double life

The good man

He is the one good man.

He’s on his knees figuratively speaking, groveling about his apparent privilege. He’s allowed to speak so long as he prefaces each utterance with an apologetic seeking of approval.

“Look! Look! I’m using the knotted rope to beat myself! I’m one of the good men! Look! Look! I’m not like those other bad men!”

This slave, this coward, this supplicant seeking approval – he is the good man, and to prove it he will scourge every other man; every other man, who is not, like him, demonstrating that he is one of the good men; on his knees, or already busy attacking other men who don’t yet know they should live in a state of ongoing apology for existing.

Now, some will call this apologetic man an unkind word: a “mangina.” It is not a word I generally use. Although it is appropriately insulting, it lacks explanatory power. Others will call him a white knight. They’re the same creature. A man, surrendering reason, morality, surrendering the right to an identity as a human being, in favor of the consensus identity afforded to him by the group, based on his utility, his conformance, or his affectations of supplication to the preferred members of the group, such as women.

But the underlying motivation for men to manifest the characteristics of snivelling, apologetic supplicants for approval, or the characteristics of amoral, violent enforcers of group think and conformism – are the same motivations. The first is fear of loss of their identities as “good men.” This is the cowardice of identity, or the inability or unwillingness to define themselves human beings of worth without regard for approval of the group.

The second reason, which operates in concert with the first is surrender of an internal moral compass in favor of conformity. What’s right, or what’s true will be what the group says is right, or simply what the loudest drivers of opinion in the group say is right.

But what if the drivers of group opinion are themselves immature, violent, prejudiced, bigoted, or demonstrate other signs of mental illness, particularly, a constellation of qualities associated with high conflict personality disorders? Then the group think, the consensus reality becomes one of paranoia, hatred, and ultimately, violence. The accepted rules of civil society go out the window, because men who lack the courage to self define, but who allow themselves to be guided by fear of loss of their group identity of good men — these men become the enforcers of a public ethic of atavistic group think; us-versus-them along lines of trivial disagreement, social ostracism, fear driven conformism and authoritarian compliance; of hatred, and of violent enforcement of social norms which are fundamentally toxic and dysfunctional.

And all of this is enabled by the cowardice of those males who the group will define as good men. The compliant, the apologetic, and the heroes enforcing the whim of overgrown toddlers with princess complexes.

So we come to the one good man. The one who, by distinguishing himself good, renders all others bad. Look at him, he’ll defend the women, he’ll defend the children, because those other men, they’ve failed to recognize the need of all women to be defended. The bad men have failed to recognize that women are fundamentally helpless, weak, in need of rescue, elevation, protection and insulation from any possible discomfort, disturbance or criticism.

He is the one good man.

This is obviously why his violence, enacted or initiated on behalf of those helpless, special fragile flowers he defends, is excusable. Indeed, his violence, which he, being good, might not even enact other than through indirect proxy. His violence is virtuous because he is good. And if you aren’t him, then you’re a bad man. In fact, you might not even be a human being at all. Better get on your knees, apologize and admit your privilege, if, of course, you ever hope to be good.

If you let fear of loss of status as a good man – lending you to surrender your identity, your compass and any sense of right or wrong, then you simply cling to provisional approval. And you might even get to indulge yourself in some violence on behalf of grown up toddlers who discount your humanity and the humanity of all men in favor of utility and conformance.

But that world of hatred, fear, enemies, in groups and out groups, good people and bad, based on biology or cowardly conformity – that’s not where I live, or where I want to live.

  • Jay

    I think white knight is not insulting, has a reasonable cultural reference, and holds a lot more definitional power than coward.

    I don’t think coward expresses what you are describing in the first part of your essay.

    I think the tag you gave it is better, a sycophant or a flatterer.

    That said, I think mangina is insulting, has no relationship to how I feel about vaginas, or women, or sex, and begs people to call us name and think the worst of us. It annoys me and makes me want to distance myself from “Men’s Rights”.

    I would love to read Paul Elam promise to never use it again as AVfM and explain why. I think it just hurts us, and I think it should.

    So I don’t know how to express the totality of what you are describing here, but it doesn’t seem to be coward although cowardice is part of it.

    I’d label it the bipolar feminist sycophant and the white knight.

