Welmer On Women "Shooting Themselves in the Foot"

How Women Are Shooting Themselves in the Foot

by Welmer on May 20, 2010

I’ve written before about the decline of the matriarch, and how women used to have a high-status role within the family in traditional societies after they reached a certain age. This role of matriarch was, of course, partly dependent on the status of the husband (but not entirely), and therefore created a vested interest in cooperation between husband and wife throughout the many years of marriage. For example, if a man and woman got married while young, the husband would strive to work his way up to a position of stability and prosperity, and the wife had an interest in helping him do so, because she would share in that.

This is one reason homewreckers – younger women who used their youthful allure to steal older, more prosperous husbands – were held to be one of the worst examples of womanhood. Women who did this were cheating by leaping over all the hard work and dedication to jump directly into a position of affluence and comfort.

Today, however, women’s well-being has been severed from their husbands’ prosperity by government programs and family law. Although many women may see this as a liberating victory, all they are doing – in most cases – is trading in future stability and status for a short-lived power trip during their youthful, attractive years.

Some men may strike it rich while still young, but this is rarely the case. For the large majority of successful men, making their way to the top requires decades of uninterrupted dedication to their career. In their 20s and 30s, a lot of them are on a knife’s edge, and only well into middle age do they finally get a chance to rest on their laurels. All it takes is one misstep in the long path to success to derail them, and having a supportive, helpful wife throughout that journey is immensely helpful. Unfortunately, most wives no longer foot that bill. They are a dangerous liability rather than a rock of support. At any moment they could blow the entire thing apart and send the family and man’s career spiraling down in flames. Rather than partners, women have become land mines buried under the path to success.

The result of this is that the homewrecker type has become more and more the norm, as evidenced by the rash of scandals involving married, middle-aged politicians and single women. Rather than hanging in there for the long haul, women are going for the hail mary shot at the big time while they are still fertile and attractive. This has a lot to do with the lack of success younger men, who are still relatively unknown quantities, are confronting. Women figure that they have over a decade to keep shooting for the big time that could well be wasted on some guy who isn’t by any means sure to do well in life. In their minds, they are making a rational choice.

This contemporary reality is exacerbated by the fact that while young, women often make more money than men. In fact, in many parts of the country men’s and women’s salaries equalize in the 30s, and only in middle age do men begin to substantially out-earn women. Women’s greater social power when young and attractive does translate into higher salaries, but this boost wears out after the steep decline in fertility of middle age. Perhaps this explains why women are most likely to leave their husbands in their late 20s, when they feel that their status is higher than their husband’s.

Unfortunately for the women who pursue this strategy, it often doesn’t work out as well for them as they imagine. Nailing Mr. Big is out of the reach of most women, and although they may have a few passionate nights with those kinds of high-flyers, the successful men who fool around with ambitious women are usually smart enough to avoid entrapment, and very rarely marry a de facto tramp. Instead, these women end up having a string of relatively short relationships with men who know how to act the part of the alpha male, and when they hit their Wile E. Coyote moment end up in a decidedly lower status position than they would have had they married young and stuck with it for the long haul.

In coming years there will be a lot of washed up women out there working low-status jobs, unappreciated by any men, and without any financial support except their own. Men have been paying the price for a few decades now, but that isn’t going to last forever; we will adapt to the new reality and learn to avoid the walking bombs in our midst. No amount of shaming language will trump self-interest and economic reality, so cultural change is inevitable. My bet is that when the boomers start to lose power and economic clout, their outdated views will be rejected with alacrity, and there will be a return to normalcy in domestic relations. It’s a shame that they will have left so much wreckage in their wake, but human societies are known for fitful progress and reckless defiance of nature, or God if you will.

A Legend Has Passed Away: RIP Ronnie James Dio

You're a runner
But you're chasing yourself
Feel the hot breath on your shoulder

You're emotion
Running cold running warm
The young just getting older

We are sunlight
We can sparkle and shine
And our dreams are what we're made of

-Dio, Hungry for Heaven


The above pic is of singer Ronnie James Dio with the "Mob Rules" line up for Black Sabbath/Heaven and Hell, Toni Iommi, Geezer Butler, Vinne Appice, and RJD.

