obsolete sepia

Marriage is obsolete. Are women?

You’ve got it all backwards. Men invented the technology that liberated us from the parasitic housewife. We invented the washer/dryer, toaster, microwave oven, electric stove, refrigerator, modern plumbing/electricity, and most of the things that have now made the traditional housewife obsolete. We liberated ourselves from you. We don’t need you in the house anymore, so get the fuck out. You don’t need liberation from patriarchy, and by extension, liberation from men – in reality, you need liberation from your own obsolescence. Perhaps you should consider making yourself useful as something other than a sandwich-maker and create a meaningful existence for yourself, one that doesn’t rely on an identity as a victim of patriarchy. Again, you’ve got it all backwards.

father-knows-bestWe live in an amazing time. When, in the history of humanity, has there ever been such cultural pressure (and opportunity) for women to create their own identity, meaning, and purpose? Their default position and role within societal structures has typically and historically been one that entails their utility as mother, caregiver, and housewife—all cultural constructs that likely emerged from lower biological drives and that have evolved to exist primarily in the form of relationships to family, to husband, and as part of a marriage.

If we view marriage and the role of the traditional housewife as a form of cultural technology, it is an obsolete piece of technology—no more useful than the vacuum tubes in an old radio from the 1930s. As these vacuum tubes gave way to transistors and those to silicon chips, so too marriage is giving way to other forms of cultural technology. (See the SCOTUS decision on DOMA.)

Our culture is experiencing this transition right now. With the advent and proliferation of those aforementioned modern amenities and technologies, the housewife and marriage itself have become (and are becoming) obsolete pieces of cultural technology. If we view these pieces of cultural technology as extensions of a woman’s identity, meaning, and purpose, women have been and are experiencing a loss; it is a loss that exists in the form of their own obsolescence. Prior generations of women, unlike today’s generation, did not have to concern themselves with creating an identity, meaning, and purpose, at least not to the extent required today. Such things were built in to the culture for them. They could simply rely on the old cultural technology of marriage, housewifery and reproductive duties to find relevance and a sort of fulfillment. Given that such things as marriage and traditional gender roles are becoming less relevant, women are now confronting this sort of obsolescence.

zune-hes-dead-jimIn this way, the plight of the modern woman can be viewed not as a struggle against patriarchy, but as a struggle against their own obsolescence. It’s a struggle to remain relevant, to find identity, meaning, and purpose. It’s a struggle for fulfillment given the present absence of a cultural technology that once provided for them, as Heidegger might say, a “ready-to-hand” construct, a prefabricated role as mother, caregiver, and wife. With this “ready-to-hand” obsolescence and malfunctioning of these traditional roles and of marriage, a divide has emerged from within the once great gynocentrisms that enveloped prior cultures. As such, this divide reveals itself in the forms of radical traditionalists and radical feminists.

The traditionalist sort of right-wing feminists (think Phyllis Schlafly and her ilk) are nothing but a hodgepodge of stereotypically grumpy Luddites concerned with a sort of radical conservatism that attempts to maintain the old cultural technology and stubbornly refuses adaptation to and adoption of new cultural technologies—ones that might replace the traditional housewife and marriage. They are like neophobe geeks raging hard for a return to the HD DVD or to Betamax or for the Microsoft Zune.

Of the more radical leftist feminists and their ilk, we can view them not as Luddites, but as misguided revolutionaries who have created an identity for themselves as antagonists of the patriarchy. They are women compelled to create a narrative (a cultural technology, if you will) within our social-cultural structure—an astonishing attempt to create something that might restore to women an identity, meaning, and purpose.

Che Guevara - RevolutionSadly, this cultural technology is a disaster loosely analogous to something like Windows ME. It was supposed to be a sort of revolutionary software technology making the home PC more useful and attractive to the home PC buyer. However, it was buggy, prone to crashing, unstable, and poorly constructed, with limited and restricted access to MS-DOS. Though some of the graphics and interfaces were stylish, the real-world user experience was painful, aggravating, and for Microsoft, it was a disaster—having barely one year of shelf-life.

Similarly, the shelf-life of these would-be revolutionaries of modern leftist feminism is also running out. That is to say, their product doesn’t perform as it should. It’s buggy and slow and prone to crash in the face of real-world experiences. Its logic is unstable and does not hold up under questioning about its foundational underpinnings. In short, their construct exists only in relation to patriarchy and if the narrative of patriarchal oppression of women doesn’t hold up under logical scrutiny, so too does their narrative and corresponding construct fail because their construct does not exist apart from its foundation—which is patriarchy. And patriarchy, as an overarching explanation for the oppression of women, is not a true paradigm. Again, it’s not patriarchy. It’s obsolescence.

obsolescence_smallIf the modern woman wants to overcome this sort of obsolescence and create relevance for herself – if she wants to create identity, meaning, and purpose – perhaps she could take a clue from the philosopher Andy Clark. In Andy Clark’s Being There: Putting Brain, Body, and World Together Again, a phrase called the “scaffolded mind” is used to describe the “amazing capacities [of humans] to create and maintain a variety of special external structures (symbolic and social-institutional). [The scaffolded mind helps us structure] our environment so that we can succeed with less intelligence. Our brains make the world smart so that we can be dumb in peace!

Or, to look at it another way, it is the human brain plus these chunks of external scaffolding that finally constitutes the smart, rational inference engine we call mind…[and the boundaries of our mind]… extend further out into the world than we might have initially supposed (179,180).” Clark goes on to describe a “scaffolded action” as one that “relies on some kind of external support. Such support would come from the use of tools or from exploitation of the knowledge and skills of others; that is to say, scaffolding [that denotes] a broad class of physical, cognitive, and social augmentations…that allow us to achieve some goal that would otherwise be beyond us (190).”

troglodyte-brain-mediumIf the modern woman has the goal of achieving something that is otherwise beyond her, she’d abandon the entire narrative of patriarchal oppression and create scaffolds for women that extend outward from her “present-at-hand,” as Heidegger might say, existence and into an existence of relevance—one that isn’t dependent upon being the victim of patriarchy, or some sort of revolutionary slayer of patriarchy.

As the modern woman faces this Heideggerian “ready-to-hand” obsolescence, she must create her own relevance, one that is independent of false narratives about patriarchy. She must create a new sort of “scaffolded” cultural technology for herself—one that extends outward from the “present-at-hand” structure and into relevance. Without this sort of scaffolded mind to bridge the gap between obsolescence and relevance, women may as well leave their minds in a jar by the door and continue screaming like the stereotypical moustache-encrusted and incoherent purveyors of misandry who demand that men provide to them a scaffolded structure into typically male spaces of cultural technology a la Adria Richards and the Donglegate fiasco.

this-is-what-a-feminist-looks-likeRichard Rorty makes a beautiful and profound statement in his later work—Philosophy and Social Hope: “Everything that can serve as a term of relation can be dissolved into another set of relations, and so on forever.

There are, so to speak, relations all the way down, all the way up, and all the way out in every direction; you never reach something which is not just one more nexus of relations. (54).”If the modern woman wants to build her relational relevance, one that exists apart from the old cultural technology that provided a sort of prefabricated role of existence in relation to her utility as mother, caregiver, housewife, etc., she must not fall in to the trap of trying to build a set of relations and scaffolding from the present absence of something—literally nothing, her Heideggerian “ready-to-hand” obsolete roles of previous generations. She also cannot extend scaffolds and relations from false narratives of patriarchy. These false narratives about patriarchy are a ground in which to try and stabilize such scaffolding and that ground is a sort of quagmire, a swamp that will swallow, envelop, and dissolve those relations and scaffolds, only to prolong the “ready-to-hand” obsolescence.

We do live in an amazing time. Women have the opportunity to create for themselves a new identity, meaning, and purpose. As men have created so many of the amenities and technologies that liberated us from the “ready-to-hand” cultural technologies of marriage and of the traditional parasitic housewife, it is now time that women step up and create something other than lamentations about patriarchy or the waxed poetic words of how great things were under traditionalism.

The burden is on women to create, to remove themselves from the rut of traditionalism, and to remove themselves from the rut of blaming patriarchy. Until the modern woman removes herself from these ruts, she will be stuck in the wrongheaded direction and have within her perspective the kind of backwards thinking that gets her nowhere even close to being liberated from her own obsolescence.

You’re not needed in the house anymore, so get the fuck out.

About Jason Gregory

These are the words of a retired gigolo, small business owner, and philosopher who mashes together some Nietzsche, Kant, Sartre, pragmatism, and rum. Holler, bitches!

Main Website
View All Posts
  • Anti Idiocy

    Until such time as artificial wombs have been fully developed, refined, and used on a large scale, women will not be obsolete.

    Oh, and realistic, very human-like robots too.

    • http://gravatar.com/greatmegamind Never Blue Again

      That’s true … But only if you think keeping the species alive is solely men’s duty. It’s a biological duty or urge of both parties.

