So here is a tweet I was tagged in this morning, and in light of the Roosh post and feminist anger towards men whose preferred relationship to women is physical and not emotional, I thought I’d discuss this subject in a bit more depth.
Is refusing to accept, or even pretend to like, modern women, who all have a loaded gun, whether they like it or not, misogyny? Does it mean we hate women? Does anyone really hate women? You’ll love the answer to that one….
Let’s start with the PUA/game/MGTOW community. PUA/game practitioners, as far as I understand them, know that modern women have a particular psychology, aided and abetted by modern feminism, that makes them difficult to deal with: they say they want one thing, but secretly want another. On paper, young women want grovelling supplicants who will scrub out their panties by hand and empty the kitty litter box without being asked, but when they date these men, they hate them. What they really want is what I call ‘a commanding presence’. They want a man who is confident, assertive and who will exert authority. Some women want that to the extreme: basically, they want an asshole. Other women want a Captain, with whom they can serve as a valued and respected First Officer. Bad Boy and Captain are two sides of the same coin – the Captain appeals to mature women who know their own desires but are not interested in abuse, and Bad Boys appeal to immature women who crave drama and theatrics, and playing the victim. The PUA/game community teaches young men how to deal with the immature ladies without getting burned.
They get accused of misogyny for stating things like “women respond to authority”, even though that’s absolutely true. In general, most people respond positively to confident authority, because it leads to a feeling of safety and security. Men like Roosh understand this tendency in women, and teach other men how to exploit that positive response while still protecting themselves.
MGTOWs understand that dynamic, too, they just reject it. Even on this blog, I come in for a lot of hate because I’m a parasite (same word Gloria Steinem used to describe housewives) who contributes nothing to my husband and family and community because I don’t sell my skillset to the highest market bidder and instead offer them in exchange for support to the man I love. I generally take most of the MGTOW hate as misdirected anger at a legal systemthat permits women to brutally exploit men through child custody, divorce and family law, and not genuinely at me, personally. The fact is that I could destroy my husband on a whim, and simply choose not to. This is every bit as egregious as having a law stating that it’s okay for me to own slaves, I just choose not to. Laws permitting slavery are de facto wrong, whether I choose to take advantage or not – I get that, so I forgive most of the MGTOW anger that comes my way. Not all of it, mind you. People who come into my house and get grumpy and spill their drinks get a pass. People who come into my house and shit abuse all over do not. I have a ban hammer, and I do use it.
Neither group, the PUA/game group nor the MGTOW group hate women. On the whole, they hate laws that permit women to take unfair advantage of men and children. AVfM has recently changed its banner line to: changing the cultural narrative, because changing the cultural narrative is what leads to a change in the law. Case in point: gay marriage. The Supreme Court reversed an earlier decision about gay marriage, and declared prohibitions against same sex marriage to be a violation of gay citizen’s constitutionally guaranteed rights. Whether you agree with that decision or not, the point stands that the constitution did not change, the cultural narrative did, and that led to a change in the laws. The way we fix family and custody laws is to change the cultural narrative, and that is the central activism this blog, and many others, are engaged in. Win the hearts and minds, and the law follows.
Certainly you can cherry pick PUA/game MGTOW writers and find horrible things written, likely in piques of anger born of great pain and loss, and isn’t it neat that when feminists write horrible things in fits of anger it’s not all feminists are like that, but when an MRA says something even a little off putting it’s this is the face of men’s rights activists everywhere for all time. Hypocrisy, thy name is feminism. It’s all getting a little boring, quite frankly. And none of it will stop us from continuing our work to change the cultural narrative. PUAs do not hate women. Men who practice game do not hate women. Men who reject a life centered on women and women’s needs do not hate women. Women who reject feminism do not hate women. All the screaming and beer-throwing and censoring in the world isn’t going to magically change facts into a narrative that suits the feminist SJW crowd. I actually had afact-checker from Marie Claire contact me to confirm a statement, presumably taken from the draft article, which was in fact incorrect, so my optimism that the Marie Claire article won’t be a pack of hateful lies has gone from 0.0001% to 0.006%; coincidentally, the same number as a woman’s chance of being raped in any given year.
Critics will immediately (okay, it will probably take them some time to figure out a rebuttal more sophisticated than “die you stupid cunt”) counter that if hating laws that unfairly bestow women with privileges doesn’t mean PUAs/MGTOW/MRAs hate women, then hating laws that unfairly bestow men with privileges doesn’t mean feminists hate men, and I will agree heartily with that assertion. I will also wait right here for critics to show me the law that unfairly privileges men. Show me the legal rights that men have and women don’t. Feel free to use this handy guide to legal rights women have and men don’t. Let’s assume average intelligence among critics (come on, be generous!), and anticipate the next assertion that patriarchal society affords privileges to men that women can’t access, even though those privileges are not enshrined in law. Once again, I’ll wait for the evidence that we live in a patriarchy that discriminates against women, and not men. Feel free to use this handy guide to the powerful, institutional patriarchal forces that discriminate against men and protect women. Some patriarchy! Women are privileged over men and held less accountable by potent, government backed forces elected by predominantly female voters, but somehow women are a victimized minority, and men are abusive oppressors.
