Coded male

It’s not the laziness – It’s the sanity

Andy Thomas (AndyMan) had a post up recently entitled “Introducing Kelly Jones and ‘Wise Misogyny'”, Ms Jones being a fascinating woman with a soothing voice and some not so soothing, penetrating insights into the general incompetence of women and the general laziness of men in dealing with such snowflakes.

Not only does Ms Jones characterize men as lazy, but she believes this indolence results in misandry:

Men have permitted women to become morons. It is the lazy man who, himself, is desirous of being as stupid and irrational as he can get away without compromising his survival, who is responsible for misandry to a large part…Men have let themselves into the shit. If they weren’t chasing skirt, playing the fool, adoring women’s idiotic frivolities and girlish sexual displays, then women would have no hold over them. But lazy men are like dogs—they believe woman is the master.

In addition to Ms. Jones, a new femtroll commenter “Kasey, aka therose202″ made a lot of waves with her clueless neoteny and outsized breasts. When the discussion derailed, Ms Jones blamed not Kasey, but rather, the men who were treating her as a rational adult. So, not only are we lazy and deserving of sexual shaming for our normal desires, but we get victim-blamed as well. If Kasey weren’t there to underline some of Ms Jones’s points, it would have been necessary to invent her.

I tried to respond several times to Ms. Jones’s thesis but my comments got caught in the spam filter, so I decided to take one last shot at it and expand my comments into an article for AVfM.

Although Ms. Jones’s thesis – that men are behaving irrationally and lazily when they tolerate the incompetence and frivolous nature of women – is certainly intriguing, I believe it paints an incomplete picture of the motivations and justifications of men’s long tolerance for that crap.

I imagine that someone as skilled at Evolutionary Psychology as Karen Straughan (GirlWritesWhat) might point out that because women can articulate their pains and needs more effectively than the children in their care, men are under evolutionary pressure to heed their demands, however ill-advised those demands might me. A man who ignores his babymomma risks killing his offspring.

Every man who has ever met a woman knows that women are mercurial – their behavior and moods can shift suddenly and unpredictably for reasons that are obscure – although I believe that the notions of shit tests and the camouflage of reproductive capacity can account for a lot of it. A great example of this mercurial nature can be found in the writings of the troll Kasey herself, who wrote on a confession website that:

My emotions change on a whim. It’s ridiculous…I can be chatting happily with someone one moment, and then something could set a spark off in me that a normal person would ignore, but that starts a raging inferno of anger and disgust in me. It bloody sucks. Oh well, I guess it could be worse……

Men’s resources are limited and wasting them on a futile task is not only pointless but it short-changes more worthy and productive applications. Building the 5,000th nuclear missile that you will never use is a waste of money and titanium that would be better spent on, say, pens, commercial transportation, medical devices…

Thus, diverting limited mental and physical resources to the dubious task of trying to make women semi-competent is silly and wasteful. The supposed laziness of men has nothing to do with it.

Men also recognize that women are vindictively vengeful when slighted, and that rejecting women’s sexual advances, ignoring their attention-whoring, or calling them out on their idiocy can trigger their wrath. A principled concern for the well-being of self and loved ones also motivates men – men learn quickly that if you piss women off, even inadvertently, they will recruit other men to beat the shit out of you. This is the unlimited proxy violence that young, stupid, and pretty women have had at their disposal 24/7 since the dawn of human history – and I can prove it.

Over 4000 years ago, in the oldest surviving piece of human literature, “The Epic of Gilgamesh”, Gilgamesh (“Gil”) refuses the sexual/marital advances of the woman/goddess Ishtar, because Gil is disgusted and perhaps even fearful of Ishtar’s brutality to other men. Ishtar recognizes the truth and justice in Gil’s charges but she nevertheless enlists her father’s help to seek vengeance on Gil. As a result, many suffer and die, including Gil’s beloved friend Enkidu.

As a man, if you don’t learn to walk on eggshells when the harpy starts waving her “guns” (proxy male defenders) around, you are as doomed today as you were in ancient Mesopotamia.

Just ask the gentle, loving Kasey herself:

I occasionally like to fantasise [sic] about how I would murder people I despise (especially cheaters). Is this bad? There’ve been some pretty messed up thoughts…like in one, I imagined throwing them into a plane engine like that one guy in lost…in another I imagined stabbing them multiple times in places that would kill them slowly…

Characterizing men’s understanding of these real and potent threats as “lazy” is a stunning intellectual blindness that can only be characterized as, um, Dumb? Shortsighted? Sloppy? Suicidal?

I do so hope Ms Jones can look past these mean-spirited, judgmental terms to see the deeper truth they reveal. “Men” don’t decide things – a man does, and then another and another, one at a time. Outside of the M(H)RM, it is rare for men to discuss their fears and concerns in any open fashion – and when we dare to broach these subjects, we often get hammered for it. We just don’t share and bond in that way like women do, and projecting the women’s hen party group think onto men is ludicrous as patriarchy theory.

Now, having ripped away at them, I do hope we hear more from Ms Jones and a lot less from the violent neophyte Kasey. Oh, and for you younger, lustier guys – Kasey sleeps with her shy twin sister. And shame on you, or whatever.

About August Løvenskiolds

Once he stumbled onto GirlWritesWhat's videos, August Løvenskiolds, aka The Bibo Sez, started eating red pills like they were tic-tacs. He likes debating feminists, but knows this stage will pass soon enough.