      Artificial womb and Humanoid Robot don’t exist right now because we didn’t invest much time and resources toward them. If man can built something like Large Hadron Collider (LHC) which can probe into the very fabric of space-time Artificial Womb is just like toys.

      If things continue as of now, men will continue to opt out of marriage and pro-creation. Then there will be a demand of alternative technologies for them.

      They say necessity is the mother of invention .
      Sometimes I wonder, who is the father ? MEN, collectively ? :D

      • http://hyperskeptical.wordpress.com robertcrayle

        Why so inventors invent? Not just necessity; all people feel necessity because they’re alive. The father of invention is imagination. Necessity is just a condition, imagination is a quality, and a truly magnificent one. You can have all the necessity and intuition you want; imagination is the soul of life.

        • http://hyperskeptical.wordpress.com robertcrayle

          Apologies it should be “Why -DO- inventors invent?”

        • http://gravatar.com/greatmegamind Never Blue Again

          Who is the father ? Me or my p*nis ? like my…. imagination … ??
          Ok… just kidding … ;)

          • http://hyperskeptical.wordpress.com robertcrayle

            Wow, you have a p*nis? Lucky son of a gun – I only have a penis…

            On a more serious note, aren’t you more than your p*nis? Even though it’s still a vomit inducing memory, Catherine Kieu-Becker’s ex-husband is still a man, as much as he ever was. Cutting off his penis and destroying it in a garbage disposal is really the most peurile way of “trying to destroy his man status for failing me. Since I own it, I can destroy it. NOBODY IS REAL EXCEPT ME. I AM GOD!!!” It has not that much to do with being a man or a father. Those two things aren’t something you have, they’re something you _are_.

      • Steve_85

        MacGuyver is the father of invention.

        • Paul Johnson

          Actually, the father is Michael Weston, but he framed MacGuyver.

          • Nostradormouse

            Paternity Fraud.

      • Anonymous

        Well actually women just need a males sperm. And you don’t really need that many men to keep our population growing.
        Also, there’s already been work done on creating a “female” sperm that would allow women to pro-create without men at all and instead give birth to girls.

        Also, hetero women are also opting out of marriage and pro-creation (more and more single women).

        • Kimski

          “And you don’t really need that many men to keep our population growing.”

          Yes, it is becoming increasingly clear to me, that a feminist utopia will be an even more inbred version of hell than ‘Deliverance’, where the many will be fighting over the right to breed with the few. Muslim harems will become the norm, and women will be reduced to breeding stock.

          “Also, there’s already been work done on creating a “female” sperm that would allow women to pro-create without men at all and instead give birth to girls.”

          If you were able to think rationally for a second, you’d be painfully aware of the consequences when those future generations of girls find out that they’ve been cheated out on something, that other women once had. Besides, there would be no civilization as you know it, because there would be noone to sustain the present one. Good luck with living in grasshuts, sleeping in the mud, and using stone age tools. Again.

          “Also, hetero women are also opting out of marriage and pro-creation (more and more single women).”

          Completely expecting the shorelines of a future Florida to be filled with bluehaired, manhating, human deadends, and their feline company, while the dildo market skyrockets and the medical industry makes fortunes on oestrogen patches, in order to prevent them from poisoning eachother with homebaked strychnine cookies, in between Bridge sessions and ‘playing nice’.

          There’s a nice little description for all of it.
          It’s called ‘Regressive Dystopias’.
          I wish you the best of luck with that.
          You’re going to need it.

    • BraveOne

      Wow… you must have much more sophisticated appliances than I, as the men who invented mine forgot to include features like meal planning, shopping, and food prep… not to mention cleaning up after dinner. My dishes don’t put themselves in the machine, my dryer sucks at folding & putting clothes away, and the lazy ass vacuum cleaner waits until I push it around before picking up the dirt. Consequently, I WISH I had a housewife… cheapest labor out there. Instead, I put in a full day working (where, as an aside, I make 50% more than my husband) & then come home (after a quick trip to the gym, because a woman can’t get away with a lil’ beer belly the way a man can) and face “my share” (about 2/3) of the work around the house, as well as supporting him in the raising of HIS 2 kids.
      Your perspective is also interesting amid statistics that women are earning more college degrees than men. More that half my female friends are childless, never married, and own not only their own homes but investment properties as well.
      I can only assume your article is focused on the ever-shrinking percentage of women who think they’ll find a man to take care of them. Of course they still exist… but if you believe they are representative of the gender as a whole, then you probably need to take a look at why you’re only finding that sort. Lots of men are intimidated by smart, successful women fearing it is they who are obsolete & may be told to “get the fuck out.”

      • http://funkymunkyluvn.wordpress.com/ Jason Gregory

        You must be exhausted from holding up half the sky.

        • Bewildered

          That’s a good one ! LOL!

      • Kimski

        “the ever-shrinking percentage..”

        ROFLMAO!!
        Oh, my…you’re talking about the thousands upon thousands of women, complaining in every comment section under the headline: “Where have all the good men gone?”, in every country in the West, right?
        There’s far more of those than any number of hardcore feminists, and they owe their solitude and desperation to you bigots.
        When they wake up to that fact, I’ll be looking forward to seeing who gets told to “get the fuck out”.

      • scatmaster
      • Bombay

        “Lots of men are intimidated by smart, successful women fearing it is they who are obsolete & may be told to “get the fuck out.”

        Men are attracted to femininity, not success. Perhaps you should consider dating other women, because they are attracted by the qualities you cite here.

      • Bewildered

        Lots of men are intimidated by smart, successful women fearing it is they who are obsolete & may be told to “get the fuck out.”

        What’s this ? Some kind of insane humour?

        Looks like you have had a ‘fatal’ overdose of ‘self esteem’.
        This overdose unfortunately doesn’t kill but drives you insane without your being aware of it !

        A truly successful and smart woman doesn’t intimidate anyone. On the contrary she earns true respect that validates her self esteem.
        It’s the pseudos who are the problem. Their fake self esteem is propped up by the sisterhood and when they fail in RL they have umpteen reasons and enough people to blame for their truly deserved failures.
        They would have become obsolete long ago if weren’t for the state that robs money from hard working citizens to sustain them.
        They live like animals in a civilization. They wouldn’t survive a day in the jungles.

  • Bombay

    Thanks Jason, this is a refreshing perspective. It is about time women move on and take charge of their lives.

  • crydiego

    Wow! This just blows me away and makes so many puzzle pieces scattered around for the last 40 years fit together.
    I think many young feminist today are starting to look around and ask, “where are we headed and what are we trying to achieve?” The answers they are getting back are about identities that don’t fit reality. Young girls today don’t know what they are supposed to grow up to be anymore.

    • Zyavol

      That is true. As a young woman right now, I’ve had to evaluate the question. What is going to be my purpose? My family’s religion told me I ought to get married, have a bunch of Mormon kids and stay home. Okay, with machines doing or expediting my chores, I still could see that if that’s all I did, I was going to be extremely bored. That’s hardly fulfilling. Marriage doesn’t work that way because it doesn’t have to anymore.
      So I had to look beyond religion and traditional roles. What else could I do with my life? I could go get a job I’d like to do. So far, I found something that I love to do, and I’m happy and fulfilled because I’m contributing more of my day instead of two hours of chores a day and then doing nothing (I don’t have kids yet, so that’s what I would end up: being totally bored).
      I would like to be a mom someday, but I don’t want the traditional allocation. Honestly, I want my SO to have the opportunity to take days off and stay home to spend time with our kid(s). So I’m willing to work a little more to compensate. Fathers are just as important as mothers.

  • WG

    Don’t forget, women are still quite nice to look at and useful for sex, but, increasingly, little else.

    • JG

      WG, i assume that you’re speaking of women under 45 years of age, no?

      • Sting Chameleon

        Barring some exceptional women, I’d say yes.

        • http://hyperskeptical.wordpress.com robertcrayle

          Actually the answer would be yes including those exceptional women. This is a positive idea generally. No longer are they a “necessity” and what they can get out of a relationship is only what they put in. In other words they finally have destiny in their hands, and the true power to make or break themselves. They are now free of the oppressive system oppressively oppressing them -with oppression.

    • Billybobownway

      Well, maybe. Really the majority are downright ugly. The hot ones are often arrogant bitches. 80% don’t really like sex and are no good at it. The children they bear are theirs not yours. Good luck.

      • http://hyperskeptical.wordpress.com robertcrayle

        “Really the majority are downright ugly. The hot ones are often arrogant bitches.”

        Which, perversely, makes the “hot” women far, far, _far_ more ugly than the rest.

  • Kgaard

    Hmm … I never thought of it this way. Great piece. As I look back at all the women I didn’t marry (even though I would like to be married) I am struck by the exact point you make: I didn’t marry them because there was really no need to. They weren’t giving me anything I couldn’t get from appliances and maids.

    That said, the woman I WOULD have married was someone I simply wanted to be around all the time. Her value was not in what she did, but in how she made me feel being in her presence. So, in that sense, women still have value to men.

