The Futurist has an excellent essay on what could be causing the decline of American civilization. It’s a very long, yet worthwhile, read, so I encourage you all to go read the entire thing. Many Americans are waking up to a society that is crumbling, yet they can’t see why it is happening. Men and women alike are genuinely confused as to why this is happening, but is the answer really so simple? Has feminism created a misandry bubble that is ruining western civilization? The Futurist thinks so, and so do I.
Why does it seem that American society is in decline, that fairness and decorum are receding, that that socialism and tyranny are becoming malignant despite the majority of the public being averse to such philosophies, yet the true root cause seems elusive? What if everything from unsustainable health care and social security costs, to stagnant home prices and wage stagnation, to crumbling infrastructure and metastasizing socialism, to the utter decimation of major US cities like Detroit, Cleveland, and Pittsburgh, could all be traced to a common origin that is extremely pervasive yet is all but absent from the national dialog, indeed from the dialog of the entire Western world?
Today, on the first day of the new decade of ’201x’ years, I am going to tell you why that is. I am hereby triggering the national dialog on what the foremost challenge for the United States will be in this decade, which is the ultimate root cause of most of the other problems we appear to be struggling with. What you are about to read is the equivalent of someone in 1997 describing the expected forces governing the War on Terror from 2001-2009 in profound detail.
This is a very long article, the longest ever written on The Futurist, and as it is a guide to the next decade of social, political, and sexual strife, is not meant to be read in one shot but rather digested slowly over an extended period, with all supporting links read as well. As the months and years of this decade progress, this article will seem all the more prophetic.
Executive Summary : The Western World has quietly become a civilization that undervalues men and overvalues women, where the state forcibly transfers resources from men to women creating various perverse incentives for otherwise good women to conduct great evil against men and children, and where male nature is vilified but female nature is celebrated. This is unfair to both genders, and is a recipe for a rapid civilizational decline and displacement, the costs of which will ultimately be borne by a subsequent generation of innocent women, rather than men, as soon as 2020.
He basically lists four main things that have caused this decline in western civilization.
1) Easy contraception (condoms, pills, and abortions): In the past, extremely few women ever had more than one or two sexual partners in their lives, as being an unwed mother led to poverty and social ostracization. Contraception made it possible for female to conduct campaigns of hypergamy.
2) ‘No fault’ divorce, asset division, and alimony : In the past, a woman who wanted to leave her husband needed to prove misconduct on his part. Now, the law has changed to such a degree that a woman can leave her husband for no stated reason, yet is still entitled to payments from him for years to come. This enables women to transfer the costs of their behavior onto men and children.
3) Female economic freedom : Despite ‘feminists’ claiming that this is the fruit of their hard work, inventions like the vacuum cleaner, washing machine, and oven were the primary drivers behind liberating women from household chores and freeing them up to enter the workforce. These inventions compressed the chores that took a full day into just an hour or less. There was never any male opposition to women entering the workforce, as more labor lowered labor costs while also creating new consumers. However, one of the main reasons that women married – financial support – was no longer a necessity.
Female entry into the workforce is generally a positive development for society, and I would be the first to praise this, if it were solely on the basis of merit (as old-school feminists had genuinely intended). Unfortunately, too much of this is now due to corrupt political lobbying to forcibly transfer resources from men to women.
4) Pro-female social engineering : Above and beyond the pro-woman divorce laws, further state interventions include the subsidization of single motherhood, laws that criminalize violence against women (but offer no protection to men who are the victims of violence by women), and ‘sexual harassment’ laws with definitions so nebulous that women have the power to accuse men of anything without the man having any rights of his own.
