Do women need men need women?


Thy husband is thy lord, thy life, thy keeper,
Thy head, thy sovereign; one that cares for thee,
And for thy maintenance commits his body
To painful labour both by sea and land,
To watch the night in storms, the day in cold,
Whilst thou liest warm at home, secure and safe;
And craves no other tribute at thy hands
But love, fair looks and true obedience;
Too little payment for so great a debt.

Katharina, the shrew from The Taming of same.


Hey, I didn’t say it; she did.  Well, okay.  She’s fictional.  Actually, Shakespeare said it.  Alright, well, he didn’t “say” it; he wrote it.  And no, I don’t believe that women should be subservient to men, although I hereby give license to all my earthly enemies to try and make it look like I do.

A modern woman may read the above lines, see the words “thy lord… thy keeper,/Thy head, thy sovereign” without being able to see further, and consequently join the feminist cry of “Patriarchy!”  However, it should be clear to the intelligent reader (whose sex shall remain anonymous) that the main portion of the above quote, indeed, of the entire monologue, deals with making the simple mental effort – one that appears to be beyond the scope of a great many modern women – to remember what men actually do when they’re not harassing, raping, or otherwise lording over their women.

I believe that one of the major contributing factors in modern-day social ills has to do with subdividing the community, something which I hope to delve into in later articles.  Subdivision against one’s will, as in sending boys and girls to a school where they don’t want to be, sending Dad and Mom on long commutes miles away from the house, and continuing this process ad infinitum across the human community, means ultimately that we will all be certain to know each other a great deal less.  The one we’re most surely to know the least is the taller, heavier, hairier, bass-resonant creature, trained in keeping his emotions to himself and communicating only when necessary.  Suddenly, everything he does, all that “painful labour,” becomes ephemeral and unimportant, since it happens far away from the senses and thought processes of the beneficiaries.

This is, I believe, at least part of what led to a silly poll I saw at the gym on one of those women’s shows.  I don’t know if it was “The View” or one of the others.  (To me, they’re all “The View.”)  Based on the poll I saw, I can tell you that “the view” is looking bleaker, if not stupider.  The poll simply stated: “Do women need men?”  40% responded “Yes,” and a full 60% responded “No.”

It’s become so routine for me to hear cultural misandry and feminist-infused cultural doctrine that I was prepared to wave this off like so many shit-obsessed flies.  Then something amazing happened on one of the other TV screens.  The poll, it seems, was displayed on “The View” at the same time that an all-news station was reporting more than 100 earthquakes throughout Southern California the previous day.  No major, stop-the-presses quakes.  Apparently, these sorts of small quakes are quite normal in that part of the world, but so many in a 24-hour period was considered newsworthy.  The televised report went on to mention that a great many water and gas lines were ruptured during the quake.  That’s where the idiotic 60% need to be directed, I thought.  Do women need men?  Well, ladies, you do if you want your Southern Californian water and gas turned back on.  Would you like to know why?

Because you never, ever, ever see women fixing the water and gas lines.  When you do, it’s an anomaly.  Anyone who dares shout “Patriarchy!” at this should be aware that Betty Friedan wasn’t looking out her suburban living room window pining to dig in the dirt with the construction boys.  As far as water and gas lines are concerned, women have never had to be.  All they have ever had to be, as Shakespeare pointed out centuries ago, is grateful.

60% of these “View”-watching, heavily subdivided layabouts have forgotten how to express any gratitude at all, apparently.  That “60%” was displayed on a pixilated television screen that was conceived and designed by many men, from older television screens that were conceived and designed by men now deceased.  The characters 6, 0, and % were chosen out of innumerable visual aids available on modern computers, all of which were conceived and designed by men.  The raw materials requisite to make every single machine that displayed that “60%”; the rockets that propel the satellites into space; the satellite dishes; the cables that connect those dishes to those televisions; the electrical power to make the machines work; the cameras that recorded that women’s program; the lights that lit the set; the set; everything, everything, everything the women – enjoying the program from home or starring in it – participate in and gab about incessantly has something to do with some man somewhere first figuring it out, then standing “To watch the night in storms, the day in cold,/Whilst thou liest warm at home, secure and safe”; yet that is as nothing to millions of unthinking participants.

A stupid, thoughtless, pointless poll like that can be easily displayed on one television screen while a report on an accompanying screen merely implies the fact – the undeniable fact – that it’s going to be “blue collar” boys out in the California heat making certain that water and gas are restored to the creatures who don’t need them.  The men, I meant; not the water and gas.  Hell, we need water and gas.

Much of my problem with the poll actually lies with using the word “need.”  As I have pointed out elsewhere, all needs are based on desires.  Therefore, whenever we use the word “need” we should make every effort to remember that somewhere, however loosely connected, we are implying some sort of desire.  I would like to ask the poll-takers what the lack of desire is behind that lack of “need.”