    I do think this describes the bullshit caught up in the name of “The Good Men Project”

    • jms5762

      If you are worried about name calling then you missed the key points of the essay.

      • Jay

        If you think my comment was about name calling then you missed the key points of my comment.

    • http://pinterest.com/zetapersei/male-privilege/ Perseus

      Man (male)-gyna (vagina):
      1. biological male who adopts a perspective of seeing the world gynocentrically, in a bigoted fashion placing vagina and female concerns before those of males.

      2. biological male supplicant to females

      3. biological male, female supremacist pos

      “Kermit-the-Doughboy blathers that men are privileged, despite the fact that their lives are way harder than those of females, evidenced by the fact that males die nearly a decade earlier than females from every known cause of death, yet no one in their privileging society gives half a fuck, especially the great humanitarian organization ‘The Komen Foundation’. What a bigoted goatfuck fucking pisstard subhuman mangina.”

      Any interpreted meanings or attitudes beyond that can be considered one’s own responsibility.

      The heavy use of the term speaks to its utility and value. It communicates an important meaning.

      • Tawil

        @Perseus: “Man (male)-gyna (vagina):
        1. biological male who adopts a perspective of seeing the world gynocentrically, in a bigoted fashion placing vagina and female concerns before those of males.”

        Good one Perseus- this definition has an accurate ring to it.

        • http://pinterest.com/zetapersei/male-privilege/ Perseus

          Thanks Tawil :-) Means a lot coming from a wordsmith as yourself.

    • dejour

      Yeah, I agree. Mangina is an unclear term.

      If someone is undecided about the MRM, mangina can seem to mean that people with vaginas are less than men. Suddenly it seems more credible that the MRM is populated with misogynists.

      Why not just call him a “gynocentric man”? I think that’s more accurate, although it lacks bile.

      • Jay

        I just think mangina will always be susceptible to the criticism that it comes from a misogynistic view of the vagina, and hence the people who use it do to.

        I wouldn’t be opposed to a term that expressed bile. But bile, not misogyny.

        I totally understand the concept of mangina, but that word is never going to get us anywhere.

        • dejour

          I may not have been clear. Mangina is clearly an insult, and is scathing in a way that “gynocentric man” is not.

          A good substitute would mean gynocentric man but pack a more powerful punch. It would also be clear and not easily confused for misogyny.

    • OneHundredPercentCotton

      Personally, I like “mangina” – in print.

      I probably wouldn’t shout it in a crowded theatre, however.

      It’s unquestionably a very powerful word.

      White knight is …sweet. We girls like our knights in shining armour and any boy knows that. It’s as much compliment as criticism.

      Mangina?

      Mangina packs a punch.

      Poor misguided, deluded, supplicating Mangina.

      It’s a “C” word! It’s an “N” word! It’s….MANGINA!!!!!!!!!

    • http://gloriusbastard.com/ JJ

      Fella, name calling is not the point here!

      I work with a guy who lost a testicle to cancer and may never have kids. Ignorantly, because his wife is maybe one of the few good ones that stood by him, he accuses me of hatred of women for my stance on this issue.

      He has no idea how lucky he truly is! With the disparity in cancer reseach from men to women; and the fact that his wife did not divorce him and leave him in his despair are all strong indicators of how truly fortunate he is. Yet he doesn’t know it!

      He is a “good guy,” ignorantly a mangina. Dude won’t attack me, and knows I am a good dude. However, my stance “offends” him because “not all woman are like that!” Indeed, including his personal circumstances; I know he is right.

      However, his life could have gone very differently! He could have been dead; and his beautiful wife would never have known the plausible reason is that other very powerful women view her man as chattel to be discarded whenver it is convenient for them!

      Which is usually every day.

  • dhanu

    There’s a difference between a mangina and a white knight. Manginas are cowardly group thinkers and approval seekers; the kind of men described in the article. They’re ashamed of their own self. They’re idiots and are easily bullied by the feminists into thinking that they’re part of the oppressive group and are guilty even if they’ve done nothing to deserve that. White knights, OTOH, are the men in positions of power, and they choose to support feminism and proxy violence to other men in their own interest (for their own political or monetary gains, or to show off their power). They’re not ashamed of being themselves, they’re the real enablers of feminism.

