Melissa Kite hates men, wants father

Yesterday, journalist Melissa Kite became the latest woman to publicly trash men in a sexist, undeserving rant – this time, by saying those exercising a human right not to become fathers were ‘selfish’.

Just days after champagne socialist Diane Abbott claimed that modern masculinity is Viagra-chomping, whiskey-swigging homophobia – even for the millions of men who are gay, Kite jumped on the bandwagon with her own sweeping statements.

In a finger-pointing, foot-stamping article for MailOnline she said men ‘do not always play fair in matters of fertility’, adding that they ‘increasingly behave with terrible selfishness when it comes to giving up their bachelor lifestyles’.

She then added that men who date women without immediately signing up for parenthood are committing some sort of ‘fraud’.

The outrageous comments follow the launch of the Get Britain Fertile campaign, which actively discourages women from delaying pregnancy for health reasons.

But, instead of making a balanced, rational point, Kite’s comments simply revealed a sad, out-dated philosophy in contemporary gender relations. Namely, that a woman’s desire to have a child is greater than a man’s desire not to.

She’s wrong.

In her article, she makes several references to former boyfriends who made the responsible decision not to become fathers half-heartedly – then scolds them for being ‘cowardly’.  Here’s a woman who assumes that a man’s sperm – his lineage, his DNA, his family – is somehow hers for the taking.

This couldn’t be further from the truth.

Why won't you father my child, you selfish loser?

Father my child, you selfish loser!

Yes, I sympathize that her many life choices never produced children, it’s not men who are to blame. For years feminism has declared that women don’t need us – that we are redundant. OK, fine. But guess what – we don’t need women either. And it’s trending.

In Asia there’s a new tendency for men to go their own way – with thousands shunning marriage and kids for a life of independence and control, which no family court can destroy. The same thing is happening across America and Canada.

In fact, author Helen Smith Ph.D., recently published a book entitled Men on Strike, where she notes that: ‘America has become anti-male. Men are sensing the backlash and are consciously and unconsciously going on strike. They are dropping out of college, leaving the workforce and avoiding marriage and fatherhood at alarming rates.’

Now, it’s happening here in Britain.

This isn’t because men are ‘selfish’ or commitment-phobic pigs (as women frequently like to suggest). Rather, it’s because they’re tired of being ousted from families, of being shafted by sexist divorce rulings and being denied the most basic paternal rights.

These guys know that any child they have with a woman would be her baby, not their baby. In 2013, a so-called era of equality, three million UK fathers are still denied access to their children – simply because their bitter ex partners can manipulate the law.

So where’s the incentive? Quite frankly, men’s reticence to enter fatherhood is justified. And long may it continue.

Melissa Kite said men who didn’t want children were being ‘selfish’

But Kite, and many women like her, still can’t see these broader issues. Hilariously, she says: ‘to suggest that somehow the age at which women conceive is within their control is naive and misleading.’

Are we living on the same planet? By and large women have complete and utter control in the reproduction process – unlike men, who have none. Women have the full spectrum of contraceptive control, while men only have the condom – which isn’t always practical – and a vasectomy.

Women have the option to terminate or adopt a pregnancy, relinquishing responsibilities for whatever reason (and so they should), but men can’t (yet they should).

And if women don’t manage to find an ideal ‘babydaddy’ they can use a sperm donor and go it alone. Anytime. So I find it pretty offensive that she’s blaming men for a path she consciously chose.

Quite frankly, she’s a big girl who made her own decisions.

Besides, men are not – and never should be – on stand-by for when a broody woman calls. Becoming a parent is a meeting of minds. It is a mutual, life-changing decision. The maxim ‘my body, my choice’ applies to both genders, no matter how much it may inconvenience certain women.

But that’s equality – it cuts right down the middle. It is inflexible.

It’s also a basic human right to make your own decisions on parenthood. If we switched the genders in Kite’s story and had a man saying ‘Women are selfish because they won’t give me the child I deserve’ there’d be uproar. But, once again, we have stiletto sexism telling us that female-on-male chauvinism is acceptable.

Yet, while her sense of entitlement astounds me, I do respect Kite for not trapping men – something she comes perilously close to recommending.

‘Recently, a girlfriend in her 20s told me she was feeling broody but felt it was too early to ask her new husband to have kids,’ she writes. ‘I wanted to yell: ‘Then don’t ask him!’… I felt a shameful urge to tell her to secretly stop taking the Pill.’

