“I've noticed you refer to yourself as feeling misogynistic or having misogynistic thoughts from time to time in your articles.
“My personal definition of a misogynist is someone who, in black and white, dislikes women, has no appreciation for them, etc. I perceive more variance on your part, that you operate within a range that goes beyond the average definition I have of a misogynist.
“Could you please elaborate on this?
“Thank you,”
Celine
Currently, in our feminist society, the image of the misogynist is one of hatred and disrespect of women. This comes from the fact that Western Culture, at the time just before the Great European/American Cultural Suicide of 1914-1945, had placed the image of the woman on a pedestal. This social ideal of womanhood lost its elevated status at the same time that women began gaining political rights. Now that women wield slightly more electoral weight than men, many sensible men see the female rise to power as causal to the debasement of American culture, which is now entirely wrapped up in materialism, security, celebrity, and feel good social initiatives.
In many men, this realization that our society zoomed right past gender equality, and seems to have gone from a culturally diverse masculine-modeled society to a monocultural feminine-modeled society [safety, security and collective feelings first] has triggered an angry reaction. Anger is a symptom of powerlessness.
Understanding that the key component to the classic definition of misogyny, is ‘mistrust of women’ rather than hatred, I am perfectly comfortable applying the label of misogynist to myself. I do not hate, or even mildly dislike, women. In fact, I was recently viewing 7 photos of a mixed race female rapper dressed in various clingy versions of the American flag. I appreciated her very much, as well as her fashionable sacrifice to our national symbology.
To hate or dislike women is a symptom of emasculation. And, despite being kicked, punched and kneed in the balls about a dozen times in my combat life, I retain my testicles—if slung painfully low—and also the concurrent defiant and merit-based mindset of the classic misogynist.
Celine, unlike Habibi, LaLa, and the rest of my online stable of intellectual mares, you have neglected to send me a picture. But, let us assume that you did, and I found this picture pleasing. No matter if you turned out to be the most savagely leftist, communist, man-hating feminist to rise from the nine liberal hells, I would still value you. You would retain your merit, simply by virtue of the fact that you were desirable sexual property. If we met I would let your whining, and complaining, and pining and pontificating wash over my serene mind like so much warm rainwater. And, mistaking this for the wise tolerance you did not expect to find in an aging man who could line up all of your former lovers and knock them senseless, you would find, deep down in your forgotten soul, an urge to be owned by me. Your inner drive to submit would merge with your collective imperative of needing-to-feel close with those around you and accepting of your vocally striving personality, and you would find yourself excusing my crude glances at your youthful figure, as something that could not be helped by such a quaintly obsolete primal relic of masculinity.
Understanding all of this, I would warn you to keep your emotional distance from me, as you deserve a man with the time to commit himself wholeheartedly to your happiness—and I am not he. This would cue the residual cave woman in the back of your mind who wanted nothing more than to be impregnated and then left in her cozy nest by a dangerous man…
Eventually, after falling in love with me, and resenting the distance I yet maintained in my mind, you would leave me for a spindly-armed weak-minded drone. But, when spring came around with its suggestive rain, or when winter threatened and your inner self missed the truth, you would send him shopping for curtains to match the new egg shell white paint he had applied to your nest at your imperious direction, and would call that old recluse, for one last taste of unrepentant testosterone.
Why would I dislike you for that?
Why would I hate a woman for that?
Why would this old dog, who can’t expect to beat the young dogs for much longer, not appreciate a woman who wished only to submit to his God-given desire for power over her?
This instinctive need to submit on behalf of the woman makes her the natural political enemy of the free thinking man, as well as the natural master of the submissive male.
But between elections why would I hold a woman’s needy nature against her?
Indeed, in light of the fact that elections are a sham, and that male voters are delusional fools screaming like teenage girls for their rock star politicians in wan imitation of the primitive woman who simply wanted to voice her support of a dominant man beating their squabbling asses and taking over the tribe by force, why would I resent her even as she voted for my next paper master, secretly wishing he could be exchanged for a real man like me?
Why do I not hate and resent the dainty creatures that God cast down from heaven for my enjoyment?
We might as well ask of the landscaper why he does not hate and resent the grass.
Celine, I have a weakness for women that has generally matched my mistrust, and has some times exceeded it. For that reason I have recently decided that I will no longer coach women, to avoid any conflict of interest. I have also begun writing this book, Your Trojan Horse, which you have stepped into, advising younger fighters, in a most misogynistic tone, to avoid female entanglements as much as possible, and to keep their alternately darling and nefarious hands at bay, for they can bring a man down as surely as the fists of his opponent.