It’s not completely unreasonable to see feminism as largely at fault for the decline of American society. What once was something great has now become something perverted and ugly. Modern-day feminists aren’t crusading for equality between sexes; they’re crusading against men. Feminists today see men as inherently inferior, violent, untrustworthy beings. Women, of course, are intelligent, kind, sensitive, strong, and able to do anything. They are inherently superior in the eyes of feminists. It’s why you see so many feminists encouraging women to sleep around with as many men as possible, while simultaneously insulting and degrading men to second-class citizens. Using men as nothing but sex-objects lowers and debases them to nothing more than a glorified sex toy. Use a man for nothing but sex, because he isn’t worth a woman’s brains, heart, or money. He’s there for nothing but to serve whatever woman needs a bit of pleasure at the time. For any woman who still decides to get married to such an inferior being, he needs to be kept inferior while married. If and when the woman decides to leave, it is then his responsibility to pay her for her time and suffering for pretty much the rest of his life, despite the fact that women initiate the overwhelming majority of divorces.
The state of marriage is in decay, also in large part due to feminists. Americans are marrying at the oldest they’ve ever married. Feminism rejected traditional values over and over again, and women eventually began to listen. They were trained to think that what they really wanted was to get out of the tradition of marriage and childbearing, and into new, high-powered careers. If they so happened to find a man along the way, then he needed to meet an astronomical number of required qualities to be worthy of the new high-powered, career-obsessed Alpha Female. He needed to have just as good a career as she did, and make just as much money, and be just as smart, but he also needed to be there to take care of the house and kids. He needed to serve her every whim. If she cooked or cleaned or watched the kids, it clearly meant that he was sexist. Feminists trained women to have completely unrealistic expectations of their lives — and trained men to know that marriage was something that they might want to stay the hell away from.
Because what man wants to willingly enter an institution where he’s treated with zero respect every single day? Where the risks far outweight the potential benefits? It used to be that a man had to work to prove that he was worthy of the woman he wanted to marry. Now, men have to be exceedingly careful before they get married. There are too many women out there who have drunk the feminist Kool-Aid. They’ll marry a man, and at the first bump in the road, run away and take almost everything the man had.
Feminism has caused us to be a more woman-centered society. You can see it in every aspect of our culture. You can see it in movies, sitcoms, and even commercials which almost always show a smart, sexy, savvy woman married to a dumb, fat, lazy oaf that she has no respect for. Boys have almost no role models in popular culture today to show them what a good husband and father should be. You can also see it in our now more emotional society. Politicians and celebrities make the rounds on various talk shows where they reveal their “feelings” constantly. People are encouraged to share their various trials and tribulations, because it’s “inspiring” to know that… I don’t know, Celine Dion once had asthma or something and was able to overcome it. Oprah is the perfect epitome of our overly womanized culture. Single mothers are worshipped. Cougars are applauded. Emotions reign supreme. We’re trained to be impulsive now because we rely so heavily on emotions. We’re constantly told that being happy is all that matters. If someone, or something, makes you sad or angry or upset, then you should just quit. You don’t soldier through the hard times or find a solution to the problem — you just get a divorce, or quit, or run away. Even politics are affected. Feminists are succeeding in building a matriarchy, even as they incessantly whine about the patriarchy. But how will a matriarchy destroy western civilization?
It can and will destroy us because you cannot build or maintain an empire on impulsiveness and emotion. Sleeping around is a great way to feel good in the moment, for example, but it sure doesn’t help build healthy families or a healthy society. The emphasis on promoting women at the expense of men — rather than just judging each person on the quality of their character — can wreck some of the most important foundations of this country. Our police and fire departments, and our military, will never be as strong if feminists had their way. This could also affect your typical blue-collar industries like construction or manufacturing. Women are not as strong as men are, they cannot do the physical labor that men can do. There might be one woman out of a hundred who can, sure. But having exactly equal numbers of women and men in every field is ludicrous and potentially harmful. The matriarchal shift in our society can also be seen in the welfare/nanny state we currently live in. And all of it is killing us. It’s killing our country. But women are getting nothing for it. Feminism has been extremely harmful to America, and made women less happy along the way.