But this is raping a man’s choice and must never be accepted. In fact, it should be enforced by law. Particularly as it happens all the time – which is precisely why the culture of having children needs to be less about women and more about both parents. While Harriet Harman is worrying about old women on TV, fathers in families are the much bigger priority.

Fortunately, Kite retains control of her maternal destiny. She could still adopt, foster or conceive and be a wonderful mother. But I’d still worry if she ever had a son.Not because I doubt her potential for raising another human being, but – if she’s happy to trash men for making their own decisions – what else would she encourage her son to compromise?

As a man, I’m sick and tired of such things. Fortunately, I’m not the only one. Only last week I bumped into actor Jude Law and we chatted about Diane Abbott’s recent criticisms of male identity.

Right there, being the wonderful father he is, he summed up the reality in an instant by saying: ‘Peter, men are no more in crisis than women.’

Judging by the opinions of women like Melissa Kite, he’s spot-on.

This article was originally posted in MailOnline and was reposted here with permission of Peter Lloyd.

  • ErnestoGuevara

    There is something beyond the shameful will to treat men as objects, and it’s the criminal will to treat babys as objects.

    I remember once some overheard conversation among women at work, where one of them was saying: “things are getting tough here, I will tell my husband to get me pregnant”; this said as “bring me some cigarettes”.

    I felt nausea. I thought about some Chinese saying: “Children are born first in Heaven, then on Earth”. Babies are an idea, a thought, before becoming matter and flesh. If that idea is so mean, so bleak and loveless, how will that boy or girl be someone happy, cheerful, useful to society as an adult?

    Having babies for mere convenience is a social crime.

    • Patrice Stanton

      “Having babies for mere convenience is a social crime.”

      (What then is NOT having them for mere convenience?) May I hazard a guess that such women may see this belated child-bearing as absolution for condoning (or partaking in) the feminist sacrament/right-of-passage called abortion?

      • ErnestoGuevara

        Abortion is, as stated by Mr. Elam and I agree, a delicate issue.

        I think that a human being cannot be a single cell (a zygote), or a group of identical cells. We don’t mourn or make a funeral for an interrupted pregnancy process in the early stages. So within certain limits and in some situations I think abortion is reasonable. I think sexual education and responsable parenthood should be promoted to avoid abortion, and that should be a last resource.

        While there is no fully nerves system and brain to process sensations, I think there is no human being. Human cells, yes, a person no.

        What pisses me off about feminism is that it’s all about “the right to choice” for women. I think that right ends when a human being is there. But its formation is a gradual process. The point must be established by scientific criteria, not religious or ideological ones.

        And no, I don’t think a woman like this “sees as this as absolution”, I think you give them too much credit. They don’t think of any absolution, they simply don’t give a crap.

    • Ell

      This cunt like all American bitches hates men,but yet wants a male to help her raise the child? Well fuck you Melissa, you will raise tat child by yourself you piece of shit. I’ve giving up on American bathes,and have turned my attention to Eastern European women,Brazilian women,and other foreign women that LOVE men,unlike american bitches! I don’t believe in chivalry nor would do anything chivalries for women. Women always bitching and nagging about equal rights,prove it. Pay you own way,and take care of yourselves,and take FULL responsibly without ANY help from any man,but I won’t hold my breath. If I had it my way,women would never have any rights cuz look how fucked up American bitches are with freedom,and the evil cruel shit America women do to men!

      • Typhonblue (Asha James)

        “I’ve giving up on American bathes”

        Sir. Americans have entirely adequate hygiene.

        • Typhonblue (Asha James)

          More seriously. If you like other ethnicities/races or women from other cultures who tend to be more family orientated, that’s entirely your choice. Wanting women to “human up” about equality is excellent.

          Sounding like a feminist plant by spouting off some shit about taking away women’s rights? Pointless and divisive. Besides, the more limitations women have, the more obligations men are forced into. Why not enjoy your freedom instead? This is the first era in which men could engage in a swinging bachelor lifestyle without facing fines, jail time or a bullet(if you avoid pregnancy of course.)

          Also Melissa Kite is English, not American.

        • Theseus

          Damn straight. I actually manage to get a “bathe” in every other week.