Main Website
View All Posts
  • Legion

    An intriguing and logical analysis that rings quite true to me, though I fear you may go somewhat too far and risk victim-complexing men (and thus denying our agency in this). Though that might just be my brain seeking a false middle fallacy.

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

      I thought exactly the same thing, almost word for word. Including the not being sure I agreed with myself bit.

      The meta-analysis will take weeks to untangle!

      Still, I would say to Ms. Jones, a rational mind can only operate on the data it is given or able to perceive, and the most rational of processes can collapse like a house of cards if based on faulty premise. Not having the experience of being born male and raised in an environment where most of what you are told is false and having no easy way to note that it is false is troubling, so you might do well to heed what is said here: men are likely in possession of data you had not thought of on this matter. One of the reasons sites like this is so that men may begin pooling their knowledge and sharing notes so as to better understand not just female nature but their own.

      I am reminded of an amusing chant my lovely wife recently shared with me:

      “Women! What do we want?” “WE DON’T KNOW!” “When do we want it?” “RIGHT NOW!!!”

      There are those who say it is impossible for men to understand women. I no longer believe this is the case, although this may be the first time in history when sufficient numbers of men have gotten together to tackle the problem and come to some conclusions. Women may not like some of the conclusions, but it isn’t particularly relevant how they feel about it.

  • Stephen O’Brian

    Thank you August.
    Ms Jone’s thesis about how men submit to females struck me as intellectually lazy. Had she been more intellectually rigorous she would have consulted with insightful men like yourself.
    Your ideas by contrast add much needed depth and clarity.

    • http://www.mralondon.org Andy Thomas (aka “Andy Man”)

      I have to disagree. She was far from intellectually lazy herself, but her thoughts were either developed in a vacuum, or at least on the far-side of the universe from here. I do respect her willingness to stand against the cultural tide–there was nothing lazy about that.

  • http://www.genderratic.com Typhonblue (Asha James)

    “You know, I’m one of those “tough girls” who always is externally strong and happy.”

    Well, certainly if you say it, it must be true.

    “I’ve always defended my more shy twin sister in school, from both emotional and physical abuse. But the turth is, I’m actually afraid of a lot of things. My sister and I sleep together, but some nights even with her there I can’t sleep because I’m just so…scared. Of life, of the dark, of the little sounds I hear all over the place…it’s terrifying, and really, REALLY sucks.”

    *sigh*

    You know a healthy dose of self-agency would help with that, right? Exactly what you won’t get from feminism.

  • donzaloog

    That Kasey is a fucking nutcase. I pity the poor guy who winds up with her.

    • Kimski

      Usually caretakers at asylums don’t really mind. They get payed to do it. ;)

  • http://marktrueblood.posterous.com/ Mark Trueblood

    On a societal level I agree with her characterization of the “laziness.” But on an individual level I’m not sure what we can do other than go our own way.

    • Kimski

      Well, if that’s how you feel, then let me introduce you to a happy and content man, who doesn’t have to worry about the things described by Mr.Lionshield in his excellent article:

      Living well is the best ‘revenge’.

    • Bombay

      I agree on the individual level, but on the society level, it is all about political power. This is demonstrated time and time again in most of the articles posted here. Those with power decide the winners and the utilities. Don’t like being a utility? Die, go to jail or be on the street. And as stated by Joshua in War Games, “the only winning move is not to play.”

  • Nightwing1029

    Dissenting opinion incoming!
    (Feel free to label me however you guys like)

    While I agree that her argument could have definitely been stated in a much better set of terms, I do not disagree with her argument on the whole.

    Human beings (neither just men nor women) are capable of so much a greater capacity for many things than we allow ourselves to believe, or even achieve.

    Using our brains, we as men are capable of great feats of logic, reasoning, and thought (also compassion, empathy, anger, etc, but that is an argument for another time), that far outstrip the level we utilize them at. You can see it all the time, just observing people. And if we do not live up to our full capacity, as human beings, what would you call that?

    Lots of the MHRM uses the phrase “Take the red pill.” Is it possible, that taking that red pill involves seeing ourselves and our own shortcomings, our own faults, and our own private fears?

    From my own experience dealing with people, not just from observing, I find that often when we (in the context of people) deny the possibility of something as being true, it is often more true (mainly in the case of criticism from others). Also, when we find ourselves angry at something someone says, it’s most often because we are fighting against realizing that we are seeing proof of something that goes against our own narrative of what is real.

    This, I believe, is part of what she did not address. That we are capable of so much more, but never strive to live up to our capability. Maybe because of society. Maybe because of family. Whatever the reason, we are human. We stumble. We fall. We fail.

    The next step is getting up, and working to figure out where we went wrong. Then trying again.

    This is not here to shame anyone, or blame anyone. It is my thought on Male agency. We are capable of so much more, and should step up to fulfill our potential. Not for women, but for ourselves.

    Because, lets face it, it’s our life we live. And they can come along for our ride, or stay behind. But we only have one life, and we should always strive to make it the absolute best that it can possibly be.

    As for the laziness Ms. Jones mentions, well…
    Can you say that it isn’t mental laziness, to not look at our own fear, and realize that it’s controlling our lives, instead of us, by conscious effort? Or when a woman sits there and hits us/berates us/attacks us/etc, that it’s not mental laziness that stops us from telling her to leave our lives?