A patriarchal society is not a bad thing, despite feminist yowling. What happened was simple. Feminists by and large achieved everything they claimed to be fighting for. Women can vote, they can work the same jobs men can, they can choose to live whatever kind of lives they want to live. They can play sports, they can get the same education as a man. Modern-day feminists didn’t want to lose the lobbying power and influence over impressionably women’s minds that they had gained, though. So they had to start inventing reasons to be offended, to start inventing reasons why sexism still exists in their minds. Instead of fighting for the right to vote, today’s feminists fight for abortion. They don’t fight for equality; they fight to subjugate men. A matriarchal society is what feminists are trying to build, and it is softer, it is more emotional, and it could be potentially devastating.
Feminism has arguably done more harm to western civilization than any other influence. The question is, have we gone too far? Is it too late to turn back?
(16 votes, average: 4.44 out of 5)
Loading ...RSS feed for comments on this post.
TrackBack URI
Cassy,
I am very glad to see a woman who has a better vision for male-female relationships than what ‘feminists’ have codified into law, which is destructive to BOTH genders.
We need more women who see things the way you do. A+
Thanks,
The Futurist
And thus the rise of the nanny state.
I’d also add that in addition, the breaking down of the various institutions that provided the unwritten rules that held society together started to happen right around the time feminism was taking off in this country (late 60′s). Suddenly things like free love, having babies out of wedlock, experimenting with drugs all started to take the place of traditional values and became not only accepted, but were encouraged. Groups like the ACLU rose to prominence during this time, becoming the legal pit bull that has helped tear down the institutions in our country.
Whenever I read about how radical feminism, gay rights, or any of the other left-wing crusades are going to be the death of Western Civ in general and the USA in particular, my mind always returns to the same thought:
When the terrorists win, these leftists will be the first ones up against the wall. It’s always been a fascinating observation – the Islamists hate these harpies even more than they hate conservatives and Christians.
After the Left has finished emasculating or eliminating the last vestiges of the warrior culture and survival instinct, the gates will effectively be thrown open and the barbarians will come pouring in.
Cassy will you marry me? wait- I’m already married. crap. never mind. Seriously, awesome post and commentary. The only thing I would add is a quote from the Bible. “Woe to they that call evil good and good evil. Who put darkness for light and light for darkness.”
Cassy,
The Futurist’s essay is a perfectly developed, and, for all its length, concise argument demonstrating the corruption of Western society’s core over the last 40 years. Your response here, as well, is beautifully reasoned and written.
As I noted over at Morgan’s place (whence I was directed here,) the perfect comment on “feminism” was uttered by a character in Daniel Duane’s Caught Inside with the line “I’ve never heard a feminist complain that her husband made more money than she did.” That pretty much says it.
Thanks for continuing to give us older guys hope for the future of the race. Your husband is a lucky man indeed.
Cassy,
Not really all that profound, though it is nice that someone finally put it into such detailed writing.. I’ve been saying exactly this for the last 10 years.
As for your last question, I’d answer that we’ve just about gone too far, that it’s almost too late. I still think there’s a tiny window of opportunity out there for things to turn around, but that opening is closing mighty fast…
Do me a favor, Cassy. Google “Venusian Arts”. Oh what the heck – I’ll save you the trouble by providing your “Futurist’s” own link:
http://www.seductionbase.com/mysterymethod.htm
That’s not my father, my brother, my husband, my Grandfather or any of the men I have loved and admired all my life. Is that really what you think a man is?
The Pill and Feminism’s Future
The Rise and Fall of Feminism/Female Domination
Dec 2009
The Male Contraceptive Pill; and Freedom For Men –
The male pill is on it’s way, and will be with us in less than 5 years, if not from the US or Britain, then from China and India.
The pill for men will be the biggest step for freedom that men have ever had – freedom from the serfdom imposed by fatherhood. So if the present tyrannical feminist British women want their babies, they will have to offer a far better deal to men than at present.
For example –
1
The present marriage laws, and the infamous and secret ‘family courts’ will have to go, and quickly, and the dictatorial marriage and ‘common law’ marriage expectations drastically changed.
2
The constant demeaning of masculinity, particularly on TV in programs such as ‘One Foot in the Grave’, ‘Men Behaving Badly’ and the present ‘soaps’ in general, where men habitually behave in an infantile manner, and are presented in an appalling way, will have to be recognised as highly offensive to men, and dispensed with.