          • Typhonblue (Asha James)

            I believe “I manage to get a bathe in every other week” is grammatically correct.

          • Dr. F (Ian Williams)

            Actually it’s not.

            The word ‘bathe’ is a verb. In the context you are using it in you are suggesting it’s a noun because you have used the word ‘a’ preceding it.

          • Typhonblue (Asha James)

            Wouldn’t it be akin to “I manage to get a walk in every other week?”

          • Dr. F (Ian Williams)


            ‘Walk’ can be used as a noun and a verb, and ‘bathe’ is the verb of the noun ‘bath’. Two different words.

      • Suzanne McCarley

        Even though you obviously lack basic reading comprehension skills, you are entitled to you ill-informed and bigoted opinion. However you are not entitled to come here and spew venom. I’m not deleting your comment because every once in a while it’s useful to have an example of the kind of shit we don’t tolerate here at AVfM.

      • Dr. F


        I think the letter H at the start of your name was forgotten when you signed up here.

      • Shrek6

        Maaaite, that dirty little post is enough to make my muddy swamp look sterile and clean.
        Dunno who the h’Ell you are. Whether you are a bloke or a Sheila, but you got some serious anger issues talking like that.

        And boy, do I agree with Asha. There is no way I am going back to the bad old days of restricting women’s choices, activity and responsibility in society at any level. They can bloody well ‘woman up’ and start working at the same level as men have had to for all these millennia.

        Clean up your act sunshine and clean up ya bloody mouth. Then life might take a turn for the good.

        Just sayin!

      • ErnestoGuevara

        I normally don’t use such terms but… Have you Mr. Ell considered the possibility of being an idiot?

        Who told you an Eastern European woman will not see you as a walking wallet?

        And being so full of hatred towards women, why would you expect to be treated better by them?

        Do you have a brain?

  • David

    I don’t understand the level of hatred for Ell’s comment. He makes two perfectly good points:
    (1) The woman is too old.
    (2) The woman is raising another man’s child, and a man other than the real father is well advised not to step into that situation.
    One can easily find much younger women who don’t come with another man’s children. White, asian or black women, whichever one prefers. One should do so, wherever one finds those women.

  • nicole

    I am not sure when being a Feminist translated into hating men. I get very angry when people try to define feminism as “man haters” – it’s not true. I am a Feminist and I love men. Men and women are first and foremost humans – both are capable of being good or bad – gender does not define personality. I read the article and did not get the feeling that Melissa kite hates men, just that she would like to find an honest one. I am a woman who does not want children. But many of my female friends who do want children have wasted years on partners who either don’t want children or just don’t want them with their current partners. This is the problem…. men who are with “for now partners” and feel it is OK to lead them to believe one day they will make up a happy family with them. Relationships are often complicated and people are not always honest (men and women). What we really need is for both men and women to grow up and be honest with each other about what they want in life. If two people in a relationship don’t want the same thing in life – then move on and find someone who does. If you are a man and don’t want children don’t say with a woman who does – don’t drag it on for years wasting her time. Women are angry with these men because they are liars. There are plenty of men out there who are honest, loving and want a family – ladies move on.

    There is nothing wrong with not wanting children (or wanting them) – whether you are a man or a woman – just be strong and honest with your partners. I would never date, let alone marry a man who wants a family, since this is something I do not want and it would be wasting his time – and would be hurtful to him in the end.


    all the name calling is uncalled for. All it does is reenforce the negative male stereotype. As I once said to a friend: ” if you don’t like being treated like an ass, stop behaving like an ass”. Women have been treated badly by men for thousands of years – it can not be denied. We do have something to complain about; there have been social injustices. But this can be said of Men and the social pigeon hole men have been placed in……. I would not like to be told to “man up”. Both men and women should have the rights to lead their individual lives in a way that makes them happy. In truth we are fighting for the same things and there is no reason why we both can’t have them….. Just be honest in what you want and don’t drag your partners into a life they don’t want. I’t’s very simple.

    • Shrek6

      Wow, here we go again, with yet another feminist troll turning up into this blog wanting to put her toxic point of view across to cause a shit stir then sit back and enjoy the show.

      You will be treated with the same indifference as all your lunatic sistas are.
      However, I shall treat with you just this once, because I feel in the mood.