I wrote some of this to a friend and shared this with others, I and figured I would also write something about him on my own blog because his singing and music meant so much. There is no exaggeration that his music---and the bands he belonged to over time---had gotten me through good and bad times---and a couple of serious nadirs. I had seen him only once in concert years ago, but what an incredible experience---Dio even gave me the sign of the horns several times personally (although I made the effort to get his attention at first by practically standing on my seat!)

There's so much I could say, and throughout his music has been with me---and many others---through most my life. It has touched so many people, and when thinking MGTOW-wise, no politician, no skank, no feminist, or any or their associated and assorted ilk will NEVER bring the happiness and enjoyment to someone like Dio did turning his lifetime; the former seeks to control, ruin, and tarnish, the latter to uplift and move you. That is a testament to the power, the magic, and the inspiration he bequeathed to all of us.

This is depressing beyond belief that Dio has succumbed to stomach cancer. Our wizard for a modern age has crossed over.

Getting through work was a bitch just knowing what happened. The odd thing is that I had been listening to Dio material from the 70s all the way up to Heaven and Hell moniker, and then learned about his condition. I was hoping for the best, but at his age you can't always tell. As much as I still find it hard to fathom he isn't here with us incarnate, there is no doubt his legacy is great---there is such a wealth of material that he gave us---The Prophets, Elf, Rainbow, Dio, Black Sabbath, Heaven and Hell.

Catch the Rainbow, Ronnie. You are always with us in spirit.

Catch the Rainbow . . . by Rainbow

Forever Feminist Fail(ure)

The Amazing Atheist has caused quite a stir on the 'Net, but whether you share his beliefs or not, his complete OWNAGE of this feminist is utterly fantastic. I absolutely love it.

Enjoy, MGTOWers!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1paR4fFrXAo

Crystal Gail Mangum In the Hot Seat (article)

Crystal Gayle Mangum Charged in DV Incident

February 18th, 2010 by Robert Franklin, Esq.

Here's our old friend Crystal Gayle Mangum again (WRAL, 2/18/10).

She first won national fame by falsely accusing three Lacrosse players at Duke University of rape. From the outset, Mangum's claims were patently unbelievable, there was no evidence of wrongdoing on the part of any of the young men and what evidence did come to light clearly pointed to their innocence.

Despite all that, the rape charges were splashed across the national television, radio and print news media, with prominent national commentators engaging in the most scurrilous tactics to impute guilt to the innocent. Duke University itself got in on the act when 88 faculty members signed a document that essentially convicted the young men without trial.

The rape charges hung over the young men like a sword of Damocles for over a year before the North Carolina Attorney General finally dropped all charges and pronounced the players 'innocent.'

Now Mangum is back in the news. She was arrested last night and is charged with attempted murder, five counts of arson, assault and battery, communicating threats, child abuse, injury to personal property, identity theft and resisting a public officer. That's quite a night's work.

Those charges stem from an altercation she had with her boyfriend, and are unquestionably overblown. I mean, attempted murder? Please. The bottom line seems to be that she attacked Walker, scratched him, tossed his clothes in the bathtub and set them on fire. She lied to the police about her identity and resisted arrest. None of that is résumé material, but it's also not attempted murder.

Still, Mangum seems to have abused the children in some way and in any case exposed them to her domestic violence. Of course it looks like she did the same to Walker.

And speaking of domestic violence, that term is nowhere used in the article linked to. The almost invariable refusal by the news media to call domestic violence by a woman against a man "domestic violence," is an ongoing scandal. It contributes to the public's widespread inaccurate belief that domestic violence is overwhelmingly a male-on-female phenomenon. It's not, as 35 years of research into the matter show clearly. In fact, about 50% of DV is done by women to men and more than that is initiated by women. The most recent study to show the same pattern recorded data from Scotland. It came out in December of 2009 and showed that 5% of men and 5% of women said they'd been the victim of a DV incident in the past year.