    Apropos of nothing, I am a huge fan of Heidegger. Nice to see some obscure Heideggerian references being put to good use.

    • Richard

      yeah, but after you married the woman you WOULD marry, you’d soon find that the urge to be around her a whole lot, might not have actually been genuine but more part of her marketing campaign to move into your house, and take over your possessions…. and get unexpectedly pregnant a few times… sorry honey forgot the pill again….

      and then when she’s all set up, you’ll find she has precious little time for you, expect when the gold car needs paying each month, you might get a token BJ

  • GQuan

    There’s also the fact that feminism sold a great many women the idea that everything about being a woman, traditionally, was awful and inferior and nothing any self-respecting woman would choose had she the option; meaning that the only thing to do if a woman wanted to feel like she had a right to self-esteem was to grab for the male role with both hands, while often being both unable to truly fill it and unwilling to let go of the benefits that came with her old role. And those women who do manage to find their own place in life, and work their way out of this sorry limbo, overcoming the feminist-originated shame and confusion and hand-wringing over whether they’re empowered or not, seem to act as though they’ve triumphed over a great foe rather than simply succeeded in clearing their head and doing what any woman could do once she accepts that feminism has no business defining her.

  • rocelot

    Self determination, self actualiztion, and self fulfillment are tenants that drive everyone. Period. Suggesting women are failing compared to men just because their formally successful marketing campaign (feminism) is starting to back fire is a little ridiculous. Although society may put more pressure on men to achieve such things women need too as well and neither find it easy. You essential took universal human traits and hardships, pointed your finger at women, and went nadda nadda boo boo.

    • crydiego

      I read it different. Isn’t he saying that women have it more difficult because they are moving outside of their traditional rolls and there is no scaffolding in place for them, no history, no roll models, or whatever? You don’t get those things handed to you, because they aren’t tangible, but you also can’t get them by yelling Patriarchy!

      • rocelot

        But that doesn’t explain the finger pointing and the nadda nadda boo boo.

        • feeriker

          I’m sorry, but I must have missed that part of Jason’s article. Can you show us where he points a finger and taunts? I just can’t see it from here.

        • http://gravatar.com/thepatriotblogspot thepatriotblogspot

          rocelot you really are one dumbass aren’t you!

        • Nostradormouse

          As much as one would respect them for doing so, I fear it may be ontologically unfair too expect the Women’s Studies department of one’s local Higher Education Establishment to run higher degrees in Research Feminism, Experimental Feminism, and Theoretical Feminism, deriving a philosophically rigourous theoretical underpinning from empirical observation and first principals. One might more seriously consider a Patriarchy Theory which was based on the names, addresses, accounts details of those involved, and the minutes of their meetings.

          Women had the pharmaceutical assistance to make a seismic discontinuous break with the cultural scripts derived from biological determinism half a century ago.

          All that lovely Dr. Greer could come up with at the time was a demand for more and better orgasms. Even the Spice Girls, who were in a position to concisely articulate the aspirations of an entire gender and generation, could only identify their endgame as ‘Zigazigah’

          This article crystalises my underlying ‘beef’ with Feminism. It has no underlying philosophical or critical premise. “Women are human beings too” just doesn’t cut it.

          The culture hasn’t figured out what to do with fertile women who aren’t having kids, so women now get a free pass.

          They have done surprisingly little with a change which makes us almost a different species. No observation. No derivation of theory. No experimental evidence reproducible or otherwise. I am disappointed.

          Ladies and Gentlemen, I think the discourse of gender has been thrown into the hazard. We are on the front foot. It may be time to do some intellectual heavy lifting and take on the Gender Studies Departments by theorising what rational Feminism should have been.

          Feminism 2.0.

          Mansplain to them that they need to get out of the kitchen, show some enthusiasm during sex, get some interests, love, and not expect to mooch for life.

          Should we be leading here? Suggesting Zeta Womanhood as an upgrade? It is more empowering and philosophically defensible than Feminism…

    • Bombay

      “You essential took universal human traits and hardships, pointed your finger at women, and went nadda nadda boo boo.”

      Which is why this article is so refreshing. It mocks feminism like it has never been mocked before. This article truly expands a MRA’s perspective of what the feminists’ narrative(s) are doing to pigeon-hole men.

      • rocelot

        Isn’t that relishing the suffering of others? Also feminism has been mocked a lot better than this.

        • scatmaster

          In answer to your question. Yup and I’m loving it.

          Please provide examples of others doing a better job of mocking the femmiroids. The more the merrier.

        • Bombay

          Not only is the mocking stupendous, the feminists should move on and go their own way. Move on from their faux history and make a life for themselves in the here an now. This article has so many nuances, it is truly an MhRA masterpiece.

        • Nostradormouse

          Feminism almost certainly has been mocked better than this, but rarely with such enthusiasm, confidence, and frequency.

        • Nostradormouse

          Feminism has been mocked a lot better than this?

          I’m doing my best, and it’s still early.

        • ihateyourguts 25

          Relishing the suffering of women is never wrong.

          I cheer for rapists.

    • http://funkymunkyluvn.wordpress.com/ Jason Gregory

      Reading comprehension is foundational for an educated and informed population. Period. Suggesting that this piece was about Maslow or feminist marketing suggests that your reading comprehension is ridiculously low. I suggest your reading of the piece again and again, or, until you comprehend what’s actually there. You know, that way you won’t make evident that you’re such a misinformed and uneducated sort of the population. It’s good to have a fundamental grasp of something so foundational–reading comprehension.

      In the meantime, all is not lost. Your confusion and lack of comprehension has inspired me to write about feminist marketing and Maslow’s Hierarchy of needs. Thanks. :-)

      • rocelot

        A little narcissistic to think that its my intelligence, and not your poor writing, that lead to this confusion. But I guess humility isn’t your strong suit. Although I can’t argue with your criticism of feminism, that in of itself has become a point so beaten in that the horse isn’t just dead but some mushy puddle (which makes peoples ignorance of that aggravating.) I think the problem is that may entire criticism could be condensed into NAWALT. Yes I know a dirty word, however in this case Its justified. You fail to make any distinction between individual women and women as a group. Imply malice in cases of ignorance. Finally I stating that all women need to get it together, you imply all men have it together. Finally describing the psychological necessity of everyone but state only women need to…… what exactly, have a major epiphany? You took what makes ever human humans and divided along the gender. Your doing what the feminists do all the time.

        But what does all this matter? I’m just some random guy on the internet that criticized your gross generalizations. That seems to think there’s enough intelligence there to criticize. But fuck this and fuck you. I’m going to bed.

        • http://funkymunkyluvn.wordpress.com/ Jason Gregory

          It’s not narcissism. It’s your poor reading comprehension…sorry.

          “… stating that all women need to get it together, you imply all men have it together.”

          False.
          That implication simply doesn’t exist in the article. The traditional gender role of man/husband as provider/protector is also becoming obsolete. It’s a consequence of men being liberated from the parasite-housewife. As such, men too are confronting a sort of “present-at-hand” obsolescence–a similar sort of identity crisis. If you want to flesh that out in your own article, go ahead, but that wasn’t the focus of this article. That lack of focus doesn’t “imply” that “all men have it together,” as you suggest. Again, it’s your poor reading comprehension.

          “…psychological necessity of everyone but state only women need to…”

          Again with your poor reading comprehension, I never used the qualifier “only,” but you did. It must be really difficult for you to comprehend what you read, especially when you add words that simply aren’t there. Your world must be as confusing as a carnival house of mirrors.

          As far as criticizing my “gross generalizations,” you are clearly an asshat who has tripped over your lack of reading comprehension, especially in regards to the distinctions between “all” and “some.” Even with your poor reading comprehension skills, I ironically suggest your read up on logic. You should start by reading this. It’s about the distinction between “all” and “some.”
          http://philosophy.stackexchange.com/questions/4110/whats-the-difference-between-not-all-and-some-in-logic

          I would also suggest your read up on qualifiers. Here is another good source for, assuming you can comprehend it. :-)
          http://writingcenter.unc.edu/handouts/qualifiers/

          • http://www.avoiceformen.com August Løvenskiolds

            When a feminist says, “patriarchy”, she is saying, in essence, “wow – you men have had your shit together since the beginning of time. That’s something women as a class have never been able to do.”

            She is stamping her foot and screaming “stop cooperating with each other, right now! I need shoes!”

          • rocelot

            Maybe your rambling incoherent style of written is getting in the way of comprehending your meaningless drivel.

      • ali

        You know what? I will read it again and again. Not because my reading comprehension is low. But because I loved it so much it made many things clear to me. It made me understand the reason for all the hatred towards men more clearly.

        • http://funkymunkyluvn.wordpress.com/ Jason Gregory

          Blaming “patriarchy” and men for this sort of obsolescence being experienced by women seems relatively reasonable. Like I wrote in the opening, men created the tech that liberated us from the parasitic housewife, and by extension, men created the obsolescence of the traditional housewife. As such, men, in a way, are to “blame” for the “opportunity” that women now have to create for themselves a new identity, meaning, and purpose.