    That’s my interpretation anyway.

    I find nothing wrong with any of these terms and they should be used to make the points clear and distinct, and also to insult those who hate us for our mere existence.

    • http://thereluctantmysogynist.blogspot.ca/ limeywestlake

      @Dhanu – You make a crucial point here. We must get our terminology straight. A mangina and a white knight are NOT the same thing. For one thing, a mangina is more likely to be mired in cultural marxism, whereas a white knight has a tendency to be a more conservative individual.
      Since the ‘great MRA divide’ I am a little down on Rockin’ Mr. E.. However, his video about the subject just about sums it up in my opinion.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oXQDtBT70B8

      @ Jay; if a mere label would make you want to distance yourself from men’s rights, then maybe you do not think that human rights for men is such a pressing concern? I will tell you this, brother, without equivocation: NOTHING that anyone would – or could – ever say would make me distance myself from human rights for men and boys. If AVfM started proposing that women needed to be rounded up and put into cattle cars, I would think, ‘Jeez, what a bunch of assholes!’ Ultimately, though, I would be pretty much be back at it – like, right away, registering a website domain with a similar ring to this one; one where I would propose the ‘radical notion that women are human-beings…’ (Mmmm, where have I heard that before?)

      However, that said, I feel pretty confident that Paul Elam et al are not going to turn all Josef Goebbels on me any time soon, so I feel as though I do not have to prepare for that eventuality…

      Words are just words. Men and boys are worth more than a trillion words. Nothing will take away my love for them. I owe them almost everything. Without the contribution of men, all our lives life would be one of misery, privation and early death. And yes, ladies, it would be one without caesarian procedures, anesthetic, antibiotics, oral contraceptives, washing machines, dishwashers – and yes, one without those precious blood diamonds, even!

      I am an MRA on cold and rainy mornings as well as the sunny ones. The dislike of a mere word will never change that.

      • Jay

        ” if a mere label would make you want to distance yourself from men’s rights, then maybe you do not think that human rights for men is such a pressing concern? ”

        Perhaps.

        I know I identify strongly with “Father’s Rights” and that it seems Father’s Rights covers the vast majority of Men’s Rights that I do find important while seemingly leaving behind a lot of idiot foot shooters so you may be right.

        I would might also identify stronger with egalitarianism and/or humanism if I became more aware of those movements and thought they really did support Father’s Rights.

        But I may be stuck with what I have to work with, and that is a diverse movement made up of a bell curve of the population with many segments each with important issues to each but saddled with a pretty ugly reputation, some of which seems well deserved.

        So I hope you won’t kick me out just yet as I can tell you are eager to sharpen your knives and stab the apostates and traitors.

        “I am an MRA on cold and rainy mornings as well as the sunny ones. The dislike of a mere word will never change that.”

        Goddamn! You are such a fucking tough guy!

        So there we were all of together on the Group W Bench shouting Kill, Kill, Kill, Kill THE MANGINAS!

        • http://thereluctantmysogynist.blogspot.ca/ limeywestlake

          Me, tough? Ah, not so much…

          Anyhow, you sound honset to me. I prefer an honest man to a good man…

          However, like John and many others, I am a bad man.

          The ‘reputation’ of the MRM that you refer to, in my opinion, in not well deserved. There are nut-jobs everywhere. Fact of life. Also, we are cleaning our backyards, evermore, as every day passes. The commitment to first principles and the like testifies to this.

          I am an MRA. I stand for compassion and justice – without the modifying social bit. My feet are largely free from bullet wounds.

      • Ex Machina

        I’m with you.

        I could care less about the “misogynist undertones” some idiot amateur critical analysis student “reads into”,i.e. imagines in the term “mangina”.

        Does it do us any favors? Probably not. But does it measurably harm us? That’s the question we should be asking.

        I think not. If,as Jay claims, our terminology “appears misogynist” to outsiders,so much the better. If they can’t handle “mangina”,it’s really going to blow their minds when someone tells them there’s a third angle to the abortion debate,pro-choice…for men. That’s going to appear “misogynist” as all hell,because you’re “taking away” a woman’s “right” to be the sole determinant of who gets born and who gets their brains sucked out in a doctor’s chair before the fetus is even conceived.