    Because that is how I view it. Mental laziness, on the part of men (And I am not even going to attempt to say I have not been guilty of it, many times, because I have. And sometimes I am still guilty of it, even now) may not be the attack on us, that people want to think it is. It may just be something as simple as not owning up to our own fear.

    And speaking of which…
    When you pointed out Kasey posting a blog about wanting to hurt people she doesn’t like, can you honestly say you haven’t had thoughts about hurting other people, in your life?

    I ask this, fully knowing I have. In fact, just under a year ago, I wanted to shove one of my swords through my own brother’s throat. At his wedding. And twist.

    However, some context might be in order.

    When I was young (like 6, I believe. Too long ago to remember accurately), my brother used me as a sex toy. When he hit 13, he did it again, repeatedly. Also, he has been mentally, emotionally, and physically abusive to me for most of my life.

    If that isn’t a valid reason to think about hurting him, I could not say what is. (Also, there is lots more, but I already feel I have gone WAY over the amount of space I want to take)

    FYI, I left my brother’s wedding, as I did not want to ruin it for anyone. He’s just fine, and married.

    HOWEVER, do not judge a person on their thoughts. It is not the thoughts of a person, that defines them. It is their actions. Judge a person based upon their actions, and you will see the reality. Judge a person on their thoughts and you miss the person, entirely.

    Not saying she doesn’t need to seek help. In fact, if she reads this, I highly encourage that she seeks professional help, as soon as possible. Just that I find it morally wrong to bring this up, just to prove your own point.

  • http://www.mralondon.org Andy Thomas (aka “Andy Man”)

    It’s been quite interesting for me to follow the discussion on this. I have been previously perplexed, frustrated and even harmed by other men’s attitudes when it comes questions of gender. However, I now accept fully that stating that men, as a gender, are simply intellectually lazy is incorrect.

  • Nightwing1029

    Splitting my original comment into two parts, as it might be too long…

    Dissenting opinion incoming!
    (Feel free to label me however you guys like)

    While I agree that her argument could have definitely been stated in a much better set of terms, I do not disagree with her argument on the whole.

    Human beings (neither just men nor women) are capable of so much a greater capacity for many things than we allow ourselves to believe, or even achieve.

    Using our brains, we as men are capable of great feats of logic, reasoning, and thought (also compassion, empathy, anger, etc, but that is an argument for another time), that far outstrip the level we utilize them at. You can see it all the time, just observing people. And if we do not live up to our full capacity, as human beings, what would you call that?

    Lots of the MHRM uses the phrase “Take the red pill.” Is it possible, that taking that red pill involves seeing ourselves and our own shortcomings, our own faults, and our own private fears?

    From my own experience dealing with people, not just from observing, I find that often when we (in the context of people) deny the possibility of something as being true, it is often more true (mainly in the case of criticism from others). Also, when we find ourselves angry at something someone says, it’s most often because we are fighting against realizing that we are seeing proof of something that goes against our own narrative of what is real.

    This, I believe, is part of what she did not address. That we are capable of so much more, but never strive to live up to our capability. Maybe because of society. Maybe because of family. Whatever the reason, we are human. We stumble. We fall. We fail.

    The next step is getting up, and working to figure out where we went wrong. Then trying again.

    This is not here to shame anyone, or blame anyone. It is my thought on Male agency. We are capable of so much more, and should step up to fulfill our potential. Not for women, but for ourselves.

    Because, lets face it, it’s our life we live. And they can come along for our ride, or stay behind. But we only have one life, and we should always strive to make it the absolute best that it can possibly be.

    • http://marktrueblood.posterous.com/ Mark Trueblood

      I agree with you, and that’s why I don’t mind Kelly Jones’ characterization of “laziness.” The problem comes when we as individuals no longer want to be lazy – either we try to reason with the ocean tides or we go our own way.

      It’s not even so much about one gender or another, it’s the near-unstoppable tyranny of emotional “thinking.”

      • Nightwing1029

        Maybe she needs to work on how she phrases things. This is why we get feedback from people. To learn.

        Emotions are not thinking. They are part of the feminine storm. Logic is the tool we use to slow down the feminine storm, and redirect it in a more useful way.

      • August Løvenskiolds

        I feel the challenge of “lazy” on a couple of levels –

        The personal – since my worth in society is based on my utility, being called a lazy man means “dispose of this one”.

        My brothers (and I view all men as such) – are undeserving of the global shaming and dismissal it entails.

        Both men and women get caught in traps like this and we may be stuck with it – just as men are judged by their physical utility, women are judged by their physical attractiveness.

        • Nightwing1029

          Is there something wrong with being lazy?
          We all need time to relax and enjoy ourselves.
          I think we might be looking at lazy in the wrong way.
          Maybe it’s not necessarily bad.
          However, it’s been made out to be a dig, in the past.
          But consider that it might be something we need to be, from time to time.

          • Bombay

            Lazy does not make a good utility. Please remember that most women view men as utilities. Government views all men that way.

          • August Løvenskiolds

            Relaxation is indeed a basic human need, but this particular bit of “lazy” had more the flavor of “sluggish”, “slothful”, “shiftless” and even “leach” and “dull”.

        • http://marktrueblood.posterous.com/ Mark Trueblood

          I think by “lazy” Kelly Jones means to say men allow and cultivate frivolity & lack of accountability in women.