          • ali

            Read it again and yup, definitely a masterpiece.

          • MP

            May I ask, wasn’t the parasitic housewife a creation of the male dominated culture/society over the centuries?

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

            No, it was a privilege women demanded for themselves, and by and large got. How incredibly sexist and arrogant to presume the women of history had no power.

          • http://funkymunkyluvn.wordpress.com/ Jason Gregory

            @MP
            Clearly, women have always been passive objects in the world, waiting on the world and men to do stuff to them–always pure and innocent as the wind-driven snow, victims.

  • Orphan

    I am interpreting this piece as satire of similar, reversed, claims long made by feminists. If it’s intended seriously you’ve jumped the shark on the bicycle that women supposedly don’t need anymore.

    • rocelot

      Satire should be left to the professionals. Nothing is worse than bad satire.

      • feeriker

        Nothing is worse than bad satire.

        That would be feminism, by another name.

      • http://hyperskeptical.wordpress.com robertcrayle

        Satire is simply the slight over-exaggeration of perceived reality to expose the absurdity of said viewpoint. In that respect the article is perfect satire.

        …Oh, and “left to the professionals”?

        Up yours and every other sniffy snivelling snob. The ultimate duty of any writer is to relate his/her thoughts to the reader. The “professionals” are anyone who can type or hold a pen. If this article fails to surmount the Everest that is your standards, go forth and fornicate with a copy of The Prince, you prick.

        • rocelot

          Yes, I view good satire highly. Fuck you for thinking your opinion is all that matters and that somehow having standards for such things makes one a snob.

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

            And yet, here you are, spending time with us dregs.

            Why not go find yourself something more worthy of your attention?

          • http://hyperskeptical.wordpress.com robertcrayle

            Such a strange being you are. You stomp across every thread you appear in, making demands that perfectly encapsulate your view that ONLY YOUR OPINION MATTERS_ERS_ERS_ERS! Then get angry at me for criticising your weapons-grade narcissism as narcissism itself. You actually see doubt and criticism of others’ ridiculous entitled certainty as entitlement. That’s a bit spooky when thought about…

            Also, Your problem isn’t that you merely “have standards”. Everyone has them. You problem is your invalidation of others’ work because they don’t meet those celestial heights. This is the _definition_ of snobbery: excluding everything that doesn’t meet said heights. You can dislike something without declaring it shouldn’t exist. Think upon it, or find somewhere else deserving of your attention. Might I suggest the sterling works of Jonathon Swift, Oscar Wilde, Sir Terry Pratchett, or John Ralston Saul? They might scratch your itch…

          • Stu

            We have standards too. And you fall way short

  • http://gravatar.com/jjrockmale El Bastardo

    I think the transition will be legal contracts in the form that women will essentially have more and more men demand a contractual form before they make a baby that they get liberal, unrestricted access up to half the year; and they don’t get robbed in court for the child.

    IF, and it’s a BIG IF, that day ever comes; the most butch, man hating feminist will be screaming for Christianity to come back and set up traditional marriage again. Women need men more than fish need bicycles, but bicycles are one day never going to need fish.

    That scares me, and I am a man.

    Women don’t do well with kids without the father. However, when they see how the kid changes after a contractual parenthood, devoid of the perverse enslavement of men by her family courts, and that the man is now oblivious to her…she won’t like it. They need men to badger, we balance them out.

    • ihateyourguts 25

      It doesn’t matter is she likes it. Women are irrelevant.

  • GodTheRapist

    What ever happened to the strong independent woman that was free from the antiquated social construct of marriage? I seem to recall that back in the 90′s every single feminist was proclaiming to the skies that being attached to a man was the exact opposite of what the movement needed, that the idea of being bound to a man was repulsive and barbaric and merely something the patriarchy uses as a form of control and ownership of women.

    Now that the men of the world have heard the cry and, with good measure, returned it back it seems as if marriage is the soup of the day and if you don’t have it now you will miss out forever, like a social version of a family guy cut away gag.

    • http://funkymunkyluvn.wordpress.com/ Jason Gregory

      “What ever happened to the strong independent woman that was free from the antiquated social construct of marriage?”

      Those elusive Panthers are as rare as bigfoot.
      http://www.avoiceformen.com/sexual-politics/m-g-t-o-w/jaguars-only-and-all-others-need-not-apply/

      Let me know if you spot one.

    • Jon

      Back in the early 1990s, my soon-to-be wife and college graduate argued with our pastor at length regarding our marriage vows. She went on and on about she didn’t need a man to take care of her, blah, blah, blah, so the pastor relented and struck my vow to take care of her. I NEVER wanted a housewife. I NEVER wanted to take care of her. I was thrilled.

      Guess what? I’m taking care of her (you probably saw that coming). As soon as she popped out the baby her useful days were over. She told me if I didn’t like it, I could leave and she would take the kid. No need for the charade of independence once you pop a kid out. Our “family” courts got your back girl.

      So, to answer your question:

      “What ever happened to the strong independent woman that was free from the antiquated social construct of marriage?”

      They don’t want it. It turns out that job/work/career/rat race is a bitch. Oh, I know how being a mom is the toughest job in the world (wink, wink). What am I thinking? Anyway, feminists, in typical back-peddling fashion changed the game from “I am woman, hear me roar” to “I am woman, I have choices.” And “you are man, you need to live with my choices”.

      Making your own way in the world is HARD. VERY HARD. When given the option women are saying no thanks. I’ll take the husband support, “child” support, alimony, domestic relations orders, marital property, public welfare, thank you very much.

      There’s a really simple way to fix this, remove the crutches of support. Legal marriage should be abolished. So-called “child” support should end right now. Remove the privileges and we’ll be flooded with independent women.

      • feeriker

        Remove the privileges and we’ll be flooded with independent women.

        You know, of course, that removing the privileges ain’t never gonna happen. Women will start publicly immolating themselves in protest by the hundreds or thousands and will start commiting acts of terrorist violence if such a threat were to ever credibly appear. But they won’t ever need to go to that extreme. There will ALWAYS be a sufficient number of white knights in positions of power to ensure that the status quo remains in place and that deh precious wymminz are taken care of.

        For all of their rhetoric, women want “independence” like American Republican politicians want less government.

      • aimeemcgee

        Stories like yours annoy me.
        My parents knew Mum would be ‘out of action’ child raising but they both sacrificed to make sure she had her professional papers first before kids. Once I was 8, she went back and had 15 years of a wildly successful professional career. Beloved’s father supported his mother getting her nursing degree after he was born (he was looked after by an auntie). She had 20 years and was also very successful
        “Traditional” marriage involved planning to benefit both parties. Baby making and child raising was factored in to the planning. The option to return to education/ professional life was always there and (generally) women with families and life experience are superb students and fantastic employees once they qualify while juggling kids – it’s why nearly 15% of our staff come from ‘mature return to training/careers’ as a category .
        This needs to be discussed and agreed by both parties before marriage and during the leaner years of child raising, the SAHP needs to care for the house and kids like it is a job – looking to find savings and efficiency

  • re-construct

    Many of the loudest gender-feminists I read about, have a financial stake in “inflaming” the public with manufactured statistics ….so they can get ever more and more state and federal pork bloating.
    excellent piece jason.

  • Robert St. Estephe

    Yea, but there always bee a need for a few dominatrixes. “The manginas will always be with us.” (from the Sermon on the Mound of Venus).

  • Booyah

    Wow great article. Plenty of thought provoking stuff. Women did have a hand in their own obsolescence I think though. When they decided their traditional roles were oppressive men took up the slack and after easily adapting to the change they noticed that all their gendered jobs. (lawnmowing, car servicing, repairs and maintenance) were not being taken on by their partners. At around this stage men start to wonder, so exactly what do I need a partner for if I’m tackling the male and female roles? Is it a blessing or burden? Those that decide that there is nothing but burden to be found are the topic of next weeks “Where have all the good men gone?” article, usually amongst the company of an article telling us how very evil men are for not capitulating to every last one of womens increasingly ridiculous demands.

    I’ve had to teach quite a few gf’s how to cook. Very few have taught me ANYTHING. So in my world the female has voluntarily phased herself out. She is not a victim.

    • feeriker

      I’ve had to teach quite a few gf’s how to cook. Very few have taught me ANYTHING. So in my world the female has voluntarily phased herself out. She is not a victim.

      I never ceased to be amazed at how many young women today seem to be able to do NOTHING domestically for themselves, let alone anyone else. Most of my single male colleagues, especially the young single men who work for me, do all of this (cooking, cleaning, ironing, washing, repairing their own clothes, etc.) for themselves without even thinking about it.

      I had one such young man who works for me recently tell me in the course of casual conversation that he could easily forgive a potential mate’s lake of domestic skills, that these were easily learned over time and through necessity. But what he could not tolerate in any woman was the attitude of “it’s not my responsibility to take care of my own living space or to see to my own or my husband’s needs.” This, he says, radiates from the current generation of women like heat from a blast furnace. Why take on the burden of feeding and cleaning up after a second, dead-weight body?