        Through the same idiotic lens used to read ‘misogynist undertones’ (oooooh,spooookyyy) into the term mangina,we could view a father’s rights activist as an abusive monster who wants to “take away a woman’s children” rather than assert his equal right to their children.

        Besides,there aren’t any misogynists in the greater MRM, just cynical jaded bastards,of which I am one.

        I mean, it does suck to be constantly mischaracterized, but at least we have fun with it. I’ve watched the MSM turn the Tea Party into the re-incarnation of the Klan on national tv. It worked.People believe it’s a group that is about racism rather than taxes and limited government. That’s a much bigger group than the MRM, and people are ready to swallow that line eagerly and ask for seconds.

        You think we’ll get away with not being demonized as ‘misogynists’ for the entire stint of our activism? No way,Jose….excuse my ‘racism’,I meant “Joseph”.

        It doesn’t matter what they call us. Our ideas have staying power. They were conceived by men with gargantuan brass balls,or nothing to lose,and they hit you like a ton of bricks. Even words like ‘mangina’,while slightly juvenile, have a powerful punch and more importantly,they’re infectious.

        They call us ‘misogynists’,but whether or not we get the credit, the ideas are circulating. I have my ear to the ground. There’s real cross-pollination going on. Everywhere in the virtual world I go, I see ideas that were first broken in here in the manosphere.

        No,there’s nothing like universal acceptance yet. Manosphere ideas aren’t “common knowledge”,like “everyone knows women are paid less for the same work”,but our message is getting out there.

        Maybe being characterized as misogynists is helping us in this endeavor somewhat. If ‘MRA’s are misogynists’,then one thing MRA’s are not are real flesh and blood human beings,out there, working with other human beings. Instead,’misogynists’ lurk quietly in the shadows,just out of sight,evilly twisting their mustaches and waiting for a chance to pounce on some poor helpless widdle wummun.

        Think about it. If all you’ve ever heard about MRA’s is “they’re misogynists” and somebody’s telling you all of the things MRAs believe in,which basically amounts to egalitarianism,and you’re actually interested in what you’re hearing,you might ask “Wow,that sounds pretty good,what do you call this discipline/philosophy?” and your companion might reply “Men’s Rights Activism”. Well,I don’t know about you but I’d think something like this “That’s weird, I heard these guys were bitter misogynists who hated women,but it sounds to me like they just want equality. Clearly,I’ve been lied to. I wonder what other bullshit the feminists have fed me over the years?”.

        They key,I think,is not to draw on other men with the “mangina” slur reflexively. After all, if you don’t do much thinking, feminists’ way of telling things makes sense superficially (I even saw an ad for a basketball video game recently that used feminist “psychology”. The dialogue ran thusly “We know what you want,power,control,you want to dominate,and we want to give it to you.” Sound familiar? Of course, it is women,by any sane measurement, who should want these things,as feminist psychology would have it that men already have them!) . It’s inconsistent (see basketball game example) from one realm to another,but you can gloss that over in your mind with rationalizations without too much cognitive dissonance. I can forgive a person for being ignorant of the truth,but not willfully blind to it.

        Thus, I do not reflexively label any man I disagree with a ‘mangina’,but I reserve the term for certain simpering sissies of the male persuasion. They,abortive monstrosities that they are, rightly deserve such contempt and juxtaposition to female genitalia that they could never achieve in their own personal lives, because their manhood has literally been aborted at what appears to be the genetic level.

        It is not because I believe they are women,or like women,that I hold them in such contempt, but because I believe they are not men,or not like men….even though, by all rights, they should be.

        Plus,most of these guys are mama’s boys with daddy issues. Their mentality amounts to a social disease. A blight. If they were not actively hostile to men and our interests, I might pity them, but as long as they stand in my way I will combat them.

        The road to equality will,and must,be paved with the manginas we have trod over to victory.

        White Knights,I am not so concerned with. Most likely,these guys will one day snap when they catch their idolized and pampered wives blowing the mail man and it’ll be a double homicide, or homicide/suicide combo. Crime of passion. One way or another, they’ll be out of the picture pretty quick,either because they shoot themselves or wind up in prison for assault.They are problematic,but it’s a one-off event. They follow a predictable male model of baseline activity with interposed spikes or random outbursts.