  • Nightwing1029

    As for the laziness Ms. Jones mentions, well…
    Can you say that it isn’t mental laziness, to not look at our own fear, and realize that it’s controlling our lives, instead of us, by conscious effort? Or when a woman sits there and hits us/berates us/attacks us/etc, that it’s not mental laziness that stops us from telling her to leave our lives?

    Because that is how I view it. Mental laziness, on the part of men (And I am not even going to attempt to say I have not been guilty of it, many times, because I have. And sometimes I am still guilty of it, even now) may not be the attack on us, that people want to think it is. It may just be something as simple as not owning up to our own fear.

    And speaking of which…
    When you pointed out Kasey posting a blog about wanting to hurt people she doesn’t like, can you honestly say you haven’t had thoughts about hurting other people, in your life?

    I ask this, fully knowing I have. In fact, just under a year ago, I wanted to shove one of my swords through my own brother’s throat. At his wedding. And twist.

    However, some context might be in order.

    When I was young (like 6, I believe. Too long ago to remember accurately), my brother used me as a sex toy. When he hit 13, he did it again, repeatedly. Also, he has been mentally, emotionally, and physically abusive to me for most of my life.

    If that isn’t a valid reason to think about hurting him, I could not say what is. (Also, there is lots more, but I already feel I have gone WAY over the amount of space I want to take)

    FYI, I left my brother’s wedding, as I did not want to ruin it for anyone. He’s just fine, and married.

    HOWEVER, do not judge a person on their thoughts. It is not the thoughts of a person, that defines them. It is their actions. Judge a person based upon their actions, and you will see the reality. Judge a person on their thoughts and you miss the person, entirely.

    Not saying she doesn’t need to seek help. In fact, if she reads this, I highly encourage that she seeks professional help, as soon as possible. Just that I find it morally wrong to bring this up, just to prove your own point.

    • August Løvenskiolds

      When someone makes their violent or suicidal thoughts public – and in this case, Kasey posted her thoughts on a public forum for all the world to see – this act represents both an escalation of intent and an implicit call for help.

      Is it morally wrong to point out that someone is waving around a gun and making violent threats? To my thinking, it would have been morally wrong for me to fail to point her out.

      Does Kasey not realize the danger of an attractive yound woman calling for violence? If not, then surely someone needed to intervene before the gun went off. http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/03/us/massachusetts-dog-fires-gun/index.html?hpt=hp_bn1

      Now, did I also shamelessly exploit Kasey’s example repeatedly to make my point? Absolutely yes I did – just as you did to make your point – and I’ll do it again and again, because I refuse to let the shaming tactics of feminists have power over me. Is this morally wrong? A feminist, fearful of a slave who has just broken his chains, would surely think so.

      And thus we can circle back to Jones’s original point – should men actively engage the violent idiocy of women like Kasey, as I did? Yet another reason why we shouldn’t would be the moral disapprobation of folks like you, who still think that “nice” gets stuff done for Men’s Human Rights.

      • Nightwing1029

        Did I say nice gets things done?
        Absolutely not.
        Now here’s a question for you:
        You admit you went out of your way to exploit her (most of what I have issue with, by the way), but if someone did the exact same to you, would you cry foul?
        If the answer to that is yes, I hope you understand what I mean when I say that’s hypocritical (something I will always fight against, even in myself).
        I have to look up disapprobation. Give me a sec.
        Strong disapproval, typically on moral grounds.
        Got it!
        Let me see if I can explain why I have a problem with it.
        I don’t see a problem with engaging someone who needs to be told where they are going wrong.
        I disagree with how you did it. Shamelessly exploiting her, and using her to prove your point.
        (Speaking of which, what do you mean I did to make my point?)
        I could give you several names of other women (pick just about any one on register-her.com) that you could have used, instead of her.
        Also, it’s the fact that you did this, when it is almost a 100% chance that she will never see it. If she were to see it, that would be completely different.
        And I am wondering something else.
        Do you think, for even a second, that I am a feminist?
        Cause I gotta tell you something, that might screw with your mind.
        I consider myself a gender egalitarian.
        I believe that it’s best to be respectful of everyone. Even if you don’t agree with them. (My moral stance)
        If you are trying to help others, don’t forget to help everyone. Not just one set of people.
        So, now that you understand where I am coming from, do you still think that what you did was right?

  • Grumpy Old Man

    Lazy might not have been the most effective word. Passive seems to define it better.

  • Nightwing1029

    Bombay, there is no reply button for you, so I am replying here.
    Who the $#@% cares how a woman or the government views men? I don’t.
    I was in the military. But I do not, nor ever will, see myself as a utility.
    I, and all other men, as well as human beings, are not disposable.
    And if I need to be lazy, then I need to be lazy.
    If you need to be lazy, then you need to be lazy.
    If someone else doesn’t like that you, or I or anyone else, has needs that need to be met…
    $#@% ‘em!

  • Robert Sides

    Men don’t like being called “victims” because it taps into the shaming they get which says men MUST stand alone, be independent, and cut their own ice. That same dynamic keeps men silent, lest they be deemed “weak” (and therefore, shunned emotionally, sexually, etc.). If hot women declared, “I only screw male victims,” that would change in a nanosecond.

    The truth is, no man is an island. No man raises a barn himself. The “system” CAN make you a victim. The best of men do, eventually, die.

    That is, there ARE limits.