PS: In case you haven't guessed, I'm what your friends and female relations would call an "asshole."
I prefer black and white stills in profile—clothed please. My imagination is adequate for the necessary extrapolations.
That is probably one of the best definitions of misogyny I have seen. Kudos to you.
Ironically before I even put words to this mindset the above stated ideas are what drew my wife to me out of the emasculated dating pool she was used too.
Indeed why would any man hate the most beautiful creation on God's green earth....even as they try to destroy it and us.
It makes perfect sense to avoid your downfall rather than willingly jump into a pit which will take exhausting efforts to climb out of. And the rest made sense as well.
I've been protected from a number of bad matches by the fact that I can't be attracted to a man with a dull mind, which eliminates quite a few applicants. Curiously, I've seen the exact opposite in your unfairer sex, where an articulate man with two degrees marries a woman whose only interest in books is to organize them on the shelf by color, then by size.
As an aside, it has been my experience that manginas don't desire ownership. They are easily scared off.
PS: It takes more than a couple of intellectual exchanges with this mare to get her pictures. I believe you're used to another breed of whorse: one who is presenting with hopes that you have a fine saddle for her. The mounting, I leave to your imagination.
“Women are always patting themselves on the back about how difficult their lives are. And no one corrects them because they want to fuck them.” -Bill Dunn, Stand-up Comedian
I'm sure some will regard the quotation above as misogynistic. It is not. It presents an objective truth with a comedic delivery. As the Taoists say, being objective is the ultimate act of ruthlessness. Men are shallow and solipsistic; women are equally shallow and solipsistic. Men are egotistical; women are just as egotistical, they merely display and feed their egos in different ways than men do. If all other factors are equal between individual candidates for marriage, a man will pick the woman with the largest breasts and a woman will pick the man with the most money. That is an objective truth you could safely bet your rent money on. Yes, many men prefer good looks in a sexual partner to intelligence. Well duh! Men want sex from women, not problem solving ability. Ask yourself, would you want a riding horse that was as intelligent as you are? Would a horse with human level intelligence necessarily want to carry you on its back more than a non-sentient horse? What would you be able to do if the horse decided it no longer wanted you to ride it? By the same token we have learned from experience that highly intelligent women are inclined to be just as crazy and hard to control as less intelligent women. The better looking they are the crazier they are likely to be (See the Hot-Crazy Matrix). And high intelligence does not necessarily motivate women to want to have sex more than lesser intelligence. They are not complimentary traits. So why value high intelligence in a perspective sex partner? Looks are a desirable sex trait that makes men willing to accept the risk that their woman will be perilously crazy. Intelligence, less so. The human sexual market is like fishing. Yes, it would be great if the fish jumped right in your boat, but they don't. Well the Asian Carp do. In fact, they will hit you right in the face as you speed down the river, but nobody wants to eat them. Nobody. The fish people all want to eat are hard to catch. They have to cajoled and presented with attractive bait. The bait has to be exactly the right kind of bait, presented in exactly the right way and at exactly the right time. To catch those fish you must have skill, patience and the right kind of tackle (luck doesn’t hurt either). And you must fish where those fish live (once again, duh!). So it is with the human sexual market: we all, both men and women, really want to have sex with the same small group of highly attractive, high status people, but those individuals are beyond the reach of us average folk, so the people we usually end up having sex with and /or marry are our secondary and tertiary choices. Of course, most people are perceptive enough to understand that it would be impolitic to ever give voice to this truth. But it remains that the people we really want to be with frequently don’t want to be with us and conversely we often reject the people who really do want to be with us. People tend to overestimate their sexual market value, just as many people who think they should be able to make money singing, can’t. But that's life, it’s tragic. So fish, cut bait or go home and watch videos about fishing.