        Manginas however,they love being cuckholded. They probably buy women’s turds on ebay to eat and women’s panties from department stores to wear while they do it. Real sick Buffalo Bill-type wacko shit. They’re the ones who think Dworkin’s Men’s Auxilliary catechism is the voice of god from heaven,they’re the ones who wind up being caught 36 dead people later, body parts in the fridge,with the neighbors going “He was such a quiet man.” on the 6 o’clock news.

        • http://thereluctantmysogynist.blogspot.ca/ limeywestlake

          You were on fire with this one! The last 2 paragraphs were genius.
          I do not reflexively use the word mangina, either, for men in a general sense. However, I have met men who are the real deal. Manginas – dyed in the wool. Spineless fuckers who busy themselves tearing down our posters for the laydeez; willowy hipsters in skinny jeans who weave, like remora fish, around the likes of Creepy Bitter Grrl and her ilk. They do not deserve to be called men. They are pathetic wraiths.

    • OneHundredPercentCotton

      My interpretation is simpler – a mangina is a man who willingly surrendered his boy parts.

      See? That’s not so bad.

      He’s the opposite of mysogynist, that mangina is.

      All nice and friendly like.

  • danipettas

    Great article. I agree with @Jay about the “good men project.” That url presupposes that there’s something wrong or shameful about maleness. It’s effed up.

    • Jay

      Yes, a week or so ago at reddit I said something like:

      I have problems with The Good Men Project and some other problems with A Voice For Men, BUT, I know which zine has the default position for men as bad and claims they can fix it if us bad men just listen to those good feminists, and I know which zine thinks men are good and wants to provide us an outlet for our voices.

  • Kimski

    Good man = Good dog.

    Now, go fetch, and I will grant you a pad on the head.
    Tomorrow I’ll teach you to sic ‘em, boy.

    • Jay

      Hmm.

      Maybe a better word than “mangina” that conveys the same thing is “lapdog” plus “lap” dog also conveys the both the sexual motive of why they act as they do as well as they likely outcome, they will be basically neutered and allowed to sit on the laps of women but get no further.

  • Roger O Thornhill

    A number of years ago I found myself ending an all too long relationship with a 39-year-old (divorced) divorce lawyer.

    I told her “I was simply not interested in Eristic argument and only interested in Socratic discussion.” These were the exact words I ended the relationship with.

    She found it hard to believe that I could see the burning rings of fire she was attempting to get me to jump through on a regular basis.

    Whilst in this relationship, I had trouble hearing the alarm bells, I was yet to start a regular prescription of Red Pills.

    After attempting to enter my front door one day unannounced I said before she could step inside “This conversation and any others like it, in the near or distant future can serve no purpose, Goodbye!” And as I calmly closed my front door on her, I heard her say “You’re a Callous Brute!”

    To this day I take it as a compliment, it’s more poetic than being called a bad man don’t you think?

    Another great article Mr JTO!

    • Darryl X

      “A number of years ago I found myself ending an all too long relationship with a 39-year-old (divorced) divorce lawyer.”

      “Whilst in this relationship, I had trouble hearing the alarm bells, I was yet to start a regular prescription of Red Pills.”

      Snap out of it, man. What the hell were you thinking. For me, the alarm bells went off at woman. If not that, then divorce attorney would have driven it home.

      • Kimski

        Run, Forrest, run!
        Run as fast as you can, and then double the speed.
        :D

      • Ex Machina

        If her mom had also divorced her dad,and she grew up without a father, that’s the trifecta of batshit crazy,my friend. Divorced, Divorce Lawyer, daughter of divorced parents,triple D stands for Don’t Date Dat (crazy bitch).

    • http://www.avoiceformen.com Dr. F

      Roger,

      A woman that calls a man a “callous brute” with disdain is exactly the sort to go giggly and quite girly with the Stan Kowalski and whisper to her sheila mates:

      “Oh he’s such a calloused brute – sigh.”

  • Tawil

    Mangina = a man getting in touch with “the feminine” side of himself, and defending “the feminine,” as represented by actual women, from being sullied by it’s opposite. Gay and Arjuna are fine examples.