    The problem is, we’re not allowed to admit them. Even in job interviews, when asked to name our weak points, we’re to say things like “I often work too hard.”

    Being fearless is not being courageous. Acting when afraid IS,

    Being a bona fide victim is honorable (or at least not shameful). Not acting when you can…and should… IS something different.

    My endless anger against so-called MRAs from decades ago is based on several things:

    Groups were led by men whose personal fear kept members inert during early, easily rebuffed, feminist forays. That passivity empowered women’s groups.

    Men refused to act despite all explanations of WHY action was needed and demonstrations on HOW to do it.

    That was followed by endless laments that guys didn’t know why things were worsening (losing custody, paying high CS, false DV charges, etc.). Had they said, “We were too afraid to act so naturally things worsened,” I would have accepted it. Instead they denied the link between their putting “Kick me!” signs on their backs and ensuing sore arses.

    The VERY worst of their “sins” was shooting anyone who chose to act on their behalf.

    In some ways I still believe,” Eff you, you friggin’ dolts! You didn’t deserve custody!”

    Now, many/most men are taught at a very early age (when parents are, more or less, giants), that it’s wrong to hit girls…even when they hit first. I learned not to react when my older sister dug nails into my wrist and drew blood.

    Couple that stoical training with older boys and other men physically enforcing the “Don’t hit girls!” rule and you get guys who mask suffering next to Creampuffs who feel they can slap guys with impunity.

    This needs to change.

    On the verbal level, every time I hear a smug fembot sneer, “Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned,” I say, “Except the man who clocks her.”

    I suspect more and more guys will refuse to sit still when females start fights. Most men learn to not start fights they can’t finish. Why should “equal” women not learn that equal lesson, too?

    I’m not encouraging guys to be violent. I’m suggesting women grow up and accept the consequences of their actions. Otherwise, they risk this:

    http://tinyurl.com/d8edtm4

    • Grumpy Old Man

      Being a victim is about what happens to you out of your control. Not being a victim is how you process that experience and take a course of action within your control. Being a victim is to enter a situation out of ignorance. Not being a victim is when you inter a situation fully aware and chose to do so without reservation.

    • Stephen O’Brian

      “My endless anger against so-called MRAs from decades ago is based on several things:

      Groups were led by men whose personal fear kept members inert during early, easily rebuffed, feminist forays. That passivity empowered women’s groups.”

      Yes, there was some of that.
      But I was there as an MRA (didn’t know or use the term then) and I can tell you some of us spoke out fearlessly, but were hopelessly outnumbered. The number of MRAs back then was miniscule compared to these days.

    • MGTOW-man

      “Now, many/most men are taught at a very early age (when parents are, more or less, giants), that it’s wrong to hit girls…even when they hit first. I learned not to react when my older sister dug nails into my wrist and drew blood.

      Couple that stoical training with older boys and other men physically enforcing the “Don’t hit girls!” rule and you get guys who mask suffering next to Creampuffs who feel they can slap guys with impunity.

      This needs to change. ”

      —You are absolutely correct! It does need to change…and is one thing I would like to see take affect before I die.

      I hope men grow the balls to be man enough again to say to women that if she/they is/are so equal, how about being able to control your impulses to control and punish, EQUALLY, just as men have to do…to walk away and cool down before just automatically hitting, especially when his only “offense” was that he said something that she did not want to hear or “insulted” her. There is no excuse for violence—either way…and their hitting us men IS violent!

      About “not hitting your bigger sister when she dug her claws into your wrist”…what did you do to deserve it?

      You do know, without even knowing you or the situation, that is exactly what the feminists would say if you went to a shelter with lacerations on your head from a monkey wrench being planted on your noggin by a woman who didn’t like something you said to her. They actually think their reactions aren’t violent and that they have an equalizing “right” to beat you even when you only offended her, not hit her.

      Go figure. I think they don’t even know what equality actually is; they are surely oblivious. Their “feelings monitor” sways and skews their perceptions of reality in fact so much, apparently, that they are not fit for discussion—not an objective one anyway.

      One woman’s feelings is more important than all the men in the world!…and we are supposed to take them seriously…as equals!#$%^&*!!! Really now?!!

      I often say on this site that women, by accepting the special preferential treatment such as being able to get away with actually hitting men (other than self-defense) among other things, is actually proving that they are nowhere even close to being our equals.

      One can’t get help with the “marathon” and still believe they won or crossed the finish line equally. Wishful thinking does not superimpose factual reality. If you were helped, you did not win, no matter what you think. You can’t wish away the truth…unless you’re a feminist-minded woman, in which then, you can make up your own truth, whatever it is you feel, then force it on people.

      Equality can be written on paper, in policy, and in pretend land…actually forced down our throats, but it will NEVER be in reality as long as women partake and benefit from special preferential treatment of any kind. It is a self-explanatory no-brainer. We do not owe women lies here.

      They are holding themselves back but are too oblivious to know it.

      “I suspect more and more guys will refuse to sit still when females start fights. Most men learn to not start fights they can’t finish. Why should “equal” women not learn that equal lesson, too? ”
      —because duped men refuse to make them.

      “I learned not to react when my older sister dug nails into my wrist and drew blood.”
      —That is something I never learned. I mean, not with my sister, because she knew hitting me was mean, abusive, and the last thing for her safety. Besides, my father taught her that real ladies do not hit men except when in real, unimagined danger. But with other girls and women, not one of them has ever gotten away with hitting me out of an impulse to punish and control me. In relationships, in the very few that turned violent, I never hit first, never would. But I did and will defend myself and I will decide when and how that will happen. My body has worth and no one, man or woman, will hit me just because I said something they did not want to hear, and get away with it.