"Life is a tragedy to those who feel, but a comedy to those who think.” - Horace Walpole
"It's not the size of your fishing pole, it's what you catch with it that counts”. –Anonymous
“I refuse to join any club that would have me as a member.” - Groucho Marx
“The true man wants two things: danger and play. For that reason he wants woman, as the most dangerous plaything." - Friedrich Nietzsche
“They denigrate that which they are unable to emulate.”- Friedrich Nietzsche
Exploring this ruthlessly objective view further, why should it be misogynist to be an advocate for masculinity? To support and defend the rights and interests of men must one also hate women? If the interests of men and women conflict, particularly in the sexual marketplace, whose interests take precedence? We all know the answer to that: women have it and men want it. It has also become obvious that a goal of modern feminism is to “remove all constraints on female sexuality while maximally restricting male sexuality”. Why should men support this when it goes against their self-interest? Why must men accept being labeled as irresponsible, immature, commitment phobic, emasculated or stupid simply because they are unwilling to play a rigged game? If women want men to be more willing to commit they must be willing to give men something the men will truly find attractive. Not merely something the women believe the men should be willing to accept. As stands now, why buy the cow when the milk is free? Furthermore, why buy the cow when it’s all too likely to knock you down and gore you if it should become dissatisfied with its circumstances? It is rather telling that the current guru of masculinity, Jack Donavan, is a homosexual, a man who has no reason to seek the approval of women. The need of heterosexual men to seek the approval of women is used to silence them. Feminism is totalitarian: you must not only obey the tenets of Feminism, but you must also believe in them and love them! Do anything otherwise and you will be reviled and shunned, punished as a misogynist, a woman hater. The Feminists have gotten everything they want, yet they are unhappy with the result. They remain unsatisfied. Why?
James, you seem to attract these feminist women like moths to the flame. Like catfish to stink-bait. How is that possible, when according to the Feminist paradigm they should not be attracted to a violent, hyper-masculine, and necessarily misogynist "meathead” like yourself? According to our theories governing aerodynamics, bumble bees should not be able to fly, there is no explanation for it. Likewise these feminists are perplexed by their attraction to you. It should not happen. Perhaps they should quit over-analyzing and just surrender to your dominance. They might enjoy it and experience something transcendent.
Jeremy,
I don't always dominate my partner.
But when I do, I dominate a feminist.
Stay burly my friend.
I fully appreciated this article and its comments.
There's a funny corollary to the men's cow with free milk for the women: Why buy the pig when all you want is some sausage? A manizer saying, I'm sure (see Trojan Whorse).
There's also a French saying which comes to mind: The more things change, the more they stay the same.
Having read from both James, Jeremy and Sean here, I'd have to disagree with the French saying relative to current reality for men—-the changes you describe are unprecedented, as well as this relatively new experiment in our human history of having the state raise kids, rather than their parents.
I am speaking as a reformed feminist against its logical fallacies. I agree that feminism hasn't contributed to more happiness, much less a transcendent experience. I am treated better now by a secure man than by anyone before from the emasculated dating pool.
In parenting, as should be in life, fair does not mean same, and besides, neuroscience has proven differences in male and female brain wiring.
As for the minority of women who are attracted to dangerous occupations or the men who like interior design, let them have at it, but don't take what matters to me, just because you find it limiting for you. Besides, I'm sure we're not competing for the same resources. There's the rub.
“In a time of universal deceit - telling the truth is a revolutionary act.”- George Orwell
James, LOL! Carry on! It looks like we’ve provoked some important discussion here. Much like The Donald has done. LOL! The principle problem we “Masculinists” have with Modern Feminism is that it won’t leave us the hell alone. Must the liberation of women find its fulfillment in the complete subjugation of men? Apparently so. The Feminists keep taking away our prerogatives, invading our private spaces, and generally going far out their way to kick over our metaphorical sand castles every chance they get. Then they tell us we’re stupid, naughty and evil for wanting to build sand castles in the first place. Feminism is Leftism, first and foremost. Leftism is totalitarian; it is about control, total control. You must not only obey, you must believe and you must love your oppressors. Those people we dub “control freaks” have a psychological need to control others in order to feel in control of their own lives. Leftists in general and Feminists in particular certainly fit in that category. Modern Feminism is not about liberating women; American women were liberated long ago, at least since they were given the vote 96 years ago. No, Modern Feminism is about controlling women AND controlling men. It’s all a zero sum game to the Left: for somebody to get something, that something must be taken away from somebody else. Women have been the “shot-callers” in most aspects of society for as long as I can recall. “Dad’s the boss as everyone knows, but what Mom says always goes.” The patriarchy was long ago replaced by a matriarchy. It is not “The Man” who controls your life now, it is “The Woman”. Nevertheless, all you women among the great unwashed masses are mere pawns on The Woman’s great societal chess board just as we men are. Soon women will be tossed aside once they have outlived their usefulness to “The Cause”, just as every other constituency of The Woman eventually has been or will be. So if you are a recovering feminist who is feeling unhappy and oppressed by society, then sign up for the James LaFond twelve-step program to transcendent living and learning to be at peace with yourself.