#Arkhaven INFOGALACTIC #Castalia House
Oregon Mouse complains:
My husband used to live in Colorado. He took his family out for a small hike and a rock tumbled down out of nowhere and hit his 9 year old on the head. It knocked her out cold but perhaps feminism is the real culprit? How dare a 9 year old girl walk around outside!!
What a remarkable near-accomplishment! And at an even younger age than the famous Grand Canyon hiker! Do send us the link to the international newspaper accounts of her deed!
The lethality of Hultgreen-Curie Syndrome is demonstrated once again:
She was just 80 miles short of becoming the youngest person in history to hike the Grand Canyon from end to end when tragedy struck, a loose rock some believe, tumbling her 300 feet below. Beautiful, smart, active and young as a newlywed at 24 years old, friends of Ioana Hociota say she was an experienced hiker, one of the best, but died last month because of one possible misstep.
‘It’s tempting for people to think that a pretty, beautiful young woman of 24 might have been out there, you know, out of her element and out of her head,’ her husband Andrew Holycross told ABC, ‘and she absolutely was not.’
Sure she wasn’t. She actually managed to get herself killed while walking outside, but we’re supposed to believe she was totally in control of the situation throughout. The grieving widower sounds rather like a PR guy for the Navy explaining why one of their heroic and pioneering pilots landed her jet in the ocean rather than on the carrier.
Peggy Noonan complains about the coarsening of societal discourse, and in particular, the publicly demeaning and diminishing of women based on the fact that they are women, in her article titled “America’s Real War on Women.” As one would expect of yet another article about the difficulty of women’s lives written by a woman, it is long on emotion and short on logic. But it is also more than a little amusing. Noonan’s theory, you see, is that the Internet is to blame. Curse those inanimate objects and their iniquitous ways!
By the way, I should note that in addition to modifying the name of the column and changing the link to Roissy’s site, WND also edited the last sentence of the column. I have no objection to them doing so; their site, their call. That being said, here is the real final sentence:
What Peggy Noonan does not realize is that whereas men once assumed that a woman was a lady until proven otherwise, increasing numbers of them now quite reasonably assume that women are shallow and superficial sluts until they are provided with credible evidence to the contrary.
Roissy posted this, complete with some excellent commentary, and as the guy who sent it to him suggested, it really merits going viral. It should be subtitled “I’m throwing in the towel“.
So this is it–I’m not looking, I honestly don’t care if I meet anyone on here anymore–and this is what I’ve learned about the men that I have had interactions on here with a little parting advice.
If you are over 40 and you do not take care of yourself, unless you truly don’t care that a woman is dating you for your money, then maybe a better site for you is sugarbaby.com
Those of us that are of a certain age and reasonably successful on here are on here, want to meet someone reasonable–intelligent, successful, happy, that we’re attracted to physically and emotionally, not because we’re desperate, but usually because we’re too busy to date, or we do not wish to date through our work. We have businesses to run, we travel frequently, or we be on here because our friends and family are bugging us about being single and this is way to get them off our backs. What that means is–
1. We are not desperate–we do not need you to have a fulfilling life.
2. We are busy people–just like you–and we mean what we say, and say what we mean because we don’t have time to play silly word games or have drama like 20 somethings.
3. The silly little texting games are the fastest way to blow it. If we give you permission to call–then call–don’t text to see if its ok to call–we have a life–random texts from people we don’t know don’t cut it if we haven’t met you.
4. If we ask you not to contact us further–then don’t–unless you want to appear as a crazy person.
5. If we call you on the above..we’re not crazy, or scary..we just don’t have time to waste on people who don’t get it. We deal enough with that in our work.
6. Life gets shorter for us every day–we have no time or desire for drama, games or people who do not have their act together.
7. If we reject you after you have done any of the above, put your big boy pants on and move on.
8. We are not angry–we know what we want–we know what we’re willing to put up with. With age, the list of what we want gets a little longer, while the list of what we’re willing to put up with gets infinitely smaller because we have learned from our youth.
I don’t think this woman understands that any man with half a brain not only prefers younger, hotter women to the likes of her, but she is such a nasty piece of work, rotting from the inside out from all of her bitterness and barren professional ambition, that only the most masochistic of gamma males would ever want anything to do with her.
Some women are astonished by the fact that I repeatedly assert that men actively dislike intelligent, successful, educated women. What, I ask them, sounds even REMOTELY attractive about this woman and her poisonous attitude. I wouldn’t want to spend five minutes with her, let alone an entire evening.
And here is a little nota bene for women. “Busy” doesn’t impress men. I don’t quite understand what women think they’re conveying by resorting to the term as they do – I suspect it’s supposed to be a display of high value – but when a woman says “busy”, men hear “bitch”.
Dr. Helen has some advice for men concerning the equalitarian’s new discovery of “benevolent sexism”:
I hear women constantly complaining that men aren’t gentlemanly or don’t want much to do with them anymore. But with the stakes so high, who can blame them?
Guys, my advice? At work, avoid any woman who looks your way. If you must engage, use few words and whatever you do, don’t try to help or compliment her. Men are already wary to work with women or be around women for fear of being called a pervert, charged with sexual discrimination, or worse. Now, subtle sexism is here. Who has the time to figure it out? It’s no wonder many men prefer porn.
The solution is pretty simple. If it’s not your job, it’s not your concern. And when you’re approached by a female co-worker who flashes that sweetly helpless smile before making an appeal to your strong manly competence, don’t fall for it. Just return the smile and say “I’m sorry, I can’t help you with that.” And repeat it, with a smile, until she stops wheedling and trying to get you to do her work for her.