      • Booyah

        Yep feeriker somewhere along the line you realize that there is twice as much (or more if kids are involved) cooking, cleaning, washing, dishes etc. and you are pulling all that weight singlehandedly. Asking the little lady to help would of course be “oppressive”. Your friends experience does not surprise me, Ive strangely come to the same conclusion myself. It is literally easier to run a household singlehandedly. Who ever would have thought it? This is why the feminists are so up in arms about sex-robot technology. It tackles the one thing that “empowered” women may still bring to the table. (or just use as a control mechanism as is more often the case.)

        It makes you wonder what happens when they are rightfully shown the front door. When they are forced to do these things for themselves are they oppressing themselves?!?! Oh no I forgot the feminist imperative. Its always our fault! We’re still oppressive for making them do it even when its not helping us….

        So much LOL :)

        • Bombay

          When ever the subject of living with a woman comes up, my answer is that I have two children and do not want a third.

  • AlexB

    Interesting perspective and a seldom asked question what do men need women for?To have children?That goes both ways women can’t have children without men.Sex?Again goes both ways, besides sex isn’t a need it’s a want.At the the end of the day I honestly can’t think of any good reason.

    • Sting Chameleon

      Companionship, bonding and emotional security are the only things I can think of. But thanks to feminism, their ability to provide that was utterly destroyed.

  • Jared Spencer

    My wife is anything but irrelevant to myself and four children. The statement that she is as vital to the proper operation of our household as I am is about as honest a thing as I could say. It seems to me that the deliberate (on the part of everyone involved) departure from the things that built our societies in the past is making it harder and harder to carry them into the future. I could be a bit old fashioned, though…or a lot.

    • crydiego

      Good for you Jared and that’s the way it should be. I don’t know about it being old fashioned but it sounds like the way things should be, – with respect on both sides.
      If you can get some days off please go to family court. Just sit and watch for a day or maybe two. You may walk out with even a deeper appreciation of what you have.
      In your house it is safe and warm, but outside, homes and lives are being washed away in a flood.

  • Jared Spencer

    Exceedingly valid point, crydiego. In the service, you need only take one or two paces to find a shipmate that got rolled over real good in a divorce. Or had been subject to NJP because their mate assaulted them and they summoned the authorities only to be cuffed and stuffed themselves.

  • Sting Chameleon

    Why do I get the feel that this article is no different than the separatist rhetoric of radical feminists?.

    • feeriker

      You might want to ask the radfems that question, as they’re the ones who set in motion the conditions that set up the premise underlying the article.

    • http://www.avoiceformen.com August Løvenskiolds

      Are there calls in separatist radfem literature for men to reinvent themselves? Usually the call is for the massive extermination or reduction of living men.

      I see no such thing here – Gregory is calling on women to reinvent themselves apart from the gynocentric, man-hating expectations of feminism and traditionalism.

      I don’t hate my Apple ][+, but it is obsolete and I don’t need it any more.

      • Sting Chameleon

        Marriage as an institution is obsolete, but women? It reads a lot like “The End of Men”. Maybe I’m just seeing things, what do I know.

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

          The “End of Men” wasn’t written by a radical feminist and it was dripping with the idea that men are only relevant when they are protectors and providers for women.

          This article is completely different. It’s saying that women should self-actualize to be relevant to men.

        • http://www.avoiceformen.com August Løvenskiolds

          Most girls and young women still dream about their wedding day, a day that will never come. Now that straight marriage is dead, the unmarried, unneeded woman can cry, scream, demand governments save her and feed her, OR, she can make something of herself apart from her gravid womb.

        • Nostradormouse

          If you want to see this as ‘Women’ as a social construct are obsolete, be my guest.

  • Richard

    Kick ass article… Jason….. Here’s the problem….:

    1.) “Estrogen”

    Makes women broody, passive, less intelligent, prone to emotional swings and irrational emotional attachments and even less intelligent decisions. Cut your balls off and try taking birth control pills and see how productive and logical you feel.

    2.) Babies

    Women still have to make babies or within 80 odd years there will be no one left. Making babies and bringing up children is probably one of the most mundane, tedious and unrewarding pursuits in life. Hence women loaded with all that estrogen tend to have less functional brains BY DESIGN… They are like the retards that help you pack your groceries…. they can’t do much more. Anyone with a rational mind and a high IQ and a low estrogen level will NEVER agree to incubate an 8lb parasite inside their body, never mind take care of it for 18+ years afterwards.

    So until we have genetic engineering, robotic incubators and robotic nannies sorted, women have a brief chance at holding onto a niche in society and expanding that outwards…. I fear once those three things fall into place the female – technologically speaking at least – will be truly obsolete.

    The only other truly female function is as a sex partner and show piece for a man. However a well made organic robot can fill the first function and a flashy car, plane, flying saucer, computer etc. can fill the second.

    No wonder the feminists are pushing like mad for women to get Uni degrees and raise their value, gain equal wages etc. etc. Subconsciously they know that female days are truly numbered.

    Anyone offended by this comment has missed the point….

    • crydiego

      I gave a down vote and I’m very sure I didn’t miss your point. Robots and cars can replace women; never!

    • aimeemcgee

      Richard, I call BS on your link between estrogen and intelligence until you cite a paper from a credible source.
      A self-actualised woman will have sufficient self awareness to plan around the vageries of her hormones. For example, I borrow a GPS for the 3 days before if I have to travel as my map reading goes to pot.
      The human drive to procreate is powerful and although there is a mild drop in performance of cognitive tasks in the last couple of weeks and first year of raising a child this is likely sleep deprivation, not a long term diminution of raw intelligence. Baby brain is a media construct used by lazy women to excuse themselves the work of self-actualisation

      • Richard

        my wife cannot find her way around town, it takes her months to get basic orientation that I can achieve in one trip… many women are like her… my exes were the same…. many women are the same….

        if you can’t master a basic cognitive function like orientation, god help you with particle physics and microprocessor design.

    • http://funkymunkyluvn.wordpress.com/ Jason Gregory

      I’m not sure that bringing up kids is so awful. I’m sure doing so has some rewards. That being said, humour is one of the best ways to express the inverse relationship between intelligence and baby-making. (One of my favorite movie clips of all time.)

      • Richard

        oh well… come and take care of mine for a few weeks and see how tedious life can be….. sure there are flashes of fun, but under the age of 10… there’s not much in it for a guy….

  • Ginkgo

    “If we view these pieces of cultural technology as extensions of a woman’s identity, meaning, and purpose, women have been and are experiencing a loss; it is a loss that exists in the form of their own obsolescence.”

    Guilt and gender anxiety around this issue fueled the Mommy Wars, which were real enough that denying they ever happened is an article of faith now in the femmesphere, and it is probably what drives a lot of mommy-blocking.

  • onca747

    Women searching for their own identity and purpose? Isn’t this what feminism has been arguing for over the last 60 years? Oh sure.. but show a fem this article, and s/he’ll spew chips. Because males are the only sex which we’re allowed to envisage going extinct (but only after taking out big life insurance policies beforehand).

    • http://funkymunkyluvn.wordpress.com/ Jason Gregory

      The brutal Heideggerian “violence-doing” is the reality that men liberated ourselves from marriage and from the parasitic housewife. By extension, men liberated women from those roles, freeing her to create for herself a new self. This little bit of reality smashes to bits their gynocentric narratives about patriarchy and male oppression of women. Without the men who created the tech that liberated us, women would likely still be barefoot and pregnant. After 50 or so years of liberation, what have women done, aside from blame men for oppression? The same fucking shit they did under traditional parasitism–worming and leeching their way into bureaucratic, resource consuming and regulatory compliance-type paper pushing, clipboard-thumping, and H.R. jobs. Very few of them actually create anything as scientists, engineers, chemists and etc. They mostly are still traditionalist parasites of a modern sort, dependent on men or father state, if not directly, then by proxy.

      If these women are gonna “spew chips,” as you say, it’s going to be over this obscene “violence-doing” reality. If anybody should be spewing chips, it should be men, for they have not demanded credit for creating this great liberation and for not demanding that women take responsibility for themselves, for creating their own scaffolds of relational relevance and tech and industry and livelihoods that are not parasitic to the creations and industriousness of men. When I say that women need to GTFO, I don’t mean some sort of absurd separatist nonsense. I mean that women need to take responsibility for themselves, stop blaming men, and create. The burden is their own and men cannot do it for them.

      • Richard

        yes, Jason… that is exactly my point, because any poor sole trapped inside your average female biological system doesn’t have the drive to go and invent a new engine or computer chip or robot etc. etc. etc.

        Women are good with fine details, wrestling control through nagging, complaining, neediness – feminism and the nanny state bureaucracy is an extension of that. Women can excel in getting mindless university degrees, but where is the female Steve Jobs, or the female Richard Branson.