Regardless, I would have to agree with the 60% and say, “No,” women don’t need men.  But my interpretation of the question is undoubtedly too broad for the poll-takers, and too literal.  You see, it all depends on what you want.  What do women typically want from men?  Let’s list the personal wants first:

Physical protection
Financial resources
Division of labor

If you’ve got yourself a man, new or used model, then you undoubtedly have some combination of the above.  Subtract physical protection and financial resources, and the man will most likely have some combination of the remainder in his association with you.  Well done, if that’s what you want, or if you want anything at all.

But there’s a community outside your front door.  Your sense of it, due to its subdivided nature, may be muted, but it’s there, whether you want (need?) to think about it or not.  Do you want (need?) to be able to walk out your front door not only feeling safe and secure, but also feeling engaged in your community to some extent?  Then let’s expand the list further:

Physical protection within and without the community
Division of labor at the macro level
Paved, relatively flat surfaces for travel
Electrical power
Consumer goods
Communication capability
Transportation vehicles
Regular food supply
Access to and ability with various natural resources for furtherance of the above

If you’ve got yourself a herd of males, then you most definitely have some greater combination of the above than you apparently ever even bother to think about.  If, of course, that’s what you wanted, way back when you said you didn’t need men.

Unless you’re a hermit.  Are you a hermit?  Then for all of the above in both lists, the answer is “No.”  You, as a hermit, don’t need a man to _____.  Enjoy your newfound freedom as a hermit (or is it “hermitess”?).  In fact, here’s a list of things you’ll “need” in your life without men.  For all those who would accuse me of misogyny, I hope that my affirmations below of women’s magnificent abilities will dispel those arguments:

  • Women know how to make fire.
  • Women know how to hunt.
  • Women know how to fish.
  • Women know how to skin dead animals.
  • Women know how to make tools from rocks.
  • Women know metallurgy.
  • Women know carpentry.
  • Women know how to pour concrete.
  • Women know how to read.
  • Women with natural leadership ability can help coordinate the other hermitesses to get all of the above done.
  • If any individual woman does not know how to do one or more of the above, she can quickly learn, because she has a human brain.


If, ladies, that is how you wish to live, without men as any sort of necessity, then go to it.  I myself have never hunted, am quickly bored with fishing, and skinning anything is beyond my ability to stomach.  Furthermore, if I can’t light it with a match or a lighter, then that fire is going to remain unlit.  Therefore, beyond my feeble abilities at a handful of the above, I am also quite lazy.  I see that list and can think of not one single thing I want to do very much, and certainly not on a daily, do-or-die basis.  I’m pretty sure that most female readers feel the same, unless there’s an avid hunter or fisher among them.

We could call up the hunter, e-mail the fisher, find a carpentress, get a book on pouring concrete, and start making lists, ladies.  We could do it.  But think about it: How many of you really, really want to?  Furthermore, hunters and fishers eventually like to go back to the hunting cabin to turn on the electric light and play cards.  It is in that precise moment that a little gratitude ought to be in order, or you can forget about cabins, electric lights, and printed playing cards.

Because, you see, this far after Betty Friedan’s righteous anger and the Second Wave, women aren’t flocking to the occupations required for the backbone of civilization to remain aligned and sturdy.  Men fill these occupations, and only in part because it’s expected.  I seriously doubt that many construction workers would really want to leave that work behind to crochet or knit.  Construction work is not pleasant work, but there is the camaraderie, the paycheck, the chance to be outside on a nice day (or a horrible one), the opportunity to build and maintain muscle, the methodical and pleasing effect it can have on the thought process, etc.  You also get to build something, which is cool.

This many decades after “NOW!  My Body, My Choice! Take Back the Night! Slut Walk!” and the like, if a group of women actually built something straight from the raw materials all the way to the gables on the roof without a single man’s assistance, two things would happen: 1) We’d fail to acknowledge that what they accomplished was due not only to moxie, but to the information provided by men who had previously accomplished something similar; and 2) We’d have to have a big, big celebration that everyone who’s anyone would have to find out about and participate in; and which would eventually become a national holiday and a staple of Women’s Herstory Month.  Otherwise, “Patriarchy!”

If civilization is what you want, then men are what you need.  Nature is fun until you have to rely on nature for survival.  If you do not wish to do that, and you’re the sort of woman who wants a high-powered job to feel fulfilled as a woman or a human being or whatever, all you will ever do is that which so much of the rest of humanity, including me, does: You will climb a set of stairs built on the backs of men.  The only difference is that it is you, not I, who claims not to need them.

It is unconscionable for a woman to stand and proclaim “The End of Men” in a studio built by men, with cameras invented, maintained, and improved upon by men, connected to power sources that are kept running by men, all the while using a language hammered out and spun to dizzying heights by the thoughtful processes of countless male writers.  It is equally dumb to flash a silly poll denigrating everything that makes knowledge of the poll results possible to millions, and expect us all to laugh heartily along.