    White Knight = a man who rejects “the feminine” as part of his self identity and in that sense is the diametric opposite of a mangina. But like a mangina he also defends “the feminine,” in the person of actual women, and he does so much more heroically than a mangina, even unto death.

    Otherwise white knights and manginas are both ‘good men’ in the sense JTO describes above- @JTO:

    “A man, surrendering reason, morality, surrendering the right to an identity as a human being, in favor of the consensus identity afforded to him by the group, based on his utility, his conformance, or his affectations of supplication to the preferred members of the group, such as women.”

    • Atlas Reloaded

      Not all of these “effeminiate men” cause trouble though. What about the grass-eaters in Japan?

      • dejour

        I guess the grass-eaters don’t spend time defending the feminine.

      • Ex Machina

        I see your grass-eaters and I raise you Jeffrey Dahmer.

  • http://pinterest.com/zetapersei/male-privilege/ Perseus

    Love the ‘one good man’ meme, JtO, great pick for the show. Great phenomenon to flesh out.

  • Too Much Coffee

    In the old Soviet era, Russian intellectuals would appear on western television to justify Soviet policy. They were known as apparatchiks and apologists. Feminist apologist is exactly what these “good men” are. Approval seeking apologists.

  • Atlas Reloaded

    Mangina, to me sounds too much like calling a man effeminate. A man lacking in masculine traits as defined by a feminized culture. Where men seek female approval. You know like the one we fuckin live in. Well, already enough shaming men in our culture for that. Using the word “mangina” just sounds too much like that. And it has a high-schoolish quality to it.

    White-knight just describes the real problem better to me.

    • OneHundredPercentCotton

      White knight sounds girly to me, I guess because I have been crushing on white knights since I was a little princess.(Tokie Graham, my kindergarten love, slayed many, many a dragon on my behalf)

      “White Knight ” sounds like the good guy in this context, when, in fact, he is not at all.

      There ARE true White Knights that come to a lady’s rescue, and God Love ‘m. First Responders, paramedics, that stranger who rescued me and my son when my car spun out into a snow bank)..

      White Knights who “rescue” Princesses when they are being assholes are another matter, and shouldn’t be confused with White Knights at all….

      • Darryl X

        Back in the day you slayed the dragon to marry the virgin, now there are no virgins and you have to marry the dragon. This quote is by someone else. Art Vandelay. Maybe he got it from somewhere else. I like it. But I’d rather marry the dragon. Thanks.

        • OneHundredPercentCotton

          Sounds like that’s just what you did.

          • Darryl X

            LOL… Yup. No virgins left.

    • Ex Machina

      It sounds similar,but it is only superficially so. When calling a man a “mangina” the idea is not to force him to submit to some particular code of conduct,i.e.”take off your hat in the presence of a lady”,but rather to differentiate himself into one of the two recognizable modes of human existence,male or female. Not some blasphemous combination of both, the former of which he is always trying to purge himself of but never quite succeeding,like the drunken priest or recovering alcoholic.

  • Aimee McGee

    The SO has just had battle number 8,436 with Fitch base about the interpretation of the parenting order…and it is a clear and concise win on his part, amd she has had her knuckles wrapped by her own lawyer. He is of course a Bad Man…no wonder I fancy him. ;)

    • Tawil

      Congrats! wins are hard to come by.

  • externalangst

    There is something strange about men who agree with the tenet of feminism that men hate women. Germane Greer stated, “women have no idea just how much men hate them”.

    The one good man seems to understand and agree that men hate women. Is it because they can relate so much to the idea that men hate women? Is this why they point the finger at every other man as misogynists but themselves. Are they protesting too much? Opportunism or projection?

    • Tawil

      @Externalangst: “There is something strange about men who agree with the tenet of feminism that men hate women.”

      Strange indeed. I have never been able to relate to their stance, find it absolutely foreign.

      I sometimes wonder if that behavior (confessing your own evilness) is an attempt to appease a crippling sense of shame and self-loathing they have internalized as a result of women’s denigration. Rather than fight against the foe they instead give in, as if to say “If I do this constructive deed for women then I can stop beating myself up for a few hours”.

      But who knows. The alternative claim that these men are getting laid or getting power has never felt like a convincing argument…. a lot of these men get neither.

      • Kimski

        “Strange indeed. I have never been able to relate to their stance, find it absolutely foreign.”