      Not violence, just self-defense.

      I guess they want to remove our right to defend ourselves if attacked by a woman. But over my dead body!

      Mr. Sides, I really like your commentary. You are spot-on. I wish more MHRA’s would take lessons from you because you are not afraid to tell it exactly like it is!

      You have been an excellent observer and thinker and sometimes that is all the proof one needs.

      Not in every way maybe…and that is OK, but you and I are a lot alike.

      Keep it up!

  • by_the_sword

    I am quite tired of women going on and on about what is wrong with men and telling us how to fix said problems.

    They ought to address their own problems among themselves, instead of trying to “fix” men.

  • Eriu

    To be fair to Ms. Jones, I have not seen her video, so the only thing I can legitimately comment on is this statement, without I hope taking it out of context.

    “Men have permitted women to become morons. It is the lazy man who, himself, is desirous of being as stupid and irrational as he can get away without compromising his survival, who is responsible for misandry to a large part.”

    I read this and reacted on several levels, none of them positive, first the use of the words “men” collectively and “women” collectively. This, to my mind smacks of the favorite tool of feminist group think: ALL men are……, ALL men do……., ALL women have been oppressed by ALL men……etc.

    Second the phraseology of “men (collectively) have PERMITTED women (collectively)” to BECOME morons”

    This implies, to my mind, that men somehow have always had the power to dictate the behavior of women, and that further no responsibility for “becoming morons” rests with the “moron”

    In effect it places the responsibility for the behavior of women at the feet of men who “allow” this behavior. Ms. Jones supplies a reason for this permissive attitude on the part of men.

    “It is laziness, men do this out of stupidity and irrationality…….. so he can “get away without compromising his survival”

    This is interesting and again to be fair to Ms. Jones, she has a valid point here, to survive, self-preservation, she has touched on the deeper more complex issue, when a woman is “being a moron” and for this I’m going to draw on a rather generalized rationale, women can and do accuse men of all sorts of things, rape, abuse, violence, make threats that they can and do carry out, taking his children, throwing him out of his house, if she feels like it, and of course we can all testify that actual evidence for rape, abuse or violence isn’t necessary – her word is enough.

    Ms. Jones characterizes this tacit approval for the behavior of women as “laziness” I would be more inclined to say inertia, “rabbit caught in the headlights” “damned if you do, and damned if you don’t” rather than laziness.

    To use an example: of my children, only one ever decided that throwing a tantrum was an effective and legitimate method for “getting her own way” she presumed that behaving like a moron was acceptable. It was not. Not only did I and her father make it clear that this behavior was unacceptable, but that not only would she not get what she wanted, she would lose something for being a “moron” to the best of my recollection she did this twice.

    Ok, so women can behave irrationally, as a woman, while I cannot testify to the behavior of ALL women, I can testify that I have personally witnessed a grown adult female throwing the equivalent of a tantrum. In other words being a “moron”

    The other women around her applauded and cheered her on, the men shriveled up into a corner, in fact her threats were exactly what I indicated above, “throw you out of the house” “take the kids” – “I’ll make you suffer” the circumstances?

    A family wedding where the man in question had “looked at another woman”

    This is getting a bit off the point so, let’s go back, the notion of permission, the notion of survival, the notion of male laziness, Ms. Jones has given relatively plausible reasons for some male behavior, but in my opinion whilst her interpretation could be applied to some situations, her rationale only scratches the surface.

    “It’s got to the point where women can mock these stupid men and give some actual substance, in their emotional way, to the culture of misandry which is why it is so popular today. ”

    The “culture of misandry” is an interesting point – is there any doubt that there is an underlying visceral zeitgeist of male hating at play? No, it’s there, it permeates the language, it hangs like a cloud over western society, it manifests itself in the media, in film and television, but, where did it come from – originally, when and where did it become acceptable for hating a man simply for BEING a man? I believe we all know the answer to that, with the rise of feminist ideology.

    This brings us back to female behavior, and to my now grown up and non moronic daughter, her behavior was unacceptable, she was told it was, and she was punished for it, (bye bye barbies).

    Before feminism, would this kind of behavior, “generally” have been deemed acceptable in adult women?

    Ask the feminists, they will claim loudly and repeatedly, that women were expected to behave in certain ways. Of course they characterize this as “oppression” but in reality, there were acceptable and unacceptable ways of behaving that applied to everybody.

    “Can one really blame women, who are so intellectually challenged, that they need men to make rules and laws for them to copy and regurgitate for misandry? I think not. Only if women were capable of genuine original thought and intellectual processes of their own would their misandrous propaganda be, ultimately, their own doing.”

    “Can one really blame women” – again interesting, especially the phraseology, to my mind, it implies that these particular women have a legitimate reason for this behavior – that their behavior is outside their control, that they have simply taken advantage of male “laziness” and “stupidity” and run with it.

    The other side of this interesting interpretive coin is that it also implies that all women who behave like this are inherently “intellectually challenged” that it is somehow only dumb women who act like morons, this is, again to my mind, to absolve ALL women from being accountable for their behavior.