For her attack on the reputations and liberty of the three Lacrosse players, Crystal Gayle Mangum was never charged with a crime. Now she's charged with attempted murder for what looks like a relatively minor DV incident. Of course if she had been in prison for her false rape claims, the DV incident would never have happened.

Interesting Video With Angry Harry and Erin Pizzey

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uwxgavf2xWE

Women, Head Games, and The Sensitive Man

I consider this a gem of sorts---it's been on the Internet for a while now, and there's a great deal of truth here.

Women, Head Games, and The Sensitive Man

By BusterB

I've said it before and I'll say it again: modern women don't want a sensitive man. Traditional women didn't want him either. If you become a classic "new age" sensitive man, you'll invite scorn from both sides of the female spectrum. As much as women may say that they are looking for sensitive men, they act in exactly the opposite way: as though they are looking for insensitive men.

Have you ever noticed... I mean, really sat down and thought about how women react to emotional situations versus how women expect men to react to those same situations? Women judge the reasonableness of their own reactions based on how they feel; they judge the reasonableness of men's reactions on how those reactions make women feel. An angry woman will rant and rave and do her best to make her man feel bad. She calls this, "Getting [her] point across." That same woman will expect her man to keep a level head and watch what he says when he's angry so as not to upset her. If he says things to make her feel bad, then suddenly he has done something far worse than what she did in the first place to provoke his anger, and it is he who must apologize.

I have never in my life hung around with or dated a woman who didn't play head games on mates or prospective mates, although I've been out with only a few women who would admit to it. A woman will often tell her man that she doesn't love him, that he doesn't love her, that he never listens to her, or that she has done something outrageously stupid, all just to get him going. What she says doesn't have to be true; it doesn't even have to resemble the truth, and in fact it's better if it doesn't. A woman will bluff her way through something like this until he buys into what she is saying, at which point she will giggle and tell him that she was fooling, or add insult to injury by getting angry at him for believing such a thing of her. Women call this "teasing" and they love it. I used to be bewildered by this teasing, but recently the penny dropped. Now I understand it. Now it makes sense.

All of this teasing is women testing their men and preparing them to react properly in emotional situations. By "properly" I don't mean that she is teaching him to defend himself, or follow his own moral compass. She is not helping him to get in touch with himself. Quite the opposite, she is trying to find out just exactly how out of touch he is with himself, and help that along if possible. She wants to know where his breaking point is, so that she can use that information to control him.

By "teasing," she is sowing confusion, seeing how much emotional battering he can take before he snaps, and finding the hot buttons that make him feel guilty and apologetic. All three of these things help map the territory for her, and tell her how to manipulate him.

"Teasing" teaches a man not to trust his mate and, ultimately, not to trust his own feelings. She tells him that she mistakenly threw out his paycheque. His gut reaction is that this is a joke. She couldn't possibly have done anything so stupid. As she continues to insist that she did, and chides him for leaving it on a pile with the newspapers, he is torn between believing his wife and believing in his wife's intelligence. Finally, he caves in to the repeated assurances and gets angry, at which point she tells him that she was only joking, and gets angry at him for believing that she could be so stupid.

She has now taught him that he can't trust his own feelings. He knew in the beginning that it was a joke, but she convinced him that he was wrong, then turned the tables on him and blamed him for believing her. If she repeats this process often enough he will become completely confused and rely on only her to tell him what is right and what is not.

She has also determined just how long it takes him to cave in and simply believe whatever she says, no matter how outrageous. She has tested his boundaries to see how self-assured he is. The quicker he acquiesces the better, as it means that he is easier to control. She can encourage this by repeating this exercise over and over, causing him to simply accept whatever she says is the truth sooner and sooner each time.

Finally, in the process of blaming him for the whole event, she may have come across one or two hot buttons that will cause him to break down, feel guilty, and apologize. These can be anything from calling him a certain name, to shouting, to crying. She will remember these for use later when the two of them get into an argument.