Think about it: A worker for “The View” picks up a headset designed by a man, connected to a computer fixed by the IT guy, and sends a ring signal out of the building built by “blue collar” butt cracks, into the home or the very pocket of the poll voter.  Throughout this process, one sex has most definitely been required to be not only present, but physically and mentally active to a high degree, in order for 60% to completely ignore that same sex, and we’re not talking about ignoring women.

Now for the bit that ought to sober any female reader.  Let’s look at what men typically want (need?) from women on a personal basis:

Division of labor

Not too much different from what women usually want from men.  But what will men require of women if they want community, or civilization itself?  It’s an exhaustive list, but here we go:











Thank God you’re still wanted, ladies.

In spite of the fact that she’s female, it seems that every gay man alive wants Judy Garland.  She belted out a torch song in “A Star is Born,” a song that, in my opinion, simply torches all other torch songs.  Her soon-to-be mentor and suitor, Norman Maine, played by James Mason, walks into a dimly lit, low-ceilinged nightclub, where he watches Esther Blodgett (Garland), surrounded by male musicians moving rather seductively to the rhythm, in a highly sexually charged scene, singing a song about “The Man That Got Away.”  It’s a fantastic film and an electric song.  It was probably composed with Garland in mind.  (Boy oh boy, is that how she sings it!)  The movie mainly concerns the rise to stardom of Blodgett (who is turned into Vicki Lester by her brilliant husband), due only in part to her extraordinary talent as an entertainer.  Mostly, it was due to Maine’s tireless efforts, in spite of his faded career, depression and alcoholism.  The movie ends tragically, but there, to an expectant crowd of admirers in a theater, Vicki meekly steps up to the mike to tell it like it is:

“Hello, everybody. This is Mrs. Norman Maine.”

With a single song and a single line, Judy says it all.

About B.R. Merrick

B.R. Merrick writes for "Strike The Root" and "A Voice for Men," and is proud to be a classical music reviewer at Amazon.com and iTunes.

View All Posts

Support us by becoming a member

AVFM depends on readers like you to help us pay expenses related to operations and activism. If you support our mission, please subscribe today.

Join or donate

Sponsored links

  • Galt

    Frankly, I’ve evaluated the contributions of men versus women in marriage – and decided that I don’t want to get married. I’m over 50 and still hold this opinion.

    The problem is that men who want children and a family have no other alternative in reality. They have to go with the monopoly terms. And it is a monopoly because most women I have run across are selling their services for a high price. The man has to not only have a job that will support a family (read: difficult job), he has to pretend like her sitting at home is equal and he has to pretend like a sit-at-home has the same reference to the work world for making decisions.

    I don’t want it, but I truly have empathy for men who have to accept this one-sided deal.

    • Aimee McGee

      Or if they comment to the SAHM, that now the kids are at school, she might want to work to help out the family finances, he is labelled as abusive and controlling.
      I realise how unique my own family experience has been with all three of my sibs and their partners making active choices that resulted in the intensive early parenting being shared, and the Fathers all taking time out of work to raise children. There is a shocking lack of good role modelling for non-traditional division of labour.

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

      Although I haven’t finished processing my thoughts on this, I increasingly think that there may be one viable and safe path to fatherhood these days: find a woman who makes as much or preferably more than you, refuse to cohabit or even marry, have a baby with her, then immediately sue for 50/50 custody. Make sure you’re in a position to take that 50% responsibility.

      No matter how much you like and trust her, prepare for allegations in advance that you are an “abuser” and have your own allegations ready at hand.

      Tough? Yeah. Tragic? Yeah. But way better than any option I can see, and likely better for your kids, than the more statistically likely outcomes of cohabiting and ever allowing yourself, even for a few weeks, to become the “primary breadwinner” and then thrown away like the disposable trash you are in this culture.

      I know enough about how the system works here where I live that you could probably make that stick. Still a gamble, but way less of a gamble than any of the other options.

      • dhanu

        I personally won’t want to do something like that. I’d rather be without children forever. The suggested path might work but is immoral (to me).

      • Ballast

        And live a life of being alone? And why would anyone (male or female) choose to do that to someone they love?

  • rickster

    As I read this article, I went back to thinking about a movie I just saw titled “Bait 3D” about a shark that found its way into a store after a tsunami hit and began munching on the survivors. What struck me was the fact that all the men did the work to try and escape and kill the shark. How did the women thank them? By caring more about the life of a dog than their men.

    When a couple was moving to a safe location the boyfriend had to throw the Pomeranian Dog away so as to avoid the jaws of the shark. Well his girlfriend called him a “dog murderer” and gave him a hard time. He got eaten later saving somebody and she screamed a bit, but then the dog showed up and she was happy again. Not in the least concerned about her now dead boyfriend.

    I was livid. I was so upset that I didn’t finish the movie. What is so sad is that I often I see this crap happen on television where a man does something that isn’t deemed heroic and ridiculed for it, and when he dies people are happy he’s dead, or they just die and people don’t seem to bothered by it because they were annoying or something stupid like that. In this instance the life of a rat sized pet mutt is worth more than that of a man, which is probably why the UK has domestic violence shelters for pets and not abused men.