    But this flies in the face of evidence, was it dumb women who seized the opportunity to promote, propagandize and disseminate the ideology of hate that is feminism? Was it, and is it dumb women who, even now are stripping away even the most basic human rights from men?

    Do these very same women not use their intellect, their abilities to implement more and more male hating policies, laws and legislation?

    In spite of the negative, socially and culturally divisive nature of feminism’s agenda, one cannot reasonably call THESE women dumb or intellectually challenged, they know what they’re doing and why they’re doing it.

    “Men have let themselves into the shit. If they weren’t chasing skirt, playing the fool, adoring women’s idiotic frivolities and girlish sexual displays, then women would have no hold over them. But lazy men are like dogs—they believe woman is the master.”

    This is the part that gave me the most trouble, until I realised something, to all intents and purposes the feminist agenda is bullying legitimised, and it is state sanctioned bullying.

    “do this or I’ll………………….”

    Do men find women attractive? Do men make fools of themselves over women? Some men do, some men find women “adorable” some men have internalised the whole “chivalry” thing.

    If a man is lucky, he finds himself with a woman who appreciates his attention, reciprocates his kindness, his care – then we have a situation where for whatever reason, which suits both parties, the relationship works. For them.

    But, of course, in real life, playing these “traditional” roles becomes a minefield, rather than reciprocating in kind, some women take calculated, premeditated and callous advantage of men’s “chivalry” and “become morons”

    Ms. Jones statement has some application, her interpretation CAN be indicative of the behaviour of SOME men and SOME women, and her analysis that these particular types of behaviours contributed to the development of “the culture of misandry” is legitimate, but, it is only part of a larger more complex picture.

    But, as with feminism, my problem overall with Ms. Jones’s statement and interpretation is that it makes grand sweeping generalisations about “reasons for” rather than “one of the contributing factors for could be…..”

    I will of course take a much closer look at Ms. Jones entire body of work on this subject, and reiterate, that my commentary is in relation to just this particular statement.

    • Nightwing1029

      Just wow!
      And yes, I can see it as being part of the problem.
      However, it’s been a problem for so long, that it’s gotten to the point that it is currently at.
      Had more men stepped up and said something to the effect of “I understand you have needs of your own that are not being met, but there are responsibilities as well that need to be taken care of…” etc., instead of letting feminists run wild, especially the second wave of feminism, the problem might not exist to the extent that it does.
      But the past is past. Can’t change it.
      Our jobs now are to look at the present, learn from the mistakes of the past, and mindfully move towards a future that benefits all humankind.
      Anything less should be unacceptable.
      At least, for myself, I deem it as such.

    • Stephen O’Brian

      I think you hit the nail on the head – holding men collectively responsible for women’s moronic ways is too much of a generalization.

      Such an assertion also infantalizes women terribly as they are entirely responsible for their own choices, not men who shouldn’t be blamed for such – That’s intellectually lazy!
      There’s also the factor of the female birth control pill which I think had a lot to do with facilitating 2nd wave feminism. With such powerful technology women could act out whilst in a sense holding men reproductively hostage. I haven’t explained that last point well and must rush to an appointment, but will be happy to expand on it more if asked.

  • Wendy

    I don’t think Kasey’s violent. I think she’s just trying to create that mysterious, paradoxical woman persona. “I’m tough but fragile, innocent but sexual, bla bla bla” She’s trying to be that crazy, wild girl she thinks guys want. Fulfilling that Marilyn Monroe quote, “If you can’t love me at my worst, you sure as hell don’t deserve me at my best” or whatever it is. Or that Sheryl Crow song. She wants someone ‘strong enough to be her man.’ Trust me, I’ve had the misfortune of being acquainted with girls like her. Especially at her age. She has no idea how to be a real woman.

    • August Løvenskiolds

      While Kasey may not engage in violence herself, the danger is that she might incite men to do violence on her behalf. With her neoteny might take her all of 20 seconds for her to charm some horny dude into committing violence at her whim. “That mean man hurt me!”

      Wendy, this is also a part of the dilemma that men face – do dismiss Kasey as a silly little girl and thereby, rob her of her agency?

      Or, do we treat her as a mature adult who should be responsable for her choices, and thereby, is worthy of the rights that come with the assumption of responsibilities?

      Kelly Jones seems to be saying that we ought to give Kasey a metaphorical slap and tell her to grow the fuck up – and take the time and effort to teach her how to do that.

      My point was that while Kasey does need to be called out on her shit, it is Kasey who needs to take charge and responsibility for her own growth, and that blaming some character fault of men for Kasey’s immaturity only perpetuates the myth that women are helpless and men are culpable for everyone and everything.

      • Nightwing1029

        While I will not disagree with the fact that she should be called out on her shit, as you put it, I do disagree with how you did it.
        More than that, I think it comes down to some other questions.
        Can you take the time to show her how to do that?
        Are you willing to do such a thing?
        If not, why?

        Also, I see nothing wrong with mentoring someone on how to be a more responsible adult. The problem comes when they are unwilling to take that responsibility upon themselves.

        So a new question.
        At what point do you say “You aren’t worth my time and effort”?

        For me, I am willing to help others. I will gladly help others grow into being better people.
        UNTIL they show me they aren’t willing to take on the responsibility, for themselves.

        Think about it.

        • OneHundredPercentCotton

          Looking back on my life, I can see where men have patiently, kindly and gently… tried to call me out on my shit.