Well, well, well, the media is going to town on Democratic nominee for Texas Governor Wendy Davis for some “inconsistencies” in her heroic, single mother, pulled up by the bootstraps narrative. Wendy, who considers herself the epitome of American gung-ho-ism, just get ‘er done survivalist womanhood has perhaps misrepresented herself just a teeny tiny bit.
Struggling, strong independent single mother? Well, she did pop out two kids from two different men, but that’s pretty much where the “mother” story ends. She left her first husband when she was 19 (the divorce was finalized when she was 21) and then immediately enrolled in college and worked at her Daddy’s sandwich shop, where she met Husband 2.0, who just happened to be older and richer than Husband 1.0.
There’s no mothering going on here at all. Sarah Palin, another mama Governor was famous for dragging her cabal of kids everywhere she went, and even caught shit for the expenses that entailed, but Palin can rightly claim that she was governing and mothering at the same time.
Wendy? Not so much. When the opportunity arose for her to go to Harvard Law on 2.0’s dime, she dumped the 8 year old from 1.0 and the 2 year old she had to secure the resources of 2.0 and off she went.
Again, whatever. Wendy isn’t the first spouse to abandon her children for a shiny opportunity elsewhere. It makes her a shitty person, in my opinion, but hardly disqualifies her as a gubernatorial candidate. At least her children were in the care of 2.0 and not left with some underpaid nanny.
Unsurprisingly, the marriage to 2.0 broke down, possibly due to the fact that Wendy is a lying, cheating bitch but maybe not, and a restraining order was issued against her warning her not to use drugs or profanity around the little ‘uns. Quite possibly that was just standard operating procedure Texas style, but maybe not. Wendy was ordered to pay $1200 a month in child support, which is fair enough. Naturally, she was under no obligation to repay 2.0 for the hundreds of thousands of dollars he spent putting her through Harvard Law while she partied naked with men not her husband. 2.0 bled out his 401(k) for honey-bunny, but it was his choice and he gets to live with it.
Again, who cares? Wendy is hardly the first woman to line men up, bleed them out and chuck them to the curb. It’s kind of cute that Wendy moved out the day after 2.0 paid off the last of her student loans, but maybe that was just a case of poor timing?
The fact that Wendy is a shitty mother with two failed marriages under her belt and colleagues who consider her “ambitious” – a woman who is not gonna let a little thing like being a responsible parent get in the way of her dreams – is really not relevant to her run at the Governor’s mansion. Lots of epic assholes have been elected to government offices and have managed to do the job they were elected to do, despite their personal shortcomings. Hell, I seem to recall one guy who let an enthusiastic intern blow him under his desk and he still managed to leave office with every column in the black.
The real issue here is that rather than gather up her barbed wire skirts and proudly own the fact that she put her career ahead of everything and everyone else – she leaned right in – Wendy is spinning a story that is an insult to true hardworking single parents and people everywhere.
Look at me, folks! I took care of my kids, went to school, made top of the class, went to Harvard and did it all on my own! You can, too! All it takes is a little elbow grease and some chutzpah! It’s the American Dream! I’m living it and if you aren’t, well that’s your own damn fault, isn’t it?
She didn’t raise her children. She gave birth to them. Her motherhood was purely biological. Husband 2.0 raised those kids. Why not celebrate that? Look, ladies, you too can form a partnership with a man in which he cares for the children while you scrabble up the ladder!
Leave your husband the day after he pays off your Harvard loans? Again, spin it out, Wendy! Ladies, never feel obliged to a man when he has made a choice to support you! It’s his choice and you owe him nothing! Don’t let guilt control your decisions!
If Wendy pranced on the national stage proud of her accomplishments, and was completely open and honest about how she achieved them, I would still think she was an awful person, but I would give her points for being honest.
The world is full of awful people. No mystery there. What we should care about is honesty. Tell the truth about your life – we are not children and we understand you will attempt to spin your life so it doesn’t sound quite so awful, but the truth will still be visible.
Judgy Bitch has an undergraduate degree in Film Theory (useful!), a Master’s degree in Business Administration and she has recently been admitted to a PhD program in Entrepreneurship and Innovation, but she is not sure she wants to go just yet. She is a full time mother to her three children, PinkyPinkyPie, LittleDude and MissBossyPants and a full time wife to Mr. JudgyBitch. Her children have never seen the inside of a daycare center and her husband has never made his own sandwich, and that makes her very happy. She lives in a small town, has one car, doesn’t own a big screen TV and has never been to an all inclusive resort on vacation. She doesn’t buy scented candles, throw cushions or frozen pizza.