    Its not that women don’t need men, it seems to me that women don’t care about men. What naturally follows then, is that men stop caring about women, and the world becomes a little colder. That’s what it boils down to, no more concern, no more appreciation, no more love, so people go their own way. That’s what I feel like men and women are really missing, genuine love for one another. But while men still want it as evidenced by their desperate chasing after women, 60% of women seem to think they don’t need it.

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

      Great comment, and I line I will remember to use.

      Women need men. They just don’t care about them.

    • scatmaster

      What struck me was the fact that all the men did the work to try and escape and kill the shark.

      Or save the dolphins


      • MarkofWisdom

        You handled the dolphin wrong! You were too rough with it! You should have done this! You should have done that! (meanwhile she is sitting on her ass and drinking wine)

  • king1

    I have been saying for ages the MRM movement needs to instigate a “down tools” protest amongst men everywhere. From truck drivers to engineers, from Oil to water to light, medicine, electricity you name it.

    Then within ONE HOUR the whole feminist hate movement will be slam dunked into the toilet it came from when they realise just how little women REALLY contribute to the truly useful world we all rely on every day and how much the World really relies on Men.

    The only problem is most men are still too brainwashed and white-knighted to either see why they need to do it, or they are not consolidated enough to get with their fellow men and try it.

    • BlueBlood

      I think the only realistic result of such a ‘down tools’ would be that the women also down tools and declare something like ‘the world came crashing down without women.’ Sad, yes, but given that women in general do so very little to contribute to the day-to-day running and maintenance of the world, I can’t see them suddenly stepping up if men refuse to.

  • andybob

    A compelling read with a wealth of skillfully interwoven points drawn together with perceptive flair. AVFM has the best writers bar none. Mr Merrick leads us on a cultural journey from the sublime heights of Shakespeare to the ridiculous depths of The View before casting a nostalgic gaze at a classic movie moment that today’s ‘strong, independent’ women would scornfully dismiss.

    Even in Elizabethan times, society’s best thinkers were aware that womenfolk took men for granted. If any snippy madam attempts to deride “The Taming of the Shrew” as a celebration of oppressive patriarchy, remind them that Shakespeare based it on a near-contemporary Italian play called “Taming of a Shrew.” In this play, the hero tames the female protagonist by whipping her until she bleeds before sewing her up in a salt-filled horse’s carcass. It is vile, witless and audiences loved it (much like The View).

    Shakespeare prefers to reach his heroine with logic, reason and common sense. Obviously, Kate could only have been cut from the same cloth as our Honey Badgers. Too many critics try to rationalize Kate’s final speech by making completely unsubstantiated claims that she is only pretending to be subservient – playing the role expected of her in order to gain the rewards of social approval. Yet that would make her a conniving, manipulative sociopath – hardly the happy ending that Shakespeare would have provided for Petruchio.

    It is a sad indictment indeed when you realize that reminding women about what men do for them when we’re not harassing, raping or lording it over them (thank you for this gift of a line) is only possible when men put the necessary words into mouths of fictional female characters like Kate and Esther. Where are their contemporary equivalents? They are drowned out by the shrieking harridans of The View whose sad little survey is paraded as some kind of triumph.

    I am intrigued by this:

    I believe that one of the major contributing factors in modern-day social ills has to do with subdividing the community, something which I hope to delve into in later articles.

    I have become very aware of this phenomenon recently and look forward to your articles concerning it. Great work as usual, Mr Merrick.

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

      Agreed. AVfM has, I say with no modesty at all, the best collection of writers on the internet. Merrick is among the best of the best. Always stellar stuff from this dude.

    • Aimee McGee

      I’m also noticing the issue of social subdivision. I will read with interest.

  • JFinn

    OT: Hanna Rosin’s book version of “The End Of Men” just came out and the media is pimping it. But check this comment by betaDadBlog:


    I read The End of Men and…I didn’t hate it. It was fun pop psychology, and there’s definitely something going on with teh menz, but to say it was rigorously researched is a stretch. Or maybe it was rigorously researched and the data was haphazardly analyzed.
    Here’s an example: the loser in the book with the “Betty Friedan identity crisis”? The ex-carpenter stay-at-home dad who is defensive, wistful, and “terrified” to go back to work because he “doesn’t have the stomach for the outside world” anymore? That’s me.
    Hanna Rosin interviewed me a year ago over the phone. I told her for an hour about how much I love being a SAHD, that my wife and I are happy with the arrangement, that I’ve probably never felt so comfortable in my own skin. This despite her mining for evidence of marital discord and emasculated rage. So in the book, I come out as miserable. If this isn’t an example of manipulating the evidence to fit her thesis, I don’t know what is.