          I responded by playing checkers to their chess game, and calling it “Equal”.

          It wasn’t until I dimly began to realize how badly my boys were getting screwed over in this world I reached out to the MRM – only to withdraw a bloody stump.

          It pissed me off, and I decided to dismiss the MRM message…Fuck ‘em!

          …except my sons were suffering…except even though I REALLY resented the resentment I was shown (shouldn’t they be nice to me? I’m a GIRL tryin’ to help!) after nursing my bruised feelings…I slowly began to process what men had been “nicely” trying to tell me all along.

          When a women’s intentions are sincere, and she is really trying to “get it” she shouldn’t need the kid gloves or the nice-ity nice.

          In fact, SHE SHOULD HAVE APOLOGIZED FOR HER TRAMPLING.

          If a woman wants in on this chess game, she better be prepared to “get it” quickly or else,yes – she’s gonna get the wrath.

          There’s no more time for placating, hand holding and “helping” the poor dears get up to speed. Too much is at stake. There’s been too much lost with that strategy already.

          Even when men are unkind and impatient because of her bumbling womanly obliviousness – she still supports the human rights of men because it’s the right thing to do – not because her benevolence is bestowed in exchange for niceness.

          “Dear me, I didn’t mean to slip my neck underneath your boot. Sorry to have soiled the sole of your shoe with my blood.”

          There may be a time and place for showing off your boobs and obliviousness of your entitlements, but a discussion of male oppression just isn’t that time or place.

          It just isn’t.

          Think about it.

          • Nightwing1029

            Okay, how do I explain this….
            Nothing wrong with being blunt. I tend to be BRUTALLY blunt, for the most part.

            HOWEVER, something like posting the stuff he did, in an article like this, I see as being morally wrong.

            Nothing wrong with calling someone out, but do it to their face. Not stabbing them in the back, with stuff you find.

            That is the kind of thing feminists do, in my opinion.

            Huge difference, especially considering how new she seemed, in the other article. (New even to me, and I have only been into this for a couple months)

            Not saying spare her feelings. But I will say don’t go out of your way to be an @$$#0(3.

            Also, it has nothing to do with her gender. If he had done this to another man, I would be saying the exact same thing.

            See the difference?

        • OneHundredPercentCotton

          No, Nightwing. I don’t see the difference.

          I have had others – right here on AVFM – post quotes and remarks I made on other sites, reexplaining, accusing and trying to slant my words to mean something negative to men, trying to discredit me.

          I simply restated my position. I had nothing to hide.

          I might point out – I’m still here while he isn’t.

          I don’t say anything anywhere I am ashamed of, and I will stand by whatever I say.

          So please feel free to post my words, anybody. Anytime. Anywhere.

          I’ve learned profoundly that most times the person who teaches you the most valuable lessons in life is the person who’s KICKING YOUR ASS, not the person kissing your ass.

      • OneHundredPercentCotton

        Agreed. 100%.

  • MGTOW-man

    Perhaps when she said “lazy” she meant something close, but wasn’t able to put her finger on it.

    Not laziness, but apathy.

    Most men know how most women are, how they can be, and how they will be if left unchecked. In this context, tolerating such, men aren’t lazy; they are apathetic because showing they care about their own sex may lead to them being called all sorts of baseless, assumptive names, which spoils their egos/self-worth/manhood-accomplishment, ridiculous and troublesome beliefs.

    Now couple that with how men are socialized to amp up their male duties, which sadly includes them doing all they can to please women so they will be liked (and hopefully/perhaps chosen) by them.

    Not laziness, but pathetic, boy-selling, traitorous, overly-competitive, stupidity-laced apathy.

    I actually liked her, especially when she said …”thus, women are oblivious.”

    I use the term much…gained from multiple observations and commonsense. It is good to see that while some women do not fit the description here, many women, if they can pull their heads out of their own butts, can too, be objective and have the ability to criticize themselves with everybody-knows-it-already-because-it-is-the-commonsense truth. (Now combine that with the research-based proof, and it is a done and sealed deal).

    Most women must be oblivious. It explains so much. They simply can’t see why they are wrong because they do not possess the capacity to quit feeling—which results in”subjectifying” them out of the public picture—or should be. It is not in their cards evolution-wise to be like men mentally.

    Thus, the “evil patriarchy” is nothing more than men and women acting out evolutionary pressures that provided the most success, most of the time, about most things, helping most people survive best and beyond. Some seemingly mean and unfair things were indeed included under this umbrella in yesteryear for women (AND MEN TOO!), but nonetheless…. It was not a deliberate, women-oppressing construct. No it wasn’t!

    In this sense, men and nature owe women not one damned thing!

    Not one!

    Thus, feminists (and women who partake and benefit) are thieves, and more—they solidify their own inequality (which can’t be granted by pieces of paper, public policy, and pretending).

    Dare I say that nature IS truth and the ONLY objective one possible.

    My comments are not as scattered as it may appear because with them, I am illustrating thoughts that came to mind when I watched Ms. Jones’ video.

    …and I thank her for that! Thanks too for Mr. Elam for letting the show proceed. Great food for thought.

    Remember, we do not have to agree on every single thing. As long as we remain united, we stand a chance. Divided, we will be erased.

  • Grumpy Old Man

    There are two kinds of human interaction: Violence, in all its forms and Reason. Was the application of violence consistent with the threat? Could the message have been received with reason?