      Nicole, you are so full of feminist Horse Shit, that I cannot understand why you are even commenting here.
      Your comment: ” Women have been treated badly by men for thousands of years – it can not be denied”

      I laughed when I read that. You have swallowed the sweet smelling vomit that has spewed out of the mouths of feminists and you obviously believe it. What a crock load of garbage this is. You have absolutely no evidence to back that up either.
      Oh, and let’s not forget that throughout all history while men have been treating women so badly, the men have all been living like Kings in such luxurious and plush apartments or caves as in the days of old, keeping their female companions in perpetual servitude.

      Yep, I think that’s how it goes in the dark spaces of the lunatic mind that is on the shoulders of every feminist, including you.

      If you had an ounce of love and charity toward men at all, you would easily be able to work out why men are not committing to families/children today. Yet all you can do is call them liars. Typical of your type. You lack the intelligence to see past your own selfish desires and if men don’t fall into line you call them names.

      You ask that no names be called, yet in your own post you call men names.

      The reason why men like me in this blog get annoyed is because drop-kicks like you come in here sprouting your garbage about men. Men have been treated badly by not only a few high powered men, but by women also, ever since Adam and Eve were first dating.

      Your beliefs are nothing more than ‘feminist farts.’ Just hot air that stinks!

      No one here has ever denied that women have not had economical and political equality. But then again, neither have the majority of men. Only a select few powerful men have had what they wanted and could dictate to a women and well over 90% of the male population.

      The rest of the men in society have been locked into slavery to women, through the social norm that is called ‘Chivalry.’

      Today, chivalry is dead and will probably never come back, because organisations such as this are going to make damn sure you lazy women end up off your fat backsides and you are going to be most definitely given equal rights, AND EQUAL RESPONSIBILITY.

      When wars come, you will be conscripted, be sent off to war and watch each other be torn apart by bullets and bombs,
      You will be forced to work in sewers and on rubbish collection tucks,
      You will be forced to work in all the hard, filthy and dangerous jobs that men have to work in.

      But here’s the one we will enjoy watching the most. You will be held to the same standard in Law as men are.
      You will not be given an ounce more leniency than a man, just because you have a vagina.
      You will be sent to prison for the same length of time a man is, for the same crime.
      Oh, and if you are found guilty of a false allegation of rape, you will be imprisoned for the same length of time that your falsely accused victim would have been sent to prison for if found guilty.

      So you see, life is going to be pretty sweet for men when they can finally see women being made completely equal to them in society, because we will no longer be forced to carry the load for the lazy women, while we work for our children and ourselves.

    • Keith

      Sorry but I have only ever felt compelled to offer honesty to the same extent that I receive it which is also a simple method. See how that works, if your honest with me then I’m honest with you. It’s even simpler than what you propose because it removes your gynocentric privilege. If your honesty is withheld I might choose to wait to see if you can migrate to that little extra level of maturity. But bear in mind the longer it takes you the more you waste time on your own biological clock. See how that works, or is that to complicated for you and your sisters. Its just a few short steps beyond feminism …’s called being human.

  • nicole

    Did you even read what I said? I called some men liars not all men. I then went on to say that there are many loving and honest men out there. I also sympathized with how men are treated and told to “man up” – which I would not wish to be told and think it is a terrible thing to say to anyone. I also stated that men and women should be free to live their lives in a way that makes them happy.

    As a feminist I do not support false allegations of rape (this only makes it harder for true victims – and yes a man can be a victim of rape). Any person giving false testimony should be held legally responsible.

    As far as having no evidence to back up my statement of women having been treated badly by men: Up Until The Married Women’s Property Act of 1882 (England), Upon marriage, the husband and wife became one person under the law, as the property of the wife was surrendered to her husband, and her legal identity ceased to exist. Any personal property acquired by the wife during the marriage, unless specified that it was for her own separate use, went automatically to her husband. If a woman writer had copyright before marriage, the copyright would pass to the husband afterwards, for instance. Further, married women were unable to draft wills or dispose of any property without their husbands’ consent.

    During other times, Women did not have the right to vote, did not have legal rights, were not considered persons under the law, where considered property of her husband – as were her children. If a woman left her husband, he could send the law to retrieve her (not unlike a slave).

    I do not blame you or any living man today for this (what was done by others is theirs to be guilty for) – I myself did not suffer from this unjust treatment. I simply state facts.