    LMAO. Susan2012:


    I’m a woman, but I agree totally with GuysRule4Ever. Women have had a great advantage over men as far as having choices. They have benefitted from government, taxpayer-supported programs for many years, where men for the most part have not been allowed. Women have gone from liberation to domination and still don’t seem to be content with their lives. All they do is demand more from those that have nothing left to give them. They have become like spoiled children- feeling entitled to take whatever they can, and be given whatever they want.

    Oh I could go on and on with the golden comments I’ve been reading. Painting men as pathetically weak delivers a big blow to the perpetual victim image of women. Yet Rosin tries to have it both ways. Last one:


    I feel fairly certain that when the day comes that men are all at home with the children while women are all at work making the money.. Hannah Rosen will again decry the patriarchal exploitation of women. I’ve finally realized that the complaint isn’t the issue, it’s the power of complaining.

    . Feel free to drop in your review at amazon(or perhaps a comment on her husband’s review…)

    My apologies to B.R. Merrick for the long OT comment. It was three times this long before I edited out as much as I could 

  • cooterbee

    Neither has the cat I’ve fed for the last decade ever shown the most nominal twinge of gratitude. It gladdens me that all of the accomplishments of men over the millenia were made for their own sakes or for profit. I dare say that if men had to depend on gratitude alone to reward their efforts, we would be dwelling in caves.

    This is not to say that “The View” type of attitude is natural or should be expected. As noted, some guy, somewhere was staring at his console and allowing “The View” to be uploaded to the network satellite. Why didn’t he discard the network feed, call it shit and broadcast “A Star is Born” instead?

    Make no mistake! It is men who are ultimately responsible for this shit. Oh, if he did that he’d get fired? Shouldn’t that job be for Wimminz Studdies grads anyway?

  • Tawil

    Well sock it to us preacher man…. what a great and convincing testament to mens’ contributions.

    Finally some thanks after the feminist-inspired thank-you drought!

  • Gamerp4

    I dont care if Hanna Rosin writes a book about “The End of Men” because sexist does what a sexist thinks and i dont care about me being extinct because believe it or not MY END MEANS THE END OF CIVILIZATION.

  • J3DIforce1

    Finally another B.R. Merrick article! Its like waiting for christmas and then getting what I wanted when I open presents! Nice article man : )

  • Kimski

    Mr. Merrick is an awesome writer.
    I look forward to the day, when we can actually pay these people for their work, and hopefully get so much more of it.

  • rorschach

    @JFinn Thanks for the link to the End of Men book, I’ve left a comment for her husband. I’ve watched her TED talk on the same subject and it’s almost become a hobby recently shooting down anyone who actually supports her sexist crap.

  • Zerbu

    Every time I hear one of those frequent “men are stupid” or “men can’t do anything right” remarks, I’ll direct whoever’s saying it to this article.

    I wonder what would happen to this “end of men” attitude if artificial wombs were around.

  • http://whoism3.wordpress.com M3
  • knightrunner

    I deliver a load of yeast to a bakery every week. This bakery runs 24/7 and gets 2 loads of dry yeast every week. If I am more than six hours late with their load the bakery shuts down.
    Can you imagine if every truck in the US stopped. If you can’t let me tell you. Less than 5 days all the grocery stores would be empty. All the hospitals would be closed etc. Within two weeks bodies would be piled in the streets. Civilization would collapse in two weeks. Just because of one industry. A male dominated industry. The trucking industry isn’t alone. There are hundreds of other male dominated industries that society is absolutely dependent on. I regards to the trucking industry, I don’t know of many women why are capable of doing it. Not just they don’t want to, they can’t. But there are a large number of men that can’t do it either. Im not a hero nor do I want to be seen as one. I’m just a guy doing a job that I love to do. But I take pride in the fact that I provide a valuable service to society.

    • andybob

      Excellent example of how much society depends on the work that men do, Mr Knightrunner.

      More and more feminists, in their never-ending quest to self-victimize, actually cite their inability to perform certain tasks as examples of nature’s sexism. Some vicious creature tortured her hamster by calling it “gender-centric task determinism”. She concluded that since nature only “privileged” men to perform difficult and dangerous tasks, then only men should have to perform them.

      So, feminists have found a way to turn it into just another grievance. As such, I am very reluctant to suggest that many of these are jobs that women can’t do. One woman may struggle connecting a hose to a fire hydrant, but surely several women could do it if they put some elbow grease into it. Not economically viable, I know, but they would get the job done – eventually.

      I once had a flatmate who was the only woman who worked in the sludge-pits at an oil refinery. Night shift too. She was a short, chirpy lesbian – built like a bulldog. It nearly killed her, but she did it and earned the respect of her workmates. She use to tell me that every now and then, some females would join the company. Their sole purpose in doing this was to try and sue the company for sexist practices and harrassment. They would try and rope her into it (“Go on, we could get millions!”) She’s blow the whistle and they’d be sent packing. That was twenty years ago.