        There isn’t one because testosterone, NOT estrogen is what drives a man to excel at creating… men also create objects, because they can’t actually create new life….

        The tragedy of feminism (and technology to some degree) is that it set women up to be independent and go and swim in a man’s world, but women cannot do that. So instead they have started destroying the man’s world and turning it into a socialist, communist, politically correct feminist nightmare, where the only important thing is the lowest common denominator, and we all have to be equal, but we are NOT equal.

        Rather than firing women up to compete with men, finding that to be a fruitless and pointless task and then trying to level the playing field with rules… what actually needed to happen was for women to find their place as active members of society, as cooking, cleaning and child bearing are lesser tasks than they used to be.

        That doesn’t mean attacking men or forcing equal wages on all…. .it means women should have built their niches… not in pant suits and corporate roles, but in softer, more intelligent nurturing roles, that suit their biology.

        For example… if the presidents wives were all BFFs, instead of obsessed with status and what dress to wear…. trade disputes and political squabbles would soon melt away.

        I don’t think it’s fair to call the house wife parasitic…. symbiotic would be better. I still let my wife organize the house and groceries, cleaning, clothes etc.. and I organize money… If I had to pay a house keeper 7 days a week, it would cost a lot ….

        the problem is the technology means it’s not exactly a full time job anymore… so what to do in between time other than slowly build discontent and hate for men ?

        Lack of imagination on a woman’s part for sure…. but the devil finds work for idol hands….

        I can tell from your post that you never had a solid woman taking care of you… it is a great thing …. but it’s no longer a full time work and on top of that women have been told it’s an invalid work that makes them slaves to men, which is not true at all….

        Women should have amplified and expanded their roles, instead of trying to invade and under mine the man’s role. Where is the social structure ? Why is crime, drug abuse and healthcare still in a mess ? These are nurturing feminine roles, that have been left in a mess, while chicks read cosmo and get 3rd rate MBAs in English Literature….

        Demand more from women… demand them to sort out the social issues…. men sorted out the technology, but socially we are little improved from 500 or even 2500 years ago.

        • aimeemcgee

          Richard, I’m trying to work out if you are serious or a troll.
          There are plenty of smart women – who are perfectly capable of original creative thought and who are not ruled by their hormones.
          Just because you’ve not seen an atom doesn’t mean they don’t exist.
          Your attitude to women sounds like you excuse helpless behaviour in your belief that women are ruled by their biology.

          Who is the mug there?

          • http://hyperskeptical.wordpress.com robertcrayle

            Not to mention…if you have access to “the truth”, what point is there in saying anything at all about it? If we are ruled by biology, nothing is going to change ever. So why come here and tell us when you could much more productively go off, have a great fun life, and have a gaggle of kids by adoption or surrogacy? What do you hope to prove?

  • http://melodybrooke.com ohwowmelody

    Marriage is not what is obsolete. Its the concept of the “homemaker” that is obsolete. Marriage has to be redefined, just as our role as men and women have to be redefined in todays culture. Its not even (fully) technology and birth control that has changed our roles. What has changed is the shift in our economic viability as women. We can (and mostly do) provide economically for ourselves. This is liberating not only to women, but to men. Now both men and women can choose to be the primary caretaker of their child if they wish, and those roles can go back and forth to where neither is “primary” (ideal for the child). Our laws have not caught up with the current state of what marriage is now, and that is a travesty for all of us, but most especially children.

    But men have trouble with their changing roles as well. They (as well as women) have been brought up to believe that their primary purpose in a family is to provide financial support. When women can provide both care taking and financial support for their family, men are relegated to feeling useless. Men have to learn to step into their value as an intimate partner and parent, and WOMEN have to allow it to happen.

    Women also have to stop thinking they are the only ones with feelings. Men express their feelings differently but in fact they feel things with more sensitivity than women do (from birth boys have a stronger startle reflex than girls). Yet women buy the cultural idea that men are tough, thick skinned and emotionless. Until they develop an ability to recognize and be sensitive to and compassionate with the suffering of men, little will change in our culture.

    • Richard

      this is blue pill BS. Men are men and women are women… the roles expand with technology, but they don’t change… the last thing we need is those pathetic 90s ideals about sensitive men and empowered women.

      we’re nearly in a communist police state thanks to that crap.

    • http://gravatar.com/wadsworthemmons Gordon Wadsworth

      I’m gonna have to call bullshit here. It’s not that I completely disagree with you, but the fact is that Western women do not entirely provide for themselves. We have a monstrous state apparatus to provide for women’s reproductive freedom and security, and we hold men financially responsible for women’s reproductive choices. How exactly are men supposed to shed our “primary purpose” of providing financial support when women and the state are busy forcing us into it?

      And men don’t feel “useless,” we don’t all define our identity based on our capacity to enrich women’s lives.

  • http://gravatar.com/jbl05 jbl05

    Not that I disagree with your premise: the SAH-leech is obsolete and needs to go. Meanwhile, however, I present myself as a counter-point to a lot of your article and many of these comments.
    I am female. I have an IQ of 190. I bore and successfully reared five children. I have worked in the IT industry since 1981. I completed grad school while rearing those five children as a single parent, after their father vanished.
    I have experienced the oppression of the patriarchy. I have been told I’m “too pretty” to be good at math. I’ve been told I deserved the raise/promotion, but the MAN in my organization was going to get it instead because “he has a family to support” (as if I didn’t).
    I find it interesting that I couldn’t get a date to save my life when my kids were young; but now that they are grown, I’ve got my own home, I have a good-sized 401k, decent car, healthy bank account… suddenly the men are lining up and they all propose after about 2 dates. Jeebus.
    Yes, I enjoy sex. Not that I’ll kiss and tell, but my partner sure seems to be enjoying himself too.
    Even when I had a husband (Mr. Deadbeat who took off, and oh by the way, no I never did go after him for all the child support he should have been paying), I still mowed the lawn, maintained my vehicle, took care of home repairs. Yep, all the supposed “man chores”.
    Part of rearing my children included teaching them to cook, clean, repair, do their own laundry, drive a stick shift, change a tire, change the oil… yes, all of them learned all of these things, gender notwithstanding.
    One more, on rearing kids without father present: all five have college degrees, jobs, and healthy marriages/relationships. No drugs, no promiscuity, no abuse, no drop-outs, no law-breakers.
    Yes, my family is a statistical anomaly. But we do exist as a counter-example to many of the sweeping generalizations you made.

    • http://funkymunkyluvn.wordpress.com/ Jason Gregory

      I typically only sweep dust, but sometimes I sweep generalizations just to make asshats trip over their confusion about the distinction between “all” and “some.”

      You must be a very kind person for not going after your “deadbeat” husband. I’m sure you could teach us all so much about compassion.

      In the meantime, I’m bored of your sweeping particulars and peculiarities. You’re not really a counter-point to sweeping generalities. You’re just an inversion of the norm, a particular freak–a statistical outlier, probably less than 1% of the population, but with your 190 IQ, you probably already knew that. If only the world was filled with more of your kind, then men could just go around fucking like deadbeat hypo-agent women…and that’s the real point of the article. Men need the freedom of hypo-agency too. Clearly, this whole article was about men being able to “stick it” wherever they please and without consequence.

      • http://hyperskeptical.wordpress.com robertcrayle

        Also about the IQ thing. As long as it’s above 95 or so, you’re good. The test was only created by a pair of French psychologists to identify schoolchildren who are having difficulties in school who may need some extra help. Once you get above 120, there isn’t a whole lot of difference between people of different scores.

        Secondly you mention not going after your “Deadbeat” for financial reasons. You ignore that you are enabled to do so with the full support of society (with the term deadbeat to presume that his life is now owned partly by a former family) while complaining about “the Patriarchy” denying you a promotion. Interesting….

        Finally: yes, your family is a statistical anomaly. So why did you bring it up here at all? If this article doesn’t apply to you, it doesn’t apply to you. So why get so stroppy with an article you seem to have skimmed or perused rather than thought about?

        • Bombay

          People like to piss. That is why. LOL

      • Richard

        Jason you’re dead wrong here…. Men don’t need to plunge themselves into the women’s ideals and responsibility free world of doing whatever they please (and whatever Cosmo tells them they should do).

        Not unless they are planning on becoming gay of course.

        Men need to man up and start demanding more from women. More intelligence, more responsibility, more maturity. More focus, more drive, higher income, higher social worth, and most importantly, that women find their own niche and do something wonderful for the world.

        Florence Nightingale and Mother Teresa, not Rihanna and Kim Kardashian.

        Ah it’s a male dominated world… well yes, of course it is… men built it largely to make women and children’s lives easier.

        Now it’s easier…. demand women give something back…. sort out the drug problem, sort out the corrupt politics and massive government debt problems. Sort out healthcare. Sort out education. These are women’s roles…

        that’s why they are still in a mess….

        technology, weapons, communications, housing, infrastructure, transportation, men got that sorted…. where are the women to install a stable society of decency and freedom ?