    Men worked to support the family because women could not. Women were denied education, employment in many fields and given low wages.

    Then there are the children; who should care for them? Men traditionally made more money and had better career opportunities, so it made sense for women to stay home. Things are changing. There are better opportunities for women. What is not changing is the traditional role that Men have been forced into – by politics, religion, and gender issues. I fully support any man who wishes to step outside of the traditional male role – I do not believe men should “man up” – that is just as offensive to me as saying “a woman’s place is in the home”.

    Hatred will not fix the problems men and women are facing today. Only honest and respectful debate will. This is why i commented on this site. I truly wish to resolve these issues.


    • Gordon Wadsworth

      As far as I’m concerned this is empty rhetoric. First of all, and I can only speak for myself, and not for this site in any way, I reject the claim that women were uniquely oppressed at any time during our history. I agree that they were repressed, but so too were men. I’m not particularly interested in your gynocentric examination of history through a feminist lens.

      You claim you support men stepping outside of the traditional male role (protection and provision), yet you very obviously oppose male reproductive rights. It’s the typical empty platitudes I’ve come to expect from feminists.

      You’ll tell men not to have sex if they don’t want kids, yet you’ll fight tooth and nail for abortion rights that ensure women won’t be be held to that same standard of responsibility.

      It’s obvious you haven’t read our literature or you wouldn’t be asking to be spoonfed.

    • David

      Nicole you say “As a feminist I do not support false allegations of rape (this only makes it harder for true victims – and yes a man can be a victim of rape).”

      You missed the primary reason that false allegations of rape are bad. Because the falsely accused one — almost always a man — can be screwed for life by it. Your concern is more that it makes it harder for other women, a more indirect and therefore less important reason.

      Sorry I missed this the first time, but really I don’t see how a fair minded woman could have written that sentence the way you did. It appears that you don’t really give a damn about the men falsely accused. I gave you too much credit earlier.

  • Shrek6

    “Did you even read what I said?”
    I say back to you, Did you even read what I said?

    I said, “No one here has ever denied that women have not had economical and political equality.” Yet you chose to ignore that and then set out to detail exactly what I had already acknowledged.

    As for your use of the word “Men” in your posts, trying to portray a belief that ‘all men’ in society had the ability to treat women the way you say, when in fact the vast majority of men were as enslaved as women were, or in many cases enslaved more so, because they were also the slaves of chivalry.

    You only have the proof that comes from your feminist education and all that material madam, is toxic and tainted to show an evil of the general population of men that never existed. Go and get your facts straight, before branding ‘all men’ with the same tar brush that only the select few should be tarred with.

    “Hatred will not fix the problems men and women are facing today. Only honest and respectful debate will. This is why i commented on this site. I truly wish to resolve these issues. ”

    Absolutely agree with you on the first sentence. So how about you go tell your sistas to grow up, stop acting like selfish, lying evil man (and boy) hating bitches, then get back to the discussion table with a conciliatory and charitable heart. Yes I know, that will never happen will it!

    And for your last sentence. I’ll give it to you that you have ‘some’ honour in your spine. As deluded as you are in many of your beliefs, maybe you ARE trying to do as you say. Okay, keep posting and we will soon find out your true intent.

    If you are sincere, then keep an open mind and heart and let your education begin, because you will start to find all that sweet smelling vomit that spewed out of the mouths of feminists that you so eagerly swallowed, will very quickly turn sour in your gut and you will then need to purge yourself of it.

  • David

    Nicole, I appreciate your thought about these issues. In particular your noticing that “man up” is a nonsense phrase is appreciated. Not that any woman expecting me to “man up” would get any satisfaction, but you’re a rare female with a couple active brain cells, a cool lady.

    I think that for reasons well stated by others you misstate the relative positions of men and women in the past, and as a man, I am proud to discard “chivalry” along with “manning up”. It is indeed a relief. And women seeking to go back to the old way, volunteering to be the old way, etc. won’t get mileage from me either. I think it is over, not an option any more, fugeddaboudit.

    Women want sex and children at least as much as men. In fact men are fairly willing to “go their own way” while, except for a few like you, women hate the idea. There’s no reason that men should have it any harder than women. Maybe this seems a little unfair to women, because their desires are stronger, but that’s not something men are going to protect women from any more, and we’ll work to ensure there are no additional legal protections just because of women’s feelings.