3
The most powerful of the British feminist weapons – the wild and malicious accusations of ‘rape’ and ‘child sex’ – will have to be brought back under civilized law where the accuser will be required to have hard evidence and be held responsible for their actions, both in the making of the accusation, and their part in the incident. The male sex drive is an extremely powerful force, and a woman who provokes it to the point where a man loses his self-control that woman must accept some of the blame. The accused will have to be considered innocent until – and if – proven guilty.
The Rise of Woman’s Dominance -
As far as I know never before in human history has woman obtained such a dominant position in society, and I have puzzled over this for many years. To reason this out I considered that the dominance must coincide with a recent new event, and the rise of science is the most noticeable over the last 100 years.
It seems that the science events most effecting women’s position in society are the invention of domestic labour saving devices – making the ‘housewife’ redundant, the invention of mechanised work equipment – making the ‘male upper body’ strength requirement redundant in the workplace, and – most significantly – the invention of the female contraception pill which gave a woman political power over men by either withholding sex, which she has always been able to do, or rewarding with sex, which for the fear of unwanted pregnancy, she has never been able to do before. It should be noted that recent social science research has found that giving rewards has far more impact on behaviour than giving punishments, which soon lose their effects altogether.
The female contraceptive pill in the 1960s Britain gave British women direct power over sex availability without fear of pregnancy for the first time in human history. There was a popular phrase in the 1960s – ‘free love’, but there was nothing ‘free’ about the ‘free love’ of the 1960s. It came at a price, a price controlled and set by women who seized upon this new ‘pillow power’ with vigour; and some have used this power – unwisely – to disadvantage men in every way possible, thus asserting a position of dominance over men in which she has reduced them to a level of disadvantaged cowed subservience – and infantile behaviour in an attempt to present themselves as children entitled to the protection of the maternal instinct.
The ‘Mad Maternal Instinct’ – the all powerful evolutionary force in women that regards masculine Men as simple mating objects when in lust, and when not, as dangerous predators to be avoided or driven off and away from the precious family group.
The Decline of Dominance and Re-establishment of Equality -
The timing of the 1960’s pill and ten years later, the recognition of the feminist movement is an incident that supports the view that they are connected in a cause and effect relationship, but via a third factor.
I would argue that the dominance by women is not a result of feminism, but of the 1960’s pill. Feminism developed out of this dominance. Once the dominance is removed, feminism will dwindle and demise.
The 1960’s pill does give an advantage and dominance via the reward of sex to men. But with an equivalent male contraceptive pill, men can make it quite clear that they are not prepared to have children unless they want to, and are offered a satisfactory position in the family group and society – enforced by law. This would equalise the woman’s power over men’s sex drive with the man’s power over the maternal instinct; and the need to breed. Hence the counter balancing of the power given to women – ironically by male scientists! – by the 1960’s female contraceptive pill.
Once the power of the 1960s female pill is counterbalanced – equalized – by the male pill this yoke of female dominance is likely to be flung off with surprising speed, and retribution and revenge on the British feminist female – and feminist male – is likely to be wreaked, as some wiser and more sensible women have been aware of for some time.
I am very surprised that a social event on par with the 1960s social revolution is within a few years, and the media and people in general have not noticed. I do not intent to attack women in general, but sound an alarm as to what appears to me to be in the future.
It appears to me that the combination of -
1 a general grass roots resistance and resentment by modern men to the unfairness of feminism
2 the coming worsening economic decline and worsening male unemployment
3 the problems of over population
4 the balancing of the 1960s female pill with an equivalent male pill
will result in a complete reversal of the present situation and the subjugation of western women into exploited work units with little or no rights at all – and given their attitude to Men over the last fifty years, I would have little sympathy for them; and I doubt if many Men would.
Today belongs to feminism, but tomorrow belongs to Men.
Saga1916
Even though Kim du Toit no longer blogs, the intertubes preserves everything, thank goodness.
http://www.theothersideofkim.com/index.php/essays/41/
I know what the Venusian Arts are (they’re disgusting and pathetic) and I’ll admit I don’t agree with that aspect of his essay. I do agree, however, that feminism has been one of the most destructive elements of our society over the past 40 years.
