yes, its also ok to ask them for their ‘badge number’ which is plainly displayed on their shirt.

      I strongly object, however, to your assertion that “men in power like police officers like to beat other men’s brains out.”

      I very much doubt that any Police Officer enjoys doing that.

      And I would direct you subtly to the Q in the distance.

  • BioCan

    A great comment from GWW. I watched many of her older videos. Her lectures are amazing and very informative. She reminds me of the Oracle from the Matrix film because she knows about what we all think and feel in this community while discussing these things from her kitchen. That entire comment is a great summary of everything that those feminist bigots have lied about in the past 4 years. The fact that they have a forum called “AskFeminists” makes it seem like a pathetic attempt at public outreach after all the damage they’ve done to men and their families. The feminists know that their public relations have gone down dramatically so far.

    As a young man, I feel more of us have to listen to her advice and I wish that her message could reach a wider audience.

    By the way, I haven’t been around here in a while and missed the fall donation drive. I’m happy to see it went past it’s mark. Paul, I’ve sent a donation of $50 your way and hopefully you’ll get it soon.

  • VictorGarcia

    every time i read something by you, i imagine it on a website called “the good woman project”. and how butthurt people would be by reading that women have to take responsibility for actions, and even in-actions, just like men do. damn. treating women like adult human beings? thats offensive!

  • Howard

    This should be forced to be a prologue for every feminist book that is printed. As far as female doctors go, my niece just had finished medical school and was in the midst of her residency when she said it was so hard and grueling. She almost quit before ever starting. She was considering it. But she ended up getting through. I can only imagine what she will find tough when 30 million more insured people show up without ever having added any doctors.


    Great article.

    In Australia they have a lack of Veterinarians. Women get most of the vacancies in University. But don’t have the strength to pull out a calf at birth, nor want to work at odd hours in a god-forsaken cow and sheep village.

    They just want to take care of big city pets. In addition to convenient work hours.

    Very nicely written, good language, very concise.

  • Ben

    @Sasha: Those are really great ideas! A Michael Moore approach is probably the way to go. I have already strarted to take more of an approach like you are suggesting and, I agree, sometimes just being perfectly candid and as-a-matter-of-fact about things works much better than just presuming that there are obstacles. Sometimes, the obstacle can be in our heads. I will see if he is coming to MSU anytime soon. The only problem is that I do not have the talent of someone like Michael Moore. Maybe I could study his style and practice doing some interviews with a friend or two beforehand over the Christmas holidays.

  • tallwheel

    Gems like this are the reason why I am reddit-stalking GWW. (And by reddit-stalking, I mean reading all her posts.) She has a link on her blog page where you can see all of them. Most of her material is way too good to be hanging out somewhere on reddit. Thanks for bringing this tidbit to a more visible place. It totally deserves “article” status.

  • rebtus

    @ Blue Blood,
    Are you a law enforcement officer as your handle is the same as hit TV show about police. After I was drafted into another army, in the NCO Academy had a real nice MD who went ROTC afterward but was kicked out his face beaten to pulp like having gotten drunk and fought police.
    Sometime I eavestdropped to MP conversation and they boasted how they verbally try to provoke an soldier to take a swing at them so then they are justified in “subduing” the suspect.
    Before civil rights struggle white police officers “Saturday Night Live” was to beat up the N…..

  • rebtus
  • Manifold

    “That female doctor has just taken out of society more than she’s put in.”

    Man, it’s been some days since I saw that article, but I can now finally put my finger on the problem in this paragraph and the surrounding ones. Not that I don’t agree with you generally on theory, but that particular example made me cringe hard.

    You’re treating this issue as if everything about it but the sex of the doctors (and the hours they put in) was set in stone. As if giving (yes, giving, I know a lot of you are libertarian around these parts, but do read) proper lodgings to homeless people would not at the same time free up doctors and cost less money to society. As if it wasn’t possible to use nurses (and oh, shame of the shames, part-time nurses) to treat those all important sprains and colds. As if the budget of the medical schools and their capacity to take in students was set in stone (nevermind the Pentagon). Or that “[a]ccording to the Association of American Medical Colleges, heavily indebted doctors are less likely to choose primary care fields, and may work more hours, leading to fatigue and possible medical errors.”