        Think of it this way, Tawil:

        The one good man will do womens bidding in order to get approval or more likely sex. Because he is a good man he will get neither of those, unless he’s a RICH good man, because that is obviously not what a lot of women seeks in a man, they chose to have children or sex with.

        The qualities of the ‘good man’ doesn’t register into the female equation until later, after the child is born, and they need a caretaker and provider, because the one they had sex with won’t stand for their shit testing and left.

        The resulting projected hatred of women on to other men, are very likely grounded in a deep seeded frustration, from not being rewarded with the thing at the top of the good man’s agenda, namely sex and the possibility of procreation, despite their spineless grovelling.

        These kinds of men are losers, both among men and women. Women tend to have sex with exactly the type of men they at the same time claim to despise. And at the same time, they will secretly despise the men that doesn’t make their ‘gina tingle and grovels.
        Among men they are losers, because they are in need of the herd, and unable to stand on their own two feet.

        Another fine example of inhereted inconsistency and double-think, in other words.

        Which is kind of funny when you think about it, because that also means that women are the ones that keep breeding the men they claim to despise into existence, through their choice in mating partner.
        I usually refer to this as the ‘Ouroboros-Syndrome’. :)

        So, of course the good man hates women.
        He has to watch other men go home with the women he adores so much, that he’s willing to give up any selfrespect to score them, which again is the main reason he doesn’t get laid.

        Excellent piece of work, JtO.

        • Tawil

          @Kimski: “He has to watch other men go home with the women he adores so much, that he’s willing to give up any self respect to score them, which again is the main reason he doesn’t get laid.”

          Theoretically it makes reasonable sense – that the motivation is to get sex… why else would they suck up in such a disingenuous way? The fact that they fail in that goal makes me wonder if there are other more primary motivations going on.

          I’d love to get 100 virulent manginas and put them through a battery of psychological tests to get to the truth… expose them once and for all.

          • Kimski

            Maternal imprinting very likely plays a significant role, too.

            Personally, I have a huge problem with dealing with the fact, that my adult fishing buddies can’t go on a trip, without having to ask for permission from the Missus at home. It’s sort of OT, but then again it’s not, because as I see it, one thing is a consequence of the other.

            “Permission?” -WTF?!
            Geesh, man. What happened to your spine?

            I would probably be able to understand it, if there were some kind of trade off involved. As in, ‘I will go do this thing this weekend, because we don’t have any other plans, and next weekend we can do something that you want to do’, but that doesn’t seem to be the case. They actually have to ask for permission, to go spend a couple of hours doing something they really enjoy doing.

            Sometimes I feel like scratching my head in amazement over the fact, that grown men have to ask for permission to do anything, as if they were still little boys. I just send a kind thought to the Old Man above instead, for every day that I’m not married.

          • Tawil

            “Maternal imprinting very likely plays a significant role, too.”

            That would have to be near the top of the list of motivators. ‘Internal objects’ as the psychologists call them. These men allow their wives to slot straight into the same role, dictating if/when men can have some play time.

          • Kimski

            Agreed.
            I have witnessed countless examples of men marrying women that are exactly like their mother, right down to the looks.
            Those are the ones I could easily refer to as ‘still married’, and the reason for that is pretty obvious to anyone but themselves.

          • http://www.johntheother.com John the Other

            It’s not to get sex, it’s to get and to retain a public identity, as approved by the group.

        • Theseus

          Ahhh yes, women spreading their legs for so-called bad boys ( re:assertive and independent), then spending an unbelievable amount of time bitching about how much they hate these kind of men…and then spreading their legs for these so called bad boys again.

          All the while the cowardly traitor (or good man) says to himself: “Gee I’m acting the way she says she wants men to act. How come she only sees me as as a friend”?

          In the meantime the coward’s assertive and independent male acquaintances say: “Wotta pussy”!!

          Yes. Yes. Too many men have signed onto this insanity. What’s amazing is that these cowards will stubbornly continue this behavior – selling out their brothers, and any self respect that they may have – hoping something is going to change.

          Kimski, I am also glad that you made a distinction between the guy that can get laid because he makes a woman hot, and a guy that gets woman primarily because he has money. I used to bar tend at a couple of night clubs; I would see guys that didn’t have a pot to piss in, go home with the most physically attractive women in the joint ( some of these guys were in bands too) mostly because they were assertive and didn’t give a shit.