Your exactly right Cassandra. The first part of the article does have some nice points about the decline of marriage destroying western civilation. But as a whole, the article is crap. The guy seems to subscribe to the “pick-up artist” theory of women, basically saying “feminism has ruined all”, so its best to just get laid and never bother making any serious commentment to one. Conservatives can’t just label this a good article because the guy bashes feminism, he also bashes social conservatism and chivalry.
The PUA types like to label men as alphas (guys who just use women for sex and dump them when they feel like it) and betas (guys who actually commit to women and support them. This is completely bass-ackwards. Most alpha-males as descibed by PUA are usually immature punks, and any real manly-man would work his ass off to support the woman he loves. The author claims chivalry does nothing to impress the woman, just her parents.
Obliviously that man has not even attempted to meet women with high moral character. There are a lot of them out there, its just that he needs to subscribe to the all women are divorce-happy bitches in order to try to justify his complete douchbaggery.
Cassandra,
“That’s not my father, my brother, my husband, my Grandfather or any of the men I have loved and admired all my life. Is that really what you think a man is?”
No, but it’ll be your children, your grandchildren and your great-grandchildren, because that’s what the world will be like. I’m really not into the “game” thing myself (and the stuff that the Roissy guy said made me sick…and I thought I was a realist), but I would be lying if I didn’t think the author made some valid points. Disgusting or not, an awful lot of guys are looking into the “venusian arts.” I see it at my job on campus every day. Hell, my male student workers talk exactly like what this guy described, so I don’t think this is going away anytime soon.
Andy,
“Conservatives can’t just label this a good article because the guy bashes feminism, he also bashes social conservatism and chivalry.”
I think the author bashed social conservatism because it insisted on pushing men into marriage. I don’t see why that’s necessarily a bad thing. I’m a conservative, but that doesn’t mean that I totally mindlessly agree with everything they say either. I personally thought the guy was right when he made the point of so-co’s attacking gay marriage while ignoring the (more or less) train-wreck of regular marriage, or what it’s become. I’ll also admit that the very same thing popped into my head a couple of times over the last few years or so. You currently have 50% of marriages ending up in divorce now. What do you think it’ll be like when the Millenials start getting married? Talk about coming train-wrecks…
I’ll agree with the alpha-beta thing. What good is it to have lots of sex (and potentially lots of babies) if you’re not going to be around to father them (and let’s face it, that’s what most of the “alphas” do)? That’s just as immature as anything that feminism does.
However, on the whole, that guy was essentially right. The legal system is heavily weighed against the male and it would be silly for them to adhere into a contract system (marriage) where they would be ruined for little to no gain. (chuckle) I guess that makes me one of those “betas,” since I don’t plan on ever getting married and sleeping around with random women every other day doesn’t really appeal to me.
It appears the people here don’t really understand what Game is (which The Futurist calls the Venusian Arts).
Unless you disagree with the following sentence….
“Making himself a man women find attractive is a learnable skill”.
….. you don’t disagree with Game. You simply don’t grasp what it is, even though he described it well. It is no more immoral than a woman wearing make-up.
Andy,
You clearly have no experience with women (spare us your denials). You still think that trying to gain approval will get you laid, and have not figured out why that is.
And no, your definition of Alpha and Beta is wrong. An Alpha is a man who women are attracted to, period. A Beta (such as yourself) is someone women do not find attractive. It has nothing to do with ‘commitment’.
It is men like you who are useful idiots that do the feminists’ dirty work for them. Even the PUA is morally superior to you, since the PUA is at least honest about his goals. Men like you are also accurately described in the article (see the ‘whiteknights’ part).
any real manly-man would work his ass off to support the woman he loves
Yes, until she leaves you (since 75% of divorces are of women), and you STILL have to pay her half your income as ordered by the judge, even though she is sleeping with a better guy. What a clueless fool you are.