        • http://funkymunkyluvn.wordpress.com/ Jason Gregory

          I was being sarcastic about male hypo-agency…sorry.

        • Andy Bob

          Richard, I understand the central point you are making about the need for men to stand up and demand more from women in general. Unfortunately, it is undermined by the kind of broad stereotyping that our critics point to when trying to dismiss the MHRM outright. I am well aware that I am often guilty of doing the same. Perhaps it is something we both need to work on.

          Firstly, gay men do not live responsibility-free lives. This claim used to annoy me, but now it just makes me laugh because its origin is so obvious. It is made by people whose only reference points for how gay men live their lives are reality television and sit-coms where all gay men are presented as champagne-swilling hysterics given to collapsing in puddles of despondency when peoples’ drapes don’t match their serviettes.

          Television executives believe that reducing gay men to shallow and absurd stereotypes is the only way to make gay men palatable to the wider audience. Rainbow-thonged Gay Priders contribute to the image of frivolity. It rarely occurs to observers that the spangled revelers spend the rest of the year slogging away at their jobs – unsequinned – just like everyone else.

          Most gay men are people with real jobs entailing real responsibilities, who don’t give a flying fuck about anyone’s capacity to colour co-ordinate. While it is true that not having romantic involvements women who have been tarnished by feminism makes life less stressful, there is no Rainbow Express giving us free rides through life.

          Furthermore, exercising a little more caution when generalizing about women is not the same as toning down our rhetoric. We don’t need to venture any further than this site to see that there are, indeed, women who are intelligent, responsible and mature, with fearsome focus and drive doing something very wonderful in the world: fighting for a better deal for men like us.

          Honey Badgers, I salute you, and apologize if my frequent stereotyping of women fails to acknowledge you as shining examples, not just for women, but for men as well – and not just blue-pillers.

          We should leave the stereotyping to feminists, especially when it is both avoidable and self-defeating.

    • http://www.avoiceformen.com August Løvenskiolds

      According to this site:

      http://www.iqcomparisonsite.com/IQtable.aspx

      …an IQ of 190 occurs in roughly one in one billion people (one billion = 1000 million) on the Wechsler scale. That means that perhaps 7 living people on the entire planet Earth score that high. If 4 of those 7 are female, then there exist 4 women, planet-wide, who are marriageable.

      The others are obsolete.

      • Never Blue Again

        Oh.. wait .. Don’t be TOOOO generous. Don’t suit us ;)
        As we know IQ distribution is not linear and consistent through-out the scale. So as we go up in the IQ scale men vs women ratio increases very rapidly.

        According to this site there are twice as many men than women at IQ 120. And 30 times more men than women at IQ 170 plus.

        http://www.thephora.net/forum/archive/index.php/t-17305.html

        So, i think at best it would be

        30 * women190iQ + women190iQ = 7
        women190iQ = 7/31 = 0.2258

        Hmm…. So, Her claims makes her not being a Complete Human Being. Only 23% of an adult . Pretty evident from her rest of the story. And mathematically proven :)

        Or else, The only option left is ……..

        SHE IS AN ALIEN 8O

        Which brings us to square one about women in general.
        And now give me my Nobel prize. I’ve Discovered an Alien, Damn it …. :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

    • http://www.avoiceformen.com August Løvenskiolds

      “I have experienced the oppression of the patriarchy. I have been told I’m ‘too pretty’ to be good at math. ”

      Oh, my gawd…the patriarchal oppression of having to turn down all those lucrative modeling contracts must’ve been wretched for you.

      • Peter Wright (Tawil)

        “I have experienced the oppression of the patriarchy. I have been told I’m ‘too pretty’ to be good at math. ”

        Shit, that must have seriously dented her fender. Hard to bounce back from a hit like that.

    • crydiego

      I’m think you have every reason to be proud of yourself.

      • crydiego

        You didn’t stretch the truth about anything did you jbl05?

    • ali

      I call bullshit. First off, I start with a tip. Whenever somebody starts by saying their IQ is above 140, they are lying. Especially if they go on to prove otherwise by their arguments. I have been around the most exceptional talents of my country which is among the highest scorers of the world. I have seen more than a few people obsessed to say they have high IQs always even before taking a test and for some reason they all say 190. In my experience the most intelligent are always shy about their IQ. I guess it’s the same test that said G. W. Bush was 140 and Rice was 190? You know, when the test is scaled up to 460 instead of 200 and some? Here is my challenge for you:
      Accept the following deal:
      We show up at a planned time at AVFM in this page. I challenge you with 5 questions measuring IQ between the range of 160 and 200. You answer them in the corresponding time. If you lose the test, you donate 100$ to AVFM. If you win the test, I will give 100$ to you. What do you say?

      • ali

        Translation of your post:
        I am a very delusional person that from early ages learned to resort to fantasy whenever reality did not suit me. I am obsessed to think I am princess every-guy’s-dream but when in reality not all guys extend themselves for me saying you are the best there is, my mind sets out for adventure in the islands of fantasy wherein:
        I have a very high IQ, but the reason the whole world is not talking about me saying I am the most exceptional talent is “patriarchy told me I am too pretty to be good at math”.
        I am the goddess of erotica. “My (imaginary) partner enjoys being with me” so much. I have the most powerful sexuality in the world; all guys line up to bend on their knees to be with me. “Every guy I go out with proposes after two dates” and I am in my fifties! This could have happened all the time but the reason it didn’t? Guess what? I was in a patriarchy in which men didn’t want my children, but THEY WERE DROOLING ALL OVER THE PLACE FOR ME.
        I AM NOT PSYCHOTIC… I SAID I AM NOT. My husband didn’t find out I was psychotic. He left me because “he was Mr. Deadbeat”.
        Analysis of your psychosis
        You see miss, when a psychotic person such as yourself talks to an actually intelligent person, there are things that give her away. You said: “Even when I had a husband, I still mowed the lawn, maintained my vehicle, took care of home repairs. Yep, all the supposed “man chores”.” You are trying in your delusional world to reassure yourself that you don’t need a man even going as far as saying you are a counter-example to everything we say. But you give yourself away when you say “I couldn’t get a date to save my life” insinuating that you not only need a man, you are desperate for one.
        Delusion only makes you feel better about yourself for a limited time. Then reality keeps pushing back each time harder than the previous. You van stay in the vicious circle by coming up with stronger delusions but you only set out to no avail. So I highly recommend that you see a skillful psychologist.

  • Andy Bob

    “Meanwhile, however, I present myself as a counter-point to a lot of your article and many of these comments.” Ms jbl05

    Every now and then, the AVfM gets a visit from a super-duper lady ‘counter-point’ who drops in to dazzle us all with tales of her total awesomeness. Golly, aren’t we lucky?

    Always uber-intelligent and successful, she has men falling like flies at her feet, pleading for her hand in marriage. Her offspring are all multi-talented multi-taskers who wouldn’t know a blemish if it tarred and feathered their pearly whites. This picture of apple-pie perfection would have the Brady Bunch puking in disgust and makes me want to give the whole lot of them a giant wedgie.

    Lurking in the shadows of these dazzling she-heroes is the inevitably villainous deadbeat dude what done her wrong. The cad left her to mow her own lawn – at least until her eldest son grew tall enough to grip the bar.

    This woman is just another sad and delusional soul for whom cyberspace is a kind of Fantasia where Debbie, her youngest, isn’t a crack-addled slag who’s just dropped out of rehab…again. It is where she can pretend that she is batchelor kryptonite, forcing hapless men to shower her with diamonds and proposals, instead of being just another lonely singlette sobbing through re-runs of ‘Say Yes to the Dress’ in her bob-bon wrapper-strewn abode.

    I know all this because a woman with an IQ of 190 would never claim that her concocted life-story were a counter-point to Mr Gregory’s post. She would know that her comment had no discernable relevance whatsoever. And, if she’s lying about her IQ, well, you can guess the rest.

    Ms jbl05 showed up as a reminder that her kind of crazy is just one of the dangers which litter the relationship minefield for men these days. She would be much happier among her own kind: at Manboobz.

    • Kimski

      An IQ of 190 is pretty amazing, considering Einstein’s were presumably somewhere between 160 and 180, even though he never actually took a test.

      Why would an individual like that spend her time writing on a Men’s Rights site, when there’s a sustainable energy source to be invented, or a cure for cancer to be discovered??

      It just doesn’t strike me as being an exceptionally intelligent choice, that’s all.

    • http://www.avoiceformen.com August Løvenskiolds

      There is a twitter account with the handle “jbl05″. “jbl05″ appears to have had a somewhat unhealthy interest in Justin Bieber in 2010.

      https://twitter.com/jbl05

      • http://funkymunkyluvn.wordpress.com/ Jason Gregory

        Justin Bieber Lover ’05…hahahahahaha!