  • David

    Nicole, perhaps the only way women could fix this situation is to put coordinated and effective pressure on legislators, and whatever it takes to affect the tendencies of judges, so that the legal environment changes to be much fairer to men.

    Women can try to coast, saying they are acting fairly, but knowing in the back of their minds the courts will be 90% on their side in case an actual dispute arises. But as long as they do this, they’ll find out the men are avoiding commitment in one way or another.

    And some of those ways involve real costs to the woman in terms of her biological clock. That feels unfair, but it’s biology that none of us can change, and men probably won’t bother being protective until and unless women decide to give up their legal advantages, and really make the effort to make it happen. Too late for words. The clocks are ticking.

  • Rick Westlake

    Nicole, you can’t have it both ways, and all YOUR way, based on your Sacred VaJayJay and your feeeeewings and your Awesome Sense Of Empowered Victimhood. Or maybe you CAN, in your jurisdiction, based on the corruption and the misandric bias of your Legislature and your Courts.

    But your attitude, and that of your Sisters, lead me, the lowly mere sperm-bearer, to humbly and respectfully and oh-so-sorrowfully decline your Sisters’ invitation to fructify their bodies and thus bind myself into eternal servitude to their Sacred Matriarchial Haaaaaapiiiiinessssss.

    It’s probably a shame, and probably I should be ashamed. I’ve been told by many a woman who wouldn’t even consider bearing me a child, that I would probably be a FANTASTIC ‘male-role-model’ (note how I’m following their lead in not using the six-letter F-word that implies sperm-exchange and Patriarchial parenthood!) for some lucky zygote.

    I’m glad you’ve had your children, and I hope they bring you much joy. I worked like hell to bring my OWN mother all the joy I could bring her, and all the comfort and pleasure – even when it required me to dismiss my own pleasures, as a potential father to the children who were never born to my loins.

    I hope they take good care of you. Or, failing that, I hope they remand you into a comfortable old-maid’s-home with an underpaid West Indian staff who will take care of you while they get on with their own lives.

  • Laine Mikael

    “Melissa Kite said men who didn’t want children were being ‘selfish’”

    But the man isn’t getting a child.. SHE is! And along with it, she in practice gains legal powers over part of the man’s monthly income. So which part of not wanting to give some brat the power over your posterity AND your money is selfish?

    On the other hand, we have guys like to Orlando Shaw, TN, who couldn’t care less about their responsibilities, and who have lots of great sex with lots of great girls to have lots of great kids they will never be able to support – a true case of revenge of the males gone wrong, because the kids will never have their father around.

    What is it you want, Melissa? Do you even know?

  • Essential Logic

    Nicole, you mentioned The Married Women’s Property Act of 1882 (England) in which a husband and wife became one person and the woman’s property became the property of her husband.

    However, you failed to mention how husbands were responsible for their wives’ debts. A husband could go to debtor’s prison for the rest of his life for debt that his wife accumulated. If a woman committed a crime, her husband would be responsible for any restitution. In fact, a man was responsible for any crime committed by a member of his household so it was relatively simple for a man’s wife and children to ruin his finances and his reputation.

    As for voting rights, yes, women did not have the right to vote but most men did not have the right to vote either because they did not meet the property requirements or other measures of wealth. In many nations, there were other voting restrictions such as literacy requirements or religious exclusion.

    In most countries, full universal suffrage – with the inclusion of women – followed about 10 to 20 years after universal male suffrage. Notable exceptions were France, where women could not vote until 1945, Italy (1946), Belgium (1948) and Switzerland (1971).

    Finally, men were conscripted into the armed forces whereas women were not; furthermore, men were conscripted into often back-breaking labor such as building public works projects (sewers, buildings, highways) for little if any pay.

    There were also many accounts of women beating their husbands and the husbands being vilified for being the victims of their wives’ abuse. In general, people did feel sorry for female victims of domestic violence and offered some type of assistance whereas many did not offer any assistance to men who were being abused.

    The notion that men had all of the benefits while women had all of the responsibilities is largely a myth. Wealthy men may have had benefits but they also had responsibilities. Of course, the average man was poor and had no benefits while he still had the responsibilities. Poor men and poor women suffered and that has been the reality since the beginning of time.