Cassandra,
In the article, he explained well how it could be used for strengthening monogamous relationships, not just being a pick-up artist. Show some reading comprehension.
Cassy,
You should learn more about the subject. Learning Game is no more immoral than a woman wearing make-up or getting cosmetic surgery.
Opposing Game is just like the lefties that oppose gun ownership. The same arguments and counterarguments apply. Whatever point you have about ‘guns don’t commit crime, people do’, the same goes for Game.
There is a website of WOMEN, all well-educated professionals (business, medical school, etc.), who are supporters of men using Game. It is called ‘GirlGame’
http://girlgame.wordpress.com
You are smart enough to get it.
To recap :
‘Game’ is just a recognition that being attractive to women is a learnable skill, and working on that skill. Period. Whether a man uses this for manhy short-term fling or one single relationship, depends on the man.
I think Mat gets it. Cassy *may* get it if she realizes that Game and gun ownership are very analogous concepts. What he needs to revise is his understanding of what ‘Alpha’ and ‘Beta’ is.
For example, John McCain and Ronald Reagan are Alphas, even if they are family men. They exude a dominant, woman-attracting vibe. ONE DOES NOT NEED TO BE A PICKUP ARTIST TO BE ALPHA. EVEN PUAs MELLOW DOWN AFTER AGE 30 OR SO.
The typical nerdy guy who doesn’t have a clue is a Beta. Nothing wrong with him, but he is simply not attractive to women.
The needy wuss like Andy is a lesser Beta/Omega, because he still thinks sucking up to women in a needy way will get him laid (because women SAID SO, so it must be TRUE!!!!). The definition of insanity is repeating the same thing multiple times and expecting a different result.
“What he needs ”
i.e. what both Cassy and Mat need to realize.
How Game secured American independence :
http://www.the-spearhead.com/2009/10/11/how-game-secured-american-independence/
Read it. You owe it to yourself.
Awarded the THE SPOT-ON QUOTE OF THE DAY at:
The Camp Of The Saints.
Thomas,
I know what it is. However, since I’m 36, it doesn’t really apply to me at this point in my life (if it ever really did).
My point about game was while I don’t particularly like it, it’s certainly a fact of life for people today. The nay-sayers may deny all they want, but the notion of game is spreading, not declining (and it is very appealing to Millenial guys). It’s biology at its lowest form (literally…you don’t get more reptilian than this).
However, I also believe that the widespread institution of game in this society, along with feminism, is what will hasten the downfall of our civilization. One cannot simply revert to simple animal instinctual biology with all of its short-term needs and not have it impact the long term. That’s what culture is for. When you substitute culture for darwin biology, then you will simply get a society that acts at an animal level (the freudian id, so to speak). Simple biology relies heavily on “the moment” at the expense of long-term needs and goals. That’s partly why civilization/culture developed in the first place.
While I would agree with your examples such as Reagan and McCain, let’s face it: most guys who use game are not doing it to create a family or to form long-term relationships. In an odd way, the expansion of game is a direct result of feminism and the sexual revolution. When the courtship field was as radically transformed as it was in the 60s onto today, it pretty much guaranteed that game would seep into the culture on a widespread basis.
[...] times, and today Bob awarded Cassy Fiano for nailing the truth! is awarded to Cassy Fiano for this insightful observation about one of the main reasons for the decline of Western Civilization: Feminism has caused us to [...]
However, since I’m 36, it doesn’t really apply to me at this point in my life (if it ever really did).
It applies even to monogamous relationships. People have a mental block about separating Game from ‘PUA’. That is like saying all guns owned privately are Uzis.
face it: most guys who use game are not doing it to create a family or to form long-term relationships.
Those are their choices. But at least they now HAVE choices.
It is important to blame the user and not the tool. All the usual arguments for and against gun control are quite applicable.
In an odd way, the expansion of game is a direct result of feminism and the sexual revolution.
Yes, so women have a hand in creating a climate where such an adaptation emerged.
The losers are not women, though, they are men without Game, who get demoted in the quality of relationships/women they can get (i.e. a guy with Game has 3 mistresses, so a shmoe like Andy gets left with zero).