If you think that this is over the top, consider how a woman would react to the same sort of "teasing" coming from a man. He tells her that he accidentally released her pet bird and it escaped out the window. At first she doesn't believe that he could be so stupid. (In the case of American women, they might skip this step due to their extremely low opinion of men.) After his repeated assurances, she gradually comes to accept the truth until she is finally in tears. At this point he brightens up and tells her that he is kidding and that the bird has flown into the den and is hiding behind the TV. He then explodes at her for having such a low opinion of him that she believed in his feigned stupidity.

We have a word for this in Western society: it's called "emotional abuse." We call it "abuse" because the intent is clear: to sow confusion and doubt in the person being "teased" until they no longer trust their own feelings or judgement. Notice, however, that it's called "emotional abuse" only when visited by a man upon a woman.

I claim that the motivation and methods involved in "emotional abuse" of women by men and "teasing" of men by women are exactly the same. To illustrate this, let's look at how women eventually use the information they gain through "teasing" and the conditioning that they instill in their mates through "teasing."

A thoroughly teased man no longer trusts his own feelings. He doesn't dare trust them. He has learned that to trust his own feelings means that he often has to accuse his wife of lying to him through a perfectly straight face. If it turns out that he is right and she is fooling him, then all is well, but if his feelings are wrong and she is not fooling him, she will make him wish he had never been born. In short, teasing dramatically raises the stakes for the man. Trusting his own feelings becomes an extremely risky endeavour, so he doesn't bother. He trusts hers instead.

A woman who teases her man mercilessly knows how long it will take him to cave in and believe whatever she says. She can use this to decide whether it is worth her trouble to talk to him and discuss her point of view or simply bulldoze him into agreeing with her. While men place a strong emphasis on reasoning and discussing options, women are primarily interested in simply winning the argument. Knowing his limit helps her make a more informed choice about which tactic is more likely to achieve the desired result.

She knows how long it will take him to get angry. This is perhaps the most important side-effect, as it tells her how far she can go in using him as an emotional punching bag when she's having a bad day. Women who are having bad days typically smile at everyone around them then come home and take it out on their mates. Women rarely if ever feel guilty about stomping around the house and yelling because they're in a bad mood. Their earlier experiments with teasing and mercurial emotions tell them how far they can push their mate before he snaps and gets angry too.

She also knows how to make him feel shameful and repentant. She will use this at every opportunity to turn the tide in arguments that are not going her way. Again, women place little emphasis on reasoning and discussion. To a woman an argument is a fight to the finish, and whoever wins, by whatever tactic, is the winner. Add to this the fact that women win arguments not by reason but by gaining emotional superiority, and one can easily see where the knowledge gained from "teasing" comes in handy. One day, if she really does mistakenly throw out his paycheque, she will use the knowledge that she has gained over the years to make him feel that it was his fault, and he should apologize to her.

Frequent teasing by women establishes them as emotionally superior, and sets them up to win every argument that they have with their man in the future.

Frequent teasing also affects men: it reduces their emotional security and increases their confusion and emotional pain, just as constantly prodding a caged animal with a stick reduces its sense of security and increases its confusion and pain. Most men cope with this by feeling less. Given a choice between "stuffing" their feelings and feeling anger and resentment toward their chosen mates, men usually choose to "stuff" their feelings. In this sense, women work to make their men less sensitive, not more sensitive.

In order to pull this off, women need insensitive men. A truly sensitive man, who was also sensitive to his own suffering, would become angry with his mate for his mistreatment. Only an insensitive man could tolerate women's emotional terrorism and continue functioning as if nothing were wrong. If a man starts off somewhat sensitive, his mate can and often will discourage his sensitivity with teasing, mercurial emotions, or plain unreasonable behaviour backed up by repeated assertions that she's done nothing wrong. All of these things have the same effect: they help turn him into the very same insensitive clod about which women complain endlessly.

So, if you're a truly sensitive man you can look forward to a lifetime of rejection as women discover that when they cut you, you bleed. Blood—even emotional blood—makes women feel bad, so they move on and look for someone with thicker skin. Thin-skinned, sensitive men make lousy emotional punching bags on bad days. They can't be bludgeoned into acquiescence during arguments because they feel the guilt and shame too readily and break down too easily. They can't be told that black is white and white is black because they're paying attention. They're not as easy to manipulate.