      • Kimski

        Well, that sort of took care of the IQ claim, didn’t it? :D
        Just another dimwit who buys into the excessively untalented crap the moneymakers in the recording industry peddles to toddlers.

    • ali

      We have been Andy Bobbed again! Now there, is a high IQ.

    • http://funkymunkyluvn.wordpress.com/ Jason Gregory

      Guys must learn to never dip it in crazy, not even the tip. :-)

    • crydiego

      You may have scared off a real show piece. I miss her already.

  • Andy Bob

    Exactly.

  • http://hyperskeptical.wordpress.com robertcrayle

    Not to mention, she got everyone to talk about her consistently. That’s got to be worth a bit of brilliance, surely…

  • Bombay

    She forgot to tell us her dick is 2 ft long. So much for the IQ.

  • aimeemcgee

    Makes me feel happy about my score in comparison to my freaky über bright big brother now to have looked at that site :)

    • http://hyperskeptical.wordpress.com robertcrayle

      Are you willing to divulge? I would guess you score at _least_ 125…

      • aimeemcgee

        In that ball park…kinda daunting having a brother who scored a clear 20 above me though :lol:
        Big bro did teach me an important lesson once, we were representing our branch of family at a social event once, I caught up with him having a breather in the garden a couple of hours in and the told me he would happily trade 30 IQ points for the ability to do social chit-chat without being horribly self-conscious.
        We don’t spend much time together but I try to make sure we have a parallel task when we do, as he finds that the easiest way to talk even with his wee sister

        • http://hyperskeptical.wordpress.com robertcrayle

          Sounds just like me…I would trade 60 points to be able to look another person in the eye while speaking. Or know how to start a conversation. Or end a conversation. Or feel like I had a right to be in a room with lots of other people.

          I wonder if people know how much I envy what they do so naturally? You lucky sons-of-guns!

  • http://gravatar.com/jbl05 jbl05

    Wow. I truly had no idea you all were full of such hate.

    No wonder MRAs get blown off as just a bunch of raging haters. Wow.

    To those who tried to claim I am delusional or in need of psychotherapy — you haven’t been here for my life, but there are plenty of people who have, and every one of them can verify what I said. Oh yeah, it was my parents who had my IQ tested… I was just a kid. Take it up with them.

    But I don’t have to defend myself to you. You all jumped in and attacked something that you know absolutely nothing about. I’d encourage you to do a little self-scrutiny there and see why on earth you felt the need to react like you did to someone like me. You might learn something.

    Otherwise, I’ve just got one other thing to say, and then I’ll leave you all to angrily jerk off to your porn-of-choice…

    … there are a lot more women out here like myself, who have careers and who are making a significant difference. How many of you haters have a patent? How many of you have been published in peer-reviewed scientific journals?

    Yeah, that’s what I thought.

    • Kimski

      Dear, spesjul, Justin Bieber Lover 05.
      /Snicker.

      Not so fast there, cupcake.
      I happen to own the patent on a very succesful product, that is in the process of eradicating every competition on the market. It has been shown in a number of magazines, and have made a whole string of different experts, in this particular area, change their preferred means to my product, even though they’ve used their own for more than 30->40 years.

      It has actually been so succesful in 2 years only, that I’ve been able to quit my regular job, and now only have to work roughly 1 month a year, while still maintaining the same living standards as before, where I worked 12 to 15 hours a day in the PR business. And I’ve done so during the worst recessesion in 80 years, honeybun.

      But then again, I don’t waste my time writing on feminist sites, bragging about “my wonderful life”, an IQ I can’t possibly have without getting some kind of international attention, and the women in my life I have no use for beyond sex. And I especially don’t do that walking backwards in high heels, while raising five kids simultaneously. (You must literally speaking have done one hell of a job with that, btw!)

      As to the hate..-Well, there’s a quite obvious difference between hating you, and pointing out that every one of the issues you brought up in your completely irrelevant description of your life, goes completely against your IQ claim, and your apparent fascination with a music business puppet, who couldn’t write a melody if his life depended on it, does nothing but underline it all.

      I think Ali did a fine job in nailing you good with his translation, and you just choose to misinterpret that as hate, because we’re not awestruck by your lies.

      To most of us, your life, your income, your men, your kids, your musical taste, and the IQ your parents felt the need to lie to you about, in order to make themselves feel better about some obvious faults, overt narcissism being one, are just as irrelevant as your comments.

      You’re nothing special on these pages, cupcake, and you were treated exactly like all the other feminist narcissist that stumbles in here, thinking that they are.

      No more and no less.
      Deal with it, and have a nice day.

    • ali

      Funny you should ask; I do have patents and have been published in peer-reviewed journals (I highly doubt you have). My offer still stands; I will even lower the level of questions only to suit IQs of over 140. Take it or STFU.

    • Sting Chameleon

  • Never Blue Again

    @jbl05

    Ha ha ….
    All feminist are supreme delusional …

    First off …. Let me tell you what the hell IQ is … !! Evidently an 190 IQ holder doesn’t know that. 8O
    In what world do we live in ?

    IQ is a measure of your mental age with your actual age. Normal peoples are expected to have an IQ of 100. IQ 100 means you are as intelligent as your age group should be, normally. IQ changes with age, not much, but changes for sure.

    Second, having an high IQ during childhood doesn’t mean anything specific, other than quick learning capabilities. Since kids are expected to know little, so if any kid knows few things more than other average kids or can learn quicker, then his/her IQ reading will jump up quite a lot. When people become older their IQ usually converge toward average values.

    Now bragging here about your IQ when you were a kid(even if it’s true) is itself an indication of your IQ. Plus you’ve just dumped all responsibilities of your statements (Lies) to your parents. Another indication of your IQ.

    Just read the following to know more about IQ ….. can’t brag any more .. !!
    http://www.iqcomparisonsite.com/iqbasics.aspx

    And what you’ve missed by a mile is we all called you a LIAR. A Supreme Delusional LIAR. Simple as that. Another indication of your IQ.

    In which universe to call someone a liar, some patent and peer reviewed journal publication required ? Another indication of your IQ.

    And lastly , I still believe you have an IQ of 190 . Just in backwards.

  • http://hyperskeptical.wordpress.com robertcrayle

    @Jbl05

    If we’re obsessive hate mongers…congratulations on commenting here! We might have hated you to _death_ through the screen! And since hating unaccepted targets is now disallowed in the US(?) I can see how you might not be able to tolerate such an…immoral site. You truly are a hero.

  • Rob7

    There’s plenty of interesting insights here. It’s a very good thing we men are in this mode of diagnosing the problem.

    I believe that this will take some time, because we are accustomed to dealing with the world of women and feminism with a great deal of naivety. As we discover that our best efforts in the past have been met with nothing but a good kick in the teeth, then we will slowly redefine things, and once again rescue civilisation.

    So keep going guys, this is painful, but very important.

  • Karlo

    Not only is marriage obsolete and possibly womyn getting there too, I feel the mass majority of womyn are out of control today; let me tell you what I witnessed yesterday: “I went to my local dollar store to pick up a couple of things, as I got into the check-out lane I noticed a womyn in her late 50’s bitching up a storm all because the cashier missed checking her items and mistakenly took the person ahead of her due to a lane change because someone was getting relieved for a break, she went on and on demanding the number to the corporate office so she could file a complaint about how terrible the service was, My cashier (Wanda) was in the middle of checking my items while this womyn was directly behind me chewing on Wanda’s ass to the point that Wanda was losing her concentration on checking my items, I quietly and patiently waited until we finished our transaction”. Now keep in mind I recently swallowed the Red Pill and am new to the MGTOW and Zeta male ways …
    Now, I probably witness this type of behavior in womyn at least once a week while out in public and have become sick and tired of some dam womyn making a scene because she feels some sort of entitlement. I have just become weary of womyn’s Bullshit these days, Consequently, I couldn’t help myself as to what happened next. As I grabbed my bags of things, took a couple of steps, turned, and faced Wanda and the complaining bitch and sort of loudly said: “Merry Christmas everyone and you lady need to loosen the FUCK up because in the greater scheme of things this is not as big a deal as you’re making it out to be”.
    I walked out of the store to several people clapping their hands and wishing me a Merry Christmas !
    God bless, Merry Christmas, and Happy New Year to All.
    Onward through the fog I go.

  • Trevor Smith

    yes, I really do think many women are presently useless. They have screwed up the motherhood task,thinking the dad was useless and they could go it on their own. So now that they have discarded the kids, so no more mother worship needed, they are bored and looking for crap to do. so why not complain about how bad they have it. and parasitically couple onto every institution men have sweated and died over to create, and demand representation in? of course i am referencing the entitled western feminist or their offshoots, but they are at an unprecedented level of opportunity, affluence and education. In other words living better than about 2 billion males out there. But yes, keep reminding us about how difficult it is now that you have nothing else worthwhile to do.

  • Bill Brown

    It’s not worth the time, energy or money.

  • Jack LaBear

    The fundamental flaw in this essay is that it is asking women to be like men – to create a civilization for themselves.