When the courtship field was as radically transformed as it was in the 60s onto today, it pretty much guaranteed that game would seep into the culture on a widespread basis.
Totally. That is why The Futurist talked about the Four Sirens, and the responding Four Horsemen. That crystallized the whole concept for me.
Thomas,
You are a complete moron. Almost all men I know who are in sucessful marriages (and there’s actaully a lot of them out there) would be descibed by you as needy wusses. And all studies show that those guys have the best sex. And when did I ever say that I only respect women to get laid. I treat my mother with respect, obviously no sexual motivation there. Go head a call me a wuss behind your keyboard, boy. I’ve kicked the asses of several douchebags like you who have done nothing but hurt women.
Also Tommy,
There more I read of your drivel the more disgusted I get. Were you abused by your mother as a child? Thats the only explanation for your hatred of women. You call me needy, yet its you who feels the need to justify your “alpha-male” status by taking advantage of women. Nowadays, its easy to just “get laid”. A real alpha-male will want to commit a women and have a lasting marriage. You may think its sweet to have three mistresses, but just wait until they start claiming you got them pregnant or gave them a STD. I’ve seen many so-called “players” start balling like a baby when that happens.
And all this talk about “game” makes you sound like a 12-year old boy who just found a playboy for the time.
As always, I’m going to point out that everyone needs to get their terminology straight. “Feminism” means a lot of different things to a lot of people. By its original definition, it meant the political, economic, and social equality of women. It’s about education and ensuring that women are not discriminated against. It’s about ensuring that women who divorce their cheating husbands aren’t let destitute.
The modern version, however, is about the progressive movement and, fundamentally, about replacing the family (which most women want!) with the government. It uses feminism and the feminist label, but is not about feminism.
Furthermore, it isn’t that things like birth control are a problem; the problem is its use outside of wedlock (or even a committed relationship). I don’t want to pry into your sex life, Cassy, but I’m guessing that either you and your boyfriend have admirable self-control, or you use contraception. (I’m also guessing that, if it’s the latter, you would get married in a heartbeat if you were to get pregnant.)
It’s the decline of shotgun marriages, not the rise of birth control, that is a problem.
It’s the decline of fault divorce (which men want as well!), not of women in the workplace, that is a problem.
Real alpha males – John McCain, Todd Palin – are okay with having wives that bring home the bacon. Does anyone seriously think that the Palin family is in trouble because Sarah out-earns and out-shines Todd? Or is it that Sarah is a conservative, so no matter how much money she makes or what she does with her life, family comes first?
It’s about the decline of values, not the rise of feminism, that is the problem; traditional feminism lines up well with traditional values.
Roxanne,
You are totally right. Good job.
Andy,
You are becoming more pathetic with very post. You are either a feminist posing as a man, or a man with so little direct experience with women that you probably save the shed hairs of women in an album, while being jealous of Alpha men (whether family alphas or PUA alphas).
Needless to say, you are doing the dirty work of feminism. A ‘useful idiot’, you are.
Plus, your inability to lose your virginity should make your question why you place women on pedestals and still don’t get laid (you dig yourself deeper whenever you deny this). But you won’t Hence, after about 10 years, you will become a real misogynist who shoots up a yoga class or something.
Forget about me, you are totally disagreeing with the posts of Mat and Cassy Fiano. Cassy says how feminism is damaging. Yet you disagree, for pathetic and needy reasons.
Andie (with an ‘i’),
I challenge you to define what ‘Game’ even is. You can’t.
You would rather project your loserdom and woman-worshipping (i.e. begging to get laid) outwards.
So define it. Otherwise, go collect more shed hairs from women at work who actually know your name.
Real men don’t beg to get laid for a variety of reasons, one of which being that they won’t do anything that compromises their self respect just to get sex.
A man in control of himself is enormously attractive to women. A man who has to play silly head games to get laid is manipulative, just as a woman who plays silly games to get what she wants is manipulative.