    But hey, let’s blame feminism on this one. It sure seems more simple. Doesn’t sound at all like the cry of “Patriarchy!!1!!1§!§” from the other side. Nope. Not at all, Officer.

    • tallwheel

      I’m severely liberal, and I agree with GWW and Biocan (below).

      Not sure I follow all your arguments here, or see their relevance.

  • BioCan

    Reply to Manifold above:

    For the most part, you are rambling on and deflecting the issue with other variables.

    “You’re treating this issue as if everything about it but the sex of the doctors (and the hours they put in) was set in stone.”

    No, that clearly was never even discussed so you just brought it up to deflect the facts. The commentary that follows about female doctors quitting or going part-time in the medical field is based off statistics and information showing trends in their behaviour as opposed to male medical practictioners. Not only do male practitioners work more hours and have longer careers according to the article, but they also don’t have the option for paternity leave nearly as often as women do for maternity leave. Female doctors also, beyond your facile observation, don’t nearly specialize as often as males do in critical fields like neurosurgery. There’ve been articles throwing every argument at the problem like sexual discrimination and, the worst explanation, the “patriarchy”. When, in fact, the best argument that has been made is that they simply CHOSE not to go further and instead pursued other interests. For women, it’s never really about their choice according to what you find in the press. There always has to be someone pulling their strings, even after their supposed “liberation from men” in the 60’s and 70’s. It’s juvenile, pathetic, false, and leads to general societal attitudes of contempt toward men.

    • Manifold

      (You can reply to the post you want to directly if you click on the “Reply” button below the avatar.)

      “No, that clearly was never even discussed so you just brought it up to deflect the facts.”
      Yes, the fact that this was not even hinted made me write my comment. No, actually, that’s false. It’s the unjustified “That female doctor has just taken out of society more than she’s put in.” phrase that spurred me to write it. I’m not going to say the statistics are false, that would be beyond ridiculous. My comment was about how in general the medical system (in almost every Western country) was not nearly as optimal as one would like to believe. And really, I would like to know as to where the conclusion of this particular argument GWW made goes. Working 70 hours a week sucks, women should still have the freedom to be doctors, okay, and? Should males be able to go part-time or quit or would they “take more out of society than they put in” too? What should be done about it, if anything?

      • BioCan

        Sure, medical systems aren’t optimal, but this is one of the driving forces of making it less optimal. GWW doesn’t have to write a solution to this problem. She merely explained what is happening and the mechanisms behind it are working hours and career length. Female doctors and their productivity are in relation to their male counterparts. A reduction of full-time female doctors to part-time work by half makes them far less productive than their male counterparts. Therefore, not only is this far from optimal in medical care, but the expectation for men to work hard as an obligation and for women to work in any capacity they want for their whole life regardless of the double standard is ridiculous.

        • Manifold

          “but this is one of the driving forces of making it less optimal”
          I doubt it’s anywhere near the top.

          “the expectation for men to work hard as an obligation”
          I seriously don’t see that in upper middle-class families (doctors’ families), unless we’re talking about some sort of Stepford wives straight out of fiction. I don’t discount it exists, but I’ve never seen any evidence in my circle of the “wife nagging her husband without even trying to find a goddamn job”.

    • Krolll

      There is also another mechanism at work which i think can be best explained by comparing doctors with professional athletes. Men become more attractive to women when they compete succesfully and that extra pay off might be called a privilege. Women who take up sports professionally will not become more attractive to men, probably even less attractive. The same is true for doctors and most other careers. Men don’t care if their girlfriend is a lifeguard or just laying on the beach, but it’s different the other way around. It’s another reason why it’s more sensible to invest in men’s careers.

  • Krolll


    ‘one of the biggest problems (..) with feminism is that it does not give women any credit.’

    That’s only partly true, feminism gives a whole lot of credit… but only to their own feminist kind. They just don’t give any credit to other women: all the women and girls outside their petty clique. Those ‘outsiders’ are either ridiculed, ignored or unwillingly used as ‘victims’ for mere argument’s sake. Nonetheless feministes will always state they’re speaking on all womens behalf, bathing in the glory they bestow on themselves.