Some are more equal than others, and being superior means you need a helping hand.

men, their rights and nothing more; women, their rights and nothing less.

–Susan B Anthony

Newly minted Yahoo CEO Marissa Mayer has upset feminists by backing away from the label.  Feministing takes her to task for this in the recent post
Marissa Mayer doesn’t particularly care for feminism.  What struck me was the quote the feminist was upset about, the one where Ms. Mayer boldly declares that she isn’t a female supremacist (emphasis mine):

I don’t think that I would consider myself a feminist. I think that I certainly believe in equal rights, I believe that women are just as capable, if not more so in a lot of different dimensions, but I don’t, I think have, sort of, the militant drive and the sort of, the chip on the shoulder that sometimes comes with that.

Women are just as capable as men, except for those things they are more capable at.  No chip indeed.

Even better are the final words in the Feministing post (emphasis mine):

And Marissa, it is too bad that feminism has become a negative word. You know what’s also too bad? Your failure to acknowledge that without feminism, you could never have become the CEO of Yahoo.

Keep in mind that there are two ways to end up as CEO of an internet search giant.  You can create it, as did Google CEO Larry Page and former Yahoo CEO Jerry Yang, or you can wait for someone else to build the internet search giant and become appointed CEO as Ms. Mayer did.  Feministing seems to be arguing that the former isn’t possible for women, without even considering it.  They also seem to be suggesting that Ms. Mayer wouldn’t have been accepted to Stanford and later hired at Google* based on merit alone, and therefore wouldn’t have had the experience required to be in consideration for the Yahoo CEO job.

I can see how Ms. Mayer might not care for feminism after all.

*She was Google employee #20 and their first female engineer

This entry was posted in Feminists. Bookmark the permalink.

134 Responses to Some are more equal than others, and being superior means you need a helping hand.

  1. okrahead says:

    Well, after all, womyn founded Apple… uh wait
    Womyn founded Microsoft… um, that’s not it either
    General Motors? Ford?
    In point of fact, can anyone name a Fortune 500 company founded by a woman? Surely there are one or two?
    How many of these companies, however, will soon have womyn as CEO, if they don’t already?
    Womyn… we can’t build it, but we’ll be more than happy to run it into the ground for $20 million a year and a golden parachute.

  2. Yep, the problem with liberalism the world over (and feminism in particular) no matter what their client/serfs do they will never be able to take credit (or blame) for their own sucesses (or failures). Like 0bama says, “You didn’t build that, it was somebody else”. Talk about ripping the guts out of anything approaching motivation.

    Oh yeah, according to Wikipedia, documents revealing the sexual orientation of astronaut Sally Ride became available upon her death. Is anyone surprised?

  3. Alexander says:

    This actually brings up another interesting point I’d never really considered before. When feminists prattle on about the ratio of male/female executives, I assume they include in that number companies where the leadership is still comprised of the founding members. I would be very interested in seeing how corporate power in our society breaks down when one separates founders from appointees.

    I will look into this. I suspect the results will be damning.

  4. Feminist Hater says:

    Hell, gave up years ago with actually trying to combat the silliness of the ‘victim’ industry. We have all sorts of government sponsored programs now. BEE, AA, BBBEE, Quotas, EE and various governmental departments specifically for women, blacks or other ‘victim’ groups. It’s a farce. If they’re equal, there is nothing in this day and age that is stopping them from building their own companies and creating their own jobs.

    These victim industries now have to make up excuses, create hoaxes and what not, because otherwise they will run out of government funding. Of course that means oppressing others in order to keep getting their ill earned gains. It’s a laugh a minute.

    Quick key. BEE is Black Economic Empowerment, AA is Affirmative Action, BBBEE is Broad Based Black Economic Empowerment. You might ask why there’s such a thing as BBBEE when they already have BEE, well that’s because BEE was only helping the fat cats in the ANC and so the fat cats made a new law that supposedly helps the “BROAD BASE” of blacks, haha, get it?!

    And no, I’m not joking, look it up. Oh, and EE is simply something found in the jobs section of a newspaper or job hunting site. If you see EE next to a job, if you’re white, don’t bother applying. Stands for “Employment Equity”. I just laugh!

  5. A says:

    I work in tech and need to follow various sites in order to keep up-to-date. As we all know, those with the least amount of experience with women respect them the most, so these sites consist of 98% white knights and manginas. There’s been a recent spat of posts concerning “wymmyn’s issues in engineering” at Hacker News, reddit, etc, with all the standard idiocy (that I’m sure the average Dalrock reader can imagine). But the amount of idiocy concerning Mayer is through the roof. Here’s an almost verbatim example of an exchange I saw:

    – Mayer is pregnant, how’s that going to effect things?
    – (indignant) Are you insinuating that Mayer would care more about her child than her job?

    We live in an absurd world. I mean… Shit. Yes, I would in fact insinuate that a mother would care more about her newborn child than her job. She SHOULD. The opposite disgusts me.

  6. Doomed Harlot says:

    Dalrock, I don’t think Feministing is suggesting that it is impossible for women to succeed as Ms. Mayer has on merit alone. Their point is that feminism is what makes it possible for women to thrive based on merit. You may certainly disagree with that, but it would be incorrect to claim that Feministing thinks that women can’t succeed based on merit.

  7. Jim says:

    Why yes, a subset of women with chips on their shoulder who haven’t done nothing but been coddled all their way into adulthood. And worthless as humans get as a result.