It’s so amusing to watch the “Game” folks in action. If you don’t agree with them, you’re either a fool, a man hating feminist, or a beta male. None of which is any kind of refutation of the criticisms of PUA sites :p
Cassandra,
But you don’t know what Game is. It is dishonest to judge something without really know it. And yes, Game is relevant for monogamous long-term relationships (despite your uninformed opinion to the contrary).
Game is no more immoral than a woman wearning make-up. Period.
Just like I told Andie, you should first know about a subject before criticizing it. It is part of being an adult.
Mat was accurate in much of what he wrote. Plus, your shaming language does nothing to deter men from improving themselves to a level where they greatly outperform most other men in the dating market. Whattya gonna do about it (other than get passed over)?
There is a blog of professional women (business, med students, etc.) who are fans of MEN using Game :
http://girlgame.wordpress.com
THEY recognize that Game is the friend, and the real concerns are losers like Andie who will go 10 years without female love despite sucking up, become depressed misogynists, and then shoot up a cooking class or join a terrorist network.
Your real worry should be THOSE types of men.
Thomas: PUAs are hardly alpha males, unless you define “alpha” in a rather strange way. Alpha males are leaders and are recognised as such, naturally, by men and women.
PUAs can’t get the high-quality women that real alpha males can get; sure, the women may be attractive, but they are all 22, dumb as a box of rocks, have zero self-confidence, and certainly NOT whom you would want to bear your children.
A pick-up artist, by definition, lacks what it takes to be an alpha male. He might try to act like an alpha male, sleep around like an alpha male could, but he will never be an alpha male.
Finally, humans aren’t animals; we have different values and desires. An alpha human is not an alpha baboon nor an alpha hippopotamus; he’s a man who can have the best life that humans can get. While some of that involves having lots of sex, mature men – human men who grow up – know that it’s about making love to a great woman. It’s also about having a great family (yes, reproducing!) and a great career. The alpha human is the guy with a loving wife who is probably also incredibly hot, a great career, and is happy with himself. PUAs are, by definition, not happy with themselves, not naturally attractive to women, nor on the road to a fulfilling life.
So no, they aren’t alphas. Try gammas.
As to my John McCain et. al. comment above: can anyone seriously see Cindy or Sarah going for a pick-up artist?
PUAs are hardly alpha males, unless you define “alpha” in a rather strange way.
Any man attractive to women is an ‘alpha’. Some are naturals. Some ‘fake it until they make it’, but the end result is nearly the same.
Actually, the smarter the woman, the more receptive she is to ‘Game’. But you don’t really know what Game is, and how ‘PUA’ is just a small subset of ‘Game’.
can anyone seriously see Cindy or Sarah going for a pick-up artist?
Both did (John was 17 years older than Cindy). You have a narrow definiton of what ‘Game’ is, as though only a man who wears funny hats has Game.
The other commenter make a GREAT point that opposing Game (which they don’t even understand) is exactly the opposite that women should be doing. The ‘nice guys’ who think that doing favors for a woman will get him laid (Andy appears to be a textbook example) end up being bitter misogynists after 10 years and prone to lash out violently.
[...] January 5, 2010 · Leave a Comment The number one cause of the destruction of western civilization. [...]
Wow. Well said.
I would add the distinction between equality feminism vs. gender feminism, a phase coined by another woman, Christina Hoff.
By the way, this is one of the reasons why America is considered the “Great Satan” by (generally) Muslim countries- i.e., the general disregard for traditional morality and men in Western countries, and America in particular. Could they be related?
Any man attractive to women is an ‘alpha’. Some are naturals. Some ‘fake it until they make it’, but the end result is nearly the same.
Not true at all.
Roxeanne,
That is the weakest possible rebuttal that you could have put forth. This shows that you know nothing about the subject of human sexuality.
What is funny is that when a woman is corrected about what she THINKS she knows about Game, she changes the subject or creates weak straw-men, which is what we have seen here.
Roxeanne, you don’t know what you don’t know. Period.
[...] “Misandry Bubble” piece when it was released back in January, she had this to say about game: I know what the Venusian Arts are (they’re disgusting and pathetic) and I’ll admit I don’t [...]