      When push comes to sludge, women can do most of these jobs. I don’t want to be so quick to give feminists a pass on their lack of participation on the concrete floor end of the job market – and give them something else to feel agrieved about. Reject their “gender-centric task determinism” as the BS that it is and march them into the nearest sludge pit so they can achieve the equality they’ve always claimed to want. We’ll sit and watch for a change.

  • Dazza

    Great article Merrick.

    I wonder what the percentages would have been if the question was ‘do women need high heel shoes’.

    So blinded by their sense of self importance, most women take no thought to all the work that has been done in times past to make the world more comfortable for all people, women particularly. You would expect women to be grateful, but no, ever more demanding and ungrateful.

  • externalangst

    When a woman does a traditionally male occupation the media often claims that she is beating men at their own game. I’m waiting for the headline:

    “Man opens can of soup – beats women at their own game.”

  • aGuyInRedmond

    I’ve been waiting a long time to see this called out. Well done.

  • MGTOW-man

    There is not one single thing on earth that women have accomplished without the aid of men… whether it be help offered unwittingly, voluntarily, or obligitorily. I challenge any reader to come up with and prove something, anything, even one thing, that women have completely, 100%, accomplished without men being involved minimally or maximally, directly or indirectly.

    This is a subject that feminists despise because it is filled with so much unavoidable truth against their exaggerated cries of foul play, in which their wildly exaggerated excuses, and drudged up, very rare, worst case scenarios, will not obscure or deflect.

    If you want to see a feminist squirm, bring up this subject. She, a woman taking most everything personal…as if being attacked…irrational… will hate you but claim you hate her and hate all women…all because you, a man, or a woman with this sound argument, is right.

    It seems curious that women, in general, (actually an initial handful of misguided misfit feminists claiming to speak for ALL women!@#$%^&*!), apparently feeling like they have always been treated as “second class” citizens by “deliberately men and oppressive” males kept silent in previous times when life was too hard for women to try to be equal. Not until the advent of the industrial revolution adding ease and comfort to our lives to the current point of today’s innovative push-button gadgetry and space age technology, did women start to grumble, whine, whimper, manipulate, scheme and connive to try and be equal…hoping that since they can “get it done too, they can be successful in obscuring that men actually help(ed) them with everything.

    Case in point: In the year 1800, who in their right mind would set up a family in which the woman went to war, blacksmithed, dug wells, mined metals, plowed the fields… while the man stayed home with the children wiped snotty noses and yellow stained asses, cleaned and sewed. The division of labor most definitely developed along gender lines that was absolutely directed and fostered by nature-as-guider. This definitely gets men ( patriarchy) off the hook.

    This is true because doesn’t it make sense the people, both men and women, would accept roles and duties that WORKED best for their survival overall? If the women plowed the yesteryear fields, The entire family would have starved…and we wouldn’t be here!…and women would have never been able to complain because they would be dead (or never existed).

    Many women and men bleat that it should not be held against women that they lack identical physical strength, especially upper body strength as that of men and boys. They claim that equality is a mature concept not daunted or hindered by physical capacities. HOW CONVENIENT FOR THEM!!! (Of course they are going to say that….OF COURSE!!!!).

    But proving they are wrong is the ever-present, solid-as-rocks, concept that in the “wild” (nature= truth…the only acceptable OBJECTIVE, never deliberately skewed truth available to mankind), that larger animals with more muscle power, brain power, spatial capacities, and so on, would get to be in charge, dominate, and set the tone on how things should be for the species. Again, nature is the “culprit” not mean, bad, bad men.

    If the situation were reversed and women were physically stronger than men (in general) then women would defensively cry foul if men dared to notice it to say such is unfair. Women would be outraged if men tried to take away a feature that set them at the top. But they sure have no trouble pointing their ugly fingers at men in the same way they would vehemently oppose if done to them.

    To be sure, women have helped men with a variety of things too, down throughout history. However, we are talking about two different things here. Men built civilization while women built and maintained families on the immediate front (although men also have consistently been the major providers for thriving families). With women’s help, men were able to go away from home, or stay home, to make a living (that he gave all to this family). However, to further distinguish between the two, it would certainly help feminist’s argument if they could take the earth from scratch and not only accomplish tasks on the end delivery point such as run a computer, but actually think up design, implement, test, and improve upon the computers first, before merely claiming they got a project done with a computer. The same goes for driving cars on pavement that spans bridges, and vast stretches of once unnavigable land… among thousands of other examples.

    Having said this, it is not just and fair that women get to claim they are equal all the while not having to start from scratch to prove and substantiate their their equality claim: they get to start where men left off and where men still are, with men having provided the base infrastructure so required in the tasks that women claim they do just as capably as men.

    In short, women get to cheat…but haven’t they always? They can’t grasp that when, in a race, any race, of any kind, they get special, preferential help, that makes it possible to compete with men, that in the end, when all things are considered and done, that women only kept up because they were helped by men and allowed to “win”. You can’t really have won if you were allowed to win by being helped.