No one who claims he can swim has any call to complain when you fold your arms and watch him sink. The same holds true for women.
It’s a little tempting to point and laugh, but really, Miss Stewart should be commended for her good sense:
Britain’s first female Red Arrows pilot is to move to a ground role after two of her flying colleagues were killed in separate tragedies. Flight Lieutenant Kirsty Stewart, 33, is to be reassigned after the ‘tragic events’ of 2011 had an ‘adverse effect’ on her, a defence source said….
A defence source said: ‘Not many people outside of the Red Arrows will understand the pressure and busy schedule that the team endure through a normal season. These factors have been exacerbated by the tragic events of 2011. This has had an adverse effect on Kirsty and has resulted in the Royal Air Force deciding that it would be more appropriate for the individual and the service if Kirsty is reassigned.’
Her superiors should be commended too, for reassigning the young woman before she crashes, burns, and ends up another pointless human sacrifice on the altar of female equality.
No doubt many readers will be amused by the eventual outcome of YM’s experience in attempting to discuss a basic political principle with his mother:
My father arrived home from a business trip last night. Upon hearing what happened, he ungrounded me, and suggested to my mother that punishing a child for thought crime would only drive him further into misogyny. Then he took me aside and said “While you may be right about Santa Claus being not being real, you have to accept that a 6-year old will throw a tantrum at you when you tell him that.”
The funny thing is, I never actually told her women shouldn’t vote, only that it was an interesting idea, yet she still reacted like a child. Given my mother’s irrational response, I am now firmly on your side. I had seen this sort of behavior before, but mostly from younger, feminist women. I never thought in a million years that my evangelical, allegedly traditionalist mother would act the same way. You are right about learning a valuable lesson on women.
Ironic, and yet hardly surprising. YM is not only fortunate in having a strong male father in his life, but he is aware of it. Notice too that he didn’t react with outrage to his unfair and absurd grounding, but simply waited calmly for his father to rectify the situation. This is the way things are supposed to be.
As I have pointed out many times before, those who are capable of intellectually defending their position will do so calmly. Those who can’t always try to shut down the conversation one way or another. While the pro-suffrage side did have some effective hypothetical arguments in the early part of the 20th century, the subsequent 90 years of negative consequences have sufficed to destroy them utterly.
It’s interesting to note how female solipsism can trump a mother’s instinct to defend her son, which nevertheless is capable of detaching a woman from Team Woman at times.
YM is provided with a compelling argument against the wisdom of granting women the right to vote:
I am a very big fan of your blog and your unique brand of Christian libertarianism. I mentioned to my mother your position on women and the vote. She asked me what I thought and I said that you presented some compelling arguments and I was unsure of my position. She then grounded me and refuses to let me leave the house until I apologize to her and tell her that I believe that women should have the right to vote. I have tried having discussion with her, but she immediately starts comparing me to Hitler.
The punchline? He’s 37. Actually, I have no idea how old he is, but at least he is being provided an informative lesson in female nature, female solipsism, and the authoritarian instincts of women. The Hitler comparison is particularly ironic, given that both the National Socialists and the Fascists were staunch supporters of women’s suffrage and the German party was, in fact, dependent upon it for their 1933 rise to power. It was literally the first plank in “The Manifesto of the Fascist Struggle”, published in The People of Italy on June 6, 1919 by Benito Mussolini.
“Italians! Here is the program of a genuinely Italian movement. It is revolutionary because it is anti-dogmatic, strongly innovative and against prejudice.
For the political problem: We demand:
a) Universal suffrage polled on a regional basis, with proportional representation and voting and electoral office eligibility for women.”
It’s worth noting that the Fascist demand for proportional political female representation is significantly more “progressive” than anything American feminists have ever demanded. Anyhow, I would never recommend apologizing to anyone for accused thought-crimes or submitting to exercises in forced re-education. One is required to honor one’s mother, not submit to her lunatic demands for pious expressions of political correctness.
English Actress Louise Brealey has a request: “I’d like every man who doesn’t call himself a feminist to explain to the women in his life why he doesn’t believe in equality for women.”
No problem at all. I don’t believe in equality for women for exactly the same reason I don’t believe in free unicorn rides for women. I note that equality does not exist in any material, scientific, historical, legal, or religious sense. I further note that the mere attempt to bring about this nonexistent state has massively violated human liberties and had a materially negative effect on women throughout the West by a wide variety of metrics.
Now allow me to turn the question around on Miss Brealey and anyone else who believes in equality for women. Why do you claim to believe in something that provably and manifestly does not exist and has never existed?
This can’t help Japan’s demographic decline:
A startling number of Japanese youths have turned their backs on sex and relationships, a new survey has found. The survey, conducted by the Japan Family Planning Association, found that 36% of males aged 16 to 19 said that they had “no interest” in or even “despised” sex. That’s almost a 19% increase since the survey was last conducted in 2008.
If that’s not bad enough, The Wall Street Journal reports that a whopping 59% of female respondents aged 16 to 19 said they were uninterested in or averse to sex, a near 12% increase since 2008.
Combine an economic downturn with the increasing excellence of porn and video games, then throw in female economic independence and this is the result. For all that they are decried as soshoku danshi, the position of the “herbivores” is a perfectly reasonable one.
People often point out that “a real woman” is better than the autoerotic options, but the fact is that a) the real women tend to come with considerably more negatives than they did 50 years ago and b) the gap between a real woman and autoerotica has narrowed considerably in that time, especially for men who are not in the upper half of the socio-sexual rankings.
Throw in the difference in time and money expenditure, and one can see it is a real testimony to how highly men value actual women when one considers how compelling the alternatives have become in the last two decades.