Even if you manage to become that peculiar kind of "sensitive man" who doesn't feel anything other than what his mate wants, you'll still lose out. Even if you manage to attune your sensitivity to her and only her needs, you will still likely be too sensitive. You will become too compliant. You will be too easy to manipulate, and she will lose interest. Most men think that they want a young, vapid, voluptuous nymphomaniac, but when a man finds one, he quickly becomes bored and leaves her. Men think that they want sexy, easy women, but in the end such women present no challenges and no opportunity to grow and learn. Similarly, most women think that they want caring, sensitive men, but when a woman finds one, she quickly becomes bored with him. She thinks that she wants a man who is kind, gentle, and agreeable, but in the end such men present no challenges and no opportunity to grow and learn. So she dumps him for a "real man" who won't pay her too much attention as she fumes and stomps about the house. She wants him to finally break down and give in, but she doesn't want it to be too easy. It's more fun that way.

A Classic Re-posted: Hate Bounces

Hate Bounces: How man-hating and man-bashing harms women – the making of a misogynist

by zed on January 18, 2010

Misogynists are not born, they are made.

Once, a long time ago when the world was young, I loved women with all my heart and soul. I grew up among strong competent women who understood that all living things need to be taken care of and will flourish if that happens.

The men I grew up with knew that as well. Everyone knew that people must live and work together and find ways to cooperate and just deal with the inevitable differences that arise and keep them in perspective. They knew that people are not perfect, but that most of them try to be as good as they can manage. They took the measure of a person in wholeness, and if there was more good than bad to a person, they accepted that person’s faults as being part of the package which was still valuable, if a bit flawed. After all, nobody really is perfect. We all knew that.

Then, something happened. And that something was called feminism. I remember the early days of the movement when it was called “Women’s Liberation” which was a high sounding and noble cause in a country which is founded on a document which cites liberty as one of 3 inalienable rights that every person has. No one with a sense of fairness and an understanding of civics could be against women being liberated and treated fairly. And, there was also the promise that some of the ways men were being treated unfairly would change along with it.

And, as the old joke goes: if you believe that one, then I have some lakefront property in the Mojave Desert I’d like to talk to you about.

I learned very quickly that feminism wasn’t about liberating PEOPLE from their previously too restrictive roles which were assigned to them based on the plumbing they displayed at birth, but rather was founded on a number of absolute falsehoods which had nothing to do with freedom, equality, or fairness. The fundamental premise that men had MORE power, not just a different kind of power and in a different area of society as a whole, but MORE power in a complete and absolute sense was something that I vehemently disagreed with. I could come up with thousands of examples of circumstances in which women had more power than men did. And in every example they gave of where men did have any power, I could easily point out the uneven distribution of power among men, and how a few men at the top of the wealth/influence pyramid had a lot of power, but that the vast majority of men had very little.

The strangest thing was that most of the situations in which I was being told I had or was exercising “power” seemed absolutely ridiculous to me. When I was a college freshman, one day I was walking across campus toward the student union. I reached the door about a half step ahead of a female student so, as I had been brought up to do, I hastened my last couple of steps and held the door open for her. Instead of the smile and nod that I had been used to in response to such simple acts of social courtesy, she flew into a rage and started screaming at me about how what a male chauvinist PIG I was, that she was perfectly capable of opening that door for herself and didn’t need any g– damned MAN to do it for her, and kicked me in the knee.

“Shock” is a totally inadequate word to describe my response.

I was at a loss to understand any of her reaction. She couldn’t have been any more totally, completely, and absolutely wrong about my motivations and purposes. I instantly assigned her to the categories of “mentally defective,” “hate filled,” and female. Over the next several years, a lot of women joined her company.

A couple of years later, a woman that I was dating described her feminist “consciousness raising” group as consisting of “perfectly satisfying man hating sessions.” Again, I was bewildered. I asked why she found hating me(n) so “perfectly satisfying.” I don’t remember the answer she gave, but she soon proved to me just how true that statement was of her. Like the knee-kicker in response to having a door opened, it seemed that anything and everything I did was proof that I deserved her hatred and rancor. At least 10 years later, she called me out of the blue to apologize. She said she realized that she had just gotten swept up in a group consciousness of hatred and had finally realized what had happened and that I had not deserved the bile she had spewed on me.