    Good example: if men and women raced along side each other in a marathon, in which women were allowed to start several paces ahead of the men, the women actually think they really won if they cross the finish line before a man—which probably still wouldn’t happen! Having said that, when women accept special preferential treatment, they are confirming their own inequality. They are telling on themsleves. But shhh!, We males aren’t supposed to notice this truth and dare say a word…else we are filled with hatred( for being right).

    Women expect men to be “grown up”, “be cordial” and “21st century” by not mentioning the unmistakeable and unavoidable truth about most women’s physical and scientific, spatial, inferiorities that stare us all plainly in our faces thoughout our daily lives repeatedly.

    Actually men, trained to be unwitting cowards now, are lying to women so women will keep liking them. It is called competition, and males are very good at clinging to this losing premise for men and boys.

    The challenge still goes: find one thing—ONE!, that women have accomplished on their own and with the same efficiency and vitality as men have done, and I will shoot it down. I know that burns you feminists up but this is just one example out of many that proves the number one enemy of feminists is that of the TRUTH! They hate the truth, which is why they are trying to redefine it and teach it based on their feelings that actually, without them being cognizant, distort their perceptions of reality and actual truth.

    Nothing wrong with equality…except that it is chock-filled with lies, and mockery. I am for true equality. Ever wonder why feminists despise it?

    • Man

      If you accept that a woman gave birth to you and possibly contributed to your enviromental upbringing, then the same can be said for man, who could have done nothing without the help of a woman.

      There is no such thing as equality. Equality exists nowhere on earth, except possibly with identical twins.

      Men and women compliment each other in unique ways, and need each other for the survival of our species, the proper upbringing of our children, and the advancement of our civilization.

      In our mad rush to attempt to achieve equality we missed the mark and overshot at the expense of men, in much the same way that racial issues have inadvertently placed some races above others.

      I believe we are being split apart by these and many other social, financial, and political kitchen table wedge issues … intentionally … so that we may never come together to rationally and intelligently educate, discuss, and reform issues causing alot of our problems.

      Its as old as war is itself. Called divide and conquer, you split your enemies apart into warring factions (whites vs blacks, men vs women, democrats vs republicans, etc), which in turn disallows them from banding together, so you never have to battle the enemy at its full potential, and since each faction consists of small percentages of total populations, each warring faction is easily defeatable, but it usuallynever comes to this. They kill off each other, then whoiever is left is easily defeated.

      Follow the money.

      Who benefits from any war?

      Who funds the feminism agenda?

      Who funds most agendas?

      The money is always traced to international banks then the trail runs dry into various supposed philanthropic associations, think tanks, foundations, groups, all with globalist connections to world organizations dedicated to a one world government, military, and economy… and none of them are talking anymore, but we can find out alot about them from their early history and connectioons of people and groups involved, and following where their money goes when possible.

      We need to fix racism and feminism. We DO need to make races and genders as equal as possible.

      We need to put Man back where he belongs, spearheading the assault ointo the future as he did in the past.

      A special note to you mothers out there with boys. Please take a cold hard look at feminism. Not your idealistic view of how it should be, but how it really is, and the effects it has on good men and their boys and the family unit… then ask yourself if you truly want this modern day male reality to be the reality for your sons.

      If not, you can help.

      Stand up.

      Be the change you desire.

      Your sons future as a Man and a Father depends on it.

      • MGTOW-man

        To Man:

        Thanks for your comments in response to my comments.

        However, allow me to summarize what I said last time.

        Sure women help men as men help women: of course men and women compliment one another in the nature-directed ideal scenarios, but the arena in which it all takes place spells out two different things. It is not as easy as saying they are the same and are equal.

        In short, is not right that women started grumbling and whining about inequality about the time things got easier relative to the industrial revolution and subsequent innovative successes. Said another way, why didn’t women start their nagging earlier, like say, in the 10th century? The answer lies in the sheer awkwardness of such a premise. Back then and up until modern times, if women were living “identical lives” back then, then survival rates of families would have plummeted. Things developed along lines of what attributed the most success for most families most of the time—a noble and respectable thing. Men and women didn’t question a system that drew its strengths from expecting different roles from opposite sexes.

        Said another way, sure women can maneuver a military tank, with all its push buttons, levers, and automated controls. BUT, what about building the tanks, understanding the technology, arming them (the stuff is very heavy—even for some men), maintaining them, and so on? It isn’t enough to show a woman operating a tank, it is more informative and telling and TRUTHFUL to show how she is not able to do all the other leg work that is designed and better adapted for men to do. In this way, women get to cheat; they get to start with stuff already made and in operation. As soon as they are shown to be operating such a “manly” thing, the audience hearlds it as “see there, women can do anything and everything that men can do” which is patently and critically untrue!

        I am glad men do not have wombs and babies coming out of their abdomens. Of course that is female work. But recognizing that does nothing to address the issue of women wanting to be just like men and in fact say they can do it all better, etc.