          • Kimski

            “..go home with the most physically attractive women in the joint ( some of these guys were in bands too)”

            Been there.
            Done that.

          • Theseus

            @ Kimski

            Yep…. A few myself. A bar tender in a high volume atmosphere; people are always vying for your attention.

          • Kimski

            @Theseus:

            Tell any woman below 40 that you play guitar in a hard rock band, and watch her pupils dilate.
            And they say men doesn’t notice such things.
            LOL.

  • Mr. XY

    Great article. JTO:

  • http://www.avoiceformen.com/activism-page/karma/ KARMA MRA MGTOW

    Joe Rogan explains to an obnoxious young female the principles of pussy begging and pussy power.

  • Adi

    I think the term “mangina” is offensive to actual vaginas.

  • harrywoodape

    Everywhere I see boys feminizing themselves or trying to appease women by throwing another man under a bus. I don’t think it is about getting laid. I think that is a shallow explanation for all men’s activities…trying to get laid. I don’t think it holds true for so-called “manginas” and “white-knights”.
    I think we need to be firm and honest but also understanding of those men.

  • HieronymusBraintree

    I got bounced from Pharyngula after calling PZ a lickspittle, among other thought crimes. If you ask me the term “feminist lickspittle” has a very nice ring to it, rolls crisply off the tongue and is bound to send the BP of vainglorious blowhards of Meyers’s ilk soaring into the danger zone since he and others of his type pretend to be courageous truth-tellers when in fact they’re just loudly playing it safe. (Imagine the fierce bravery it takes a professional academic to defend feminism! Wow. Am I not impressed!)

  • Robert St. Estephe

    Aw, c’mon, how can a heteronormative patriarchal oppressor truly understand what a good man is (as defined by the Fankfurt School and Norman O. Brown principle of liberation from patriarchal superego via the promotion of “polymorphous perversity”). Here is what a good man is, as described in the voice of the oppressed “other”:

    1991 – Omaima Aree Nelson – Costa Mesa, California – murdered, cooked and ate husband, boasting of her recipes.

    http://unknownmisandry.blogspot.com/2011/10/omaima-aree-nelson-man-eating.html

  • Atlas Reloaded

    Are you delaying what I post ? Hey JtO fuck you punk!

    • http://www.deanesmay.com Dean Esmay

      The Spambots have a mind of their own, your comments weren’t held on purpose. But why are you bagging on JTO?

    • http://www.johntheother.com John the Other

      What’s the problem?
      Note: it occurs to me that Atlas Reloaded’s account may have been compromised by somebody. As far as I know, he and I have had no dispute or even conversation prior to now.

    • https://www.facebook.com/pages/A-Voice-for-Men/102001393188684 Paul Elam

      I have a better idea. Fuck YOU.

      I am going to ban you now. If you can work out an apology to JtO, you might be allowed back in, or if you can show us that some punk hijacked your account or that you have some sort of organically induced Tourrette’s that plays out on your keyboard, then we might work something out.

      I am pretty fucking sure that JtO has earned more respect than this.

      • http://www.deanesmay.com Dean Esmay

        I kind of assumed maybe he was joking around? Atlas has been a regular and not given to ridiculous outbursts so I thought maybe it was a “ha ha” thing? Dunno, it seemed weird.

        • Theseus

          That’s what I thought it might have been. Problem is you can’t hear voice inflection on a post. So if a person is going to joke around like that, it falls on that individual to put in something like a “ha ha” or “LOL” afterward.

  • Xevaster

    Interesting article.
    The only thing I can think of whenever I hear the word Mangina is the following explanation from Duce Bigalow.

    T.J. Hicks: The “man-gina”: it’s a professional term we man-whores use to describe our he-pussy.

  • Falland

    The word mangina is like the word bitch, if it did not exist, it would have to be invented. There is a reason both of these words have stuck.

  • Brigadon

    I thought this was an article about David Futrelle.

    Oh wait, it is.

  • Fredrik

    Exactly a month after this article was posted, the PvP webcomic ran two strips about white knights, Cry for Help and Boys Night Pout. Coincidence? Maybe…