It was, I suppose, better than a poke in the eye with a sharp stick, but it was too little and too late. Because, by then I had encountered so many other women who acted in pretty much the same way that it had simply become part of my view of what women were. Somewhere, deep down inside, either hidden or proudly displayed, women hated men. Women came in a variety of sizes and shapes, most had breasts and female genitals, but they all seemed to come with a hatred and fundamental contempt for men. One woman I dated while Jimmy Carter was still president spoke of “my hatred of men” in the same matter-of-fact tone that she might say “my nose.” It was just an integral part of her.

Needless to say, this presented me with a significant paradox and source of internal conflict. Being a healthy heterosexual male, I had the natural and universal desire that men have to have a loving relationship with a woman. But, how is it possible to love someone that returns hate for that love?

So, over time I began to develop a wary distrustful posture toward women. I still dated them, but I had become so conditioned to expect hatred from them that I simply accepted it as part of the price I had to pay in order to be involved with one. My desire for a relationship was still strong, but was opposed by a distrust and unwillingness to let someone who hated me get the upper hand over me. Thus, in my mind the concept of “commitment” became one and the same as “trapped in a relationship with someone who hates me.” I was indeed one of those men who “wouldn’t make a commitment.”

The worst part of this, for me, is that it blinded me to the warning signals of some truly sick personalities. The hostility which I had become accustomed to enduring from women became only a matter of degree – greater or lesser. And, with a baseline of being kicked in the knee for the courtesy of opening a door, and learning how “satisfying” man hating is to some women, I had no yardstick to sort out the seriously sick and deranged women from any of the rest. As a result, I ended up in some relationships that were truly horrible and very damaging to me. And, of course, each of these left scars which over time built up so much emotional scar tissue that I began to lose all the positive feelings I once had for women.

That is the personal side. And, I won’t bore you with the details of all the stories. But, there eventually got to be so many that I developed the attitude that the question was not “whether” a woman would burn me if let her get close enough to do so, but “when” and “how soon” it would happen.

On the political side, things were just as bad if not worse. About the same time I started becoming the target of violent physical attacks by individual women for what I perceived as courtesy, I also became the target of vicious verbal attacks by women collectively – just for being a man.

I remember the first time I saw the slogan “A woman without a man is like a fish without a bicycle,” I knew my face had just been spit in. Men were not just useless to women, we were irrelevant. We had no purpose in a woman’s life, and did not belong in her world at all. It was a message of hate, dismissal, and refutation. But, I also saw it as a warning of what was to come. It was like seeing clouds on the horizon, and knowing that it is time to get under cover because a storm is brewing. And, since it was obviously smearing shit in my face, it was going to be a shit storm.

Soon it became apparent that women could say any damn thing they wanted about men – no matter how wrong, no matter how hateful, no matter how unfair – and that was fine, but every time I stood up to that and said “no, that is wrong, there is another point of view” I’d get some little fem-bot harpy in my face shrieking the same old tired slogans, like a mindless Chatty Cathy doll, about how I was threatened by losing my power, wanted to keep women “in their place,” was probably violent, and was a misogynist. The dull predictability and regularity of it all was only kept from being terminally boring by the shrillness and sheer vehemence of the attacks.

There is a belief among those who believe in magic that one must speak a spell 3 times in order for it to become binding and true. It took being called a misogynist a lot more than 3 times to become true, more like 3000+, but in time it did become true.

I began to see women as vicious creatures whose only agenda when it came to me, or any man, was to see how much they could get from the man – then when he had nothing left to give because they had taken it all, toss him out with yesterday’s garbage. In short – I viewed them as nothing but users.

Feminist author Wendy Dennis came out with a book in the early 1990s called “Hot and Bothered: sex and love in the 90s.” Among many other astute observations in the book was that nothing was more classically typical of the state of male/female relations than the woman who complained bitterly about every aspect of men, then couldn’t figure out why she couldn’t get one of these awful creatures to fall madly in love with her. I had observed the same thing so many times that I had simply concluded that such women were simply not very bright. In stark contrast to the mythology of how socially adept women are, I was baffled that such women were so stupid that they didn’t realize that no living thing will respond to such projections of distaste, contempt, and hatred with anything except return animosity.