        I am for true equality…not the pretend equality now foisted onto the world with orders for men to shut up or otherwise not notice how many proofs exist to the contrary to feminist lies and wishful thinking. So any reading into my writing that try to state that women are inferior to men, and should be, is categorically incorrect—period. What I do not like and think is backward, and cowardly of men is for everyone to overlook the obvious truths that divide men and women’s roles and for darned good reasons. Until we as a population can accept TRUE equality in all attempts to be equal, including having the courage to admit when the equality tabulation falls short of feminists doctrine and claims, then we should also have the courage as men and women, to refrain from exploiting benefits and advancement that ignore the elephant in the room.

        There is nothing wrong with the truth, but why do feminists despise it?

  • Ballast

    What about female engineers, inventors, explorers, geologists, to name just a few? To say they contribute nothing to the world? And so much is made of “facts” on this site.

    Shows like the view are insulting to anyone intelligence and are just marketing the same old crap products with more chattiness. Their market are the small % of people who sit around watching daytime tv because they are not creative, busy or well enough to imagine doing anything else with their day. it’s all down to marketing again. Besides, if they started promoting intelligent discussions they might lose their % of audience who is stupid enough to think that paying 6 easy payments for $89.99 for a set of knives or a steam cleaner is a great deal.

    • BlueBlood

      Ballast, you bring up a common and outdated stereotype of daytime TV watchers.
      We’re living in a 24/7 world, and a massive amount of intelligent people work shifts and are now awake and at home for daytime TV.
      Ad companies, being made up of mostly unintelligent people, have still not realised this fact.
      What can you see in daytime TV? Well, in Australia at least, you basically have the choice of Dr Phil and his chat show ilk or ads for funeral insurance.

      • Ballast

        Like I said, the people who watch shows like The View as something to do “are not creative, busy or well enough to imagine doing anything else with their day.” Its a big beautiful world out there and why anyone would want to spend their valuable time sitting down and watching that crap is beyond me. But perhaps I’m a bit of a dino since I grew up playing outside with little TV. I’m one of the masses who has a little bit of time on my hands during the day with kid wrangling, study and part time work. I choose to spend those hours doing creative or productive things, not watching the sort of drivel designed to sell me over the top flower arranging services or whatnot. This sort of marketing, actually any sort such as what goes into The good Man project or the Pink Ribbon campaigns or even Coke annoys the hell out of me. Its manipulation designed to get you to part with your money and an ability to think for yourself.

        • BlueBlood

          Ah, touche. Yes, no one has to watch TV. I certainly don’t watch the View, and I am also a bit of a dino. I only wish there were more people not watching daytime TV.

  • siderealspace

    Women are disposable, too, what a shock.
    I am truly dissapointed by this site. Not as a feminist, which I am not. But as a human being. Because it seems that MRA is based solely on dismissing either feminism as a movement, or women, or oppressing in the same way you are being oppressed. Then, feminists will oppress you in the way they are being oppressed, and it goes on, and on.

    Nobody needs anybody, regardless of their gender or sex. Science is proving that we no longer need ovaries nor sperm to procreate. This makes us all disposable, (even more!), since we don’t need men and they don’t need women. We had to be grateful, because we couldn’t do anything else. Just as it unacceptable for a man to be a makeup artist, it was and it is unacceptable for women to do “men’s work”. Oh, you don’t want to do it? Fantastic. Quit your job, follow your dream. But accept the consequences. Just like women accepted the consequences of leaving their houses and pursuing their dream job.
    Stop making excuses on why men keep their fishingman, constructer-worker jobs.
    “We do it because women won’t do it”. You are the only ones who are putting such a heavy burden on yourselves.

    But then again, patriarchy is a feminist invention.
    Good luck fighting feminism. That will make social institutions such as male disposability live forever.

    Because feminism has existed since the very human civilization does. Women decided they couldn’t defend themselves so they will force men to die for them. They decided they couldn’t fix a goddamn sink.

    Because women are so powerful, they couldn’t even vote, but they sure could oppress men and force them into fixing gas and water lines.

    Good luck, I will go and read actually educated, true MRAs that don’t consider feminism as the source of all evil.
    You people are doing the same things you blame feminism for.

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

      Yep, I blame feminists for doing the same thing you are. Talking absolute nonsense and actually believing you are making sense.

      First (and last), we are not just about dismissing feminism. Clearly you have not read enough here to get that. I have posed some challenges in your other two comments. I won’t add more here. There is just too much FAIL to bother with.

    • scatmaster


  • Otter

    I would love to see modern feminists transported back in time to before the industrial revolution and watch them try to convince other women that they were being oppressed and that it was a privilege to work long hard hours in the backbreaking fields.

    Those ladies would have run them out of town.

  • SeriousJohn

    it is nice to have a woman to share a life with instead of being alone like so many very lucky men and women that were very fortunate to have met one another, and have a family too. makes sense to me.