I took to avoiding women, particularly groups of them, because I could never sit quietly and put up with the bashing and would always challenge it, which ended up in a lot of fights and added greatly the count of times that I got called “misogynist.” I noticed that women seemed to do it habitually, without thinking, and would confront my female friends over and over until they learned not to do it in my presence.

And, after 3 decades of listening to it, and hating it, and trying to keep the animosity which had been building in me over it – when the husband of a woman friend of mine (who had been very dishonest about her motivations for our friendship and had been trying to harass me into turning our friendship sexual) threatened to kill me and she said “I don’t know why you are making such a big deal about it,” I caved in and really did begin to hate women.

Most of the time this hatred lies dormant. I figure that the best thing I can do for myself and for women is to keep the contact I must have with them to a minimum, and to keep as much distance between them and myself as possible. It is rather like hanging a sign on a fence that says “Beware of VERY bad dog.” Stay outside the fence, and everything is fine. But, come through the gate at your own risk. Leave me the hell alone and I will leave you alone.

Misogynists are not born, they are made.

I am still baffled at all the women who seem to expect men to live on a steady diet of hatred and man bashing, and somehow magically metabolize this toxic diet into “love” for women and a desire to see good things come to them. When I work real hard, I can make the anger cold and take no joy when bad things happen to women. I simply regard it with indifference. When I hear a woman whine about being victimized, I simply tune her out and go elsewhere.
When a woman smiles at me, I think of an old ethic bashing joke – “What does a ______ say instead of ‘fuck you?‘” Answer “Trust Me.”

I will not allow most women in my house unless I have known her a long time and she is old enough to have escaped being infected with the plague of man hating or is escorted by someone I trust, nor will I enter theirs except on the same conditions. If I pass a woman stranded on the road, I will not stop to help her because it is as likely as not that she will be afraid of me. That’s fine. She’s a fish without a bicycle – I have no place in her world, nor her in mine.

Man bashing and man hating harms women, because it makes men hate them back – eventually. A puppy returns love for love, but if you beat it will eventually turn mean and will one day turn on you when you raise your fist or your stick (or the club of words) to hit it. Men are no different. When women talk about treating men like dogs, I wish they would. It would be an improvement. Most women treat their dogs far better than they treat their men.

Somewhere along the line, I went through a metamorphosis. I changed from a man who loved women and thought they were just about the greatest thing in the world, to a man who can’t stand them, or anything about them.

I’m sick and tired of the lies that women tell about men, I’m sick and tired of their victim games, I’m sick and tired of hatred and bashing I have to put up with when I am around them. I am sick and tired of the arrogant contempt in which they seem to hold me and all other men. I am sick to death of the way that some of them feel the need to seek me out to piss me off. A couple of years back, at the funeral of my uncle, as fine a man as I have ever known, some woman felt the need to start a conversation with me as I sat with my private grief. She wanted me to agree with her that men don’t ask for directions.

How could anyone be so stupid and socially incompetent? When men came up to me to talk, it was always with something like “Your uncle was a fine man,” not, “aren’t men headstrong and stupid?”

Invariably, when I tell a woman about all this, she tries to argue with me and say something like “get over it,” or “why don’t you take the gender out of it?” In return I ask, “Why the hell don’t you women get over it, and take the gender out of it?”

I would like nothing better than to be left in peace, and allow women to enjoy the absence of my company which they find so annoying and unpleasant. Every day, a few more men got through the transformation and become like me. We don’t get our guns and shoot a few women; we don’t beat them up; because what women have been saying about us all these years is just flat wrong. But, there’s no point in trying to tell women that because they have become so certain of their superiority that the best way to deal with them is to leave them to it, and the company of their other fishy friends.

Videos of Argus Eyes reading this essay are available here - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5A87VbJUY6g and here – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nH4poAZKeak