  8. zykos says:

    I don’t know Mayer personally, I don’t know her technical proficiency and her leadership abilities. What I do know is that when it comes to the tech industry *I believe that women are just less capable* then men. And here’s the evidence I present: where I work for, there is a very large percentage of female interns, larger than the percentage of female studying the related fields in my experience. These people come in, are given projects, are being judged on them and if they perform particularly well (and this is a very successful company, they want and can afford the best people), the interns get hired full time. What do you think happens? About a third of the guys get hired, and almost none of the girls. In my division, there’s a few women… but none of them are engineers. If they’re just as capable, I would expect at least a few star engineers.
    The women are actually in project management, so they take care of scheduling and prioritizing, but don’t really have a technical knowledge of what’s being done. And that’s fine, because they’re very good at it, but I can’t shake the feeling that they might be there partly because if they weren’t women, the company wouldn’t have their diversity stats right.

  9. Rock Throwing Peasant says:

    okra,
    Speaking of Apple, they hired a woman for their board of directors, Andrea Jung. She steered Avon right onto the rocks and the company may collapse in 2013. What place does she have on the board of one of the most successful companies in history?

  10. Anon says:

    “Women are just as capable as men, except for those things they are more capable at. No chip indeed.”

    To be fair, this is simply regurgitating the expected politically-correct line. If you really look at that statement (which is repeated all over the place these days), you can see how ridiculous it is. Sure, there are things that women can do generally better than men, but there are things that men can do better than women also. To imply that only the former is true is so stupid… yet this is what feminism has become.

  11. zykos says:

    Rock Throwing Peasant:
    “What place does she have on the board of one of the most successful companies in history?”
    See: http://www.apple.com/pr/bios/
    If she wasn’t there, Apple would be accused of discrimination as she’s the only woman in a high position. But note it’s not a position of influence, the board of director’s sole power and responsibility is to oversee and nominate the CEO. At Apple, it means sit back and let Jobs, then Cook work their genius if they want to see the shareholders, the employees and the public at large happy. They very well know that it’s not in their interest to interfere with the CEO and the Senior VPs. So Jung’s power? Virtually nonexistent.

  12. Great Books For Men GreatBooksForMen GBFM (TM) GB4M (TM) GR8BOOKS4MEN (TM) lzozozozozlzo (TM) says:
  13. Rock Throwing Peasant says:

    zykos,
    I get it, but why not find a female that hasn’t led her company into disaster? This is Apple we’re talking about. Hey, I’m not fan of Algore, but he was part of a successful presidency (especially in terms of tech) and got a million bucks for his powerpoint presentation. Look at the other board members. I guess this is more of a tangent and not worth more digital ink. I just can’t see why they didn’t go after Meg Whitman after her failed bid at governor.

  14. Rock Throwing Peasant says:

    GBFM,
    Do you know how tempted I am to buy that for my buddy’s future first wife?

    Nevermind about Whitman. I just checked her bio and she’s at HP. I’m guessing she let it be known she wasn’t finished heading up tech companies. Conflict of interest and all that.

  15. The Continental Op says:

    What place does she have on the board of one of the most successful companies in history?

    Ceremonial Figurehead.

  16. The Continental Op says:

    HP was ruined by Carly Fiorina, and Whitman will bury it.

  17. Lad says:

    RE: that bolded comment… I haven’t watched the interview but a misplaced comma here or there will really change the meaning of that “women are just as capable of men except when they’re more capable” comment.

    Personally I get the impression that her opinions here are things she’s thought only briefly about in the past and, to the extent that her comments are carefully chosen, her goal is to bore the media so they will pull their nose out of her personal life.

  18. slwerner says:

    Rock Throwing Peasant – “they hired a woman for their board of directors, Andrea Jung. “

    Seems that Jung has been “handed” a number of lucrative positions based primarily on her ability to ride the coat-tails of her father and her ex-husband. It’s unclear if she actually did any good for any of the companies. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrea_Jung)

    Seems like it’s been more important for Andrea Jung to have had connections rather than abilities.

  19. zykos says:

    Rock Throwing Peasant:

    Perhaps they chose her precisely because of that fact? What does Al Gore know about making and marketing iPads? What about Iger? They’re not there to make executive decisions, they’re there to shut up and enjoy the $ ride. Perhaps Jung is just more quiet, may offer some “feminine advice” but otherwise knows her place and isn’t a problem. Remember all the instances of women getting into places of power: all the moxie make them into insufferable shrews who think they know better than everyone else and decide they’ll show all these old men how fresh their female perspective is. My take is that Jung may not be this type of woman, and is there as the token woman who makes them look diverse.

  20. Great Books For Men GreatBooksForMen GBFM (TM) GB4M (TM) GR8BOOKS4MEN (TM) lzozozozozlzo (TM) says:

    lozozzlzozo

    http://www.henrymakow.com/feminism_is_key_to_making_of_a.html

    “I haven’t heard our society described better. Our collective identity (race, religion,nation and family) is being systematically erased and replaced by air. “To achieve world government, it is necessary to remove from the minds of men their individualism, loyalty to family traditions, national patriotism and religious dogmas…” G. Brock Chisholm, psychiatrist and co-founder of the World Federation of Mental Health. ”

    “From Gareth in South Africa:

    I’m a “Coloured” male from South Africa and my forefathers also come from history of slavery and colonialism. Ours is the best example of pitting different skin tones, male/female against each other.

    I’ve been following your site for a few months and recognized that ‘they’ are basically trying to achieve with white people what was done to us through slavery. I see many white men maybe disillusioned with white women because of the effects of Feminism opt to go for coloured women. Maybe cause they feel they getting an old-fashion traditional wife. What they don’t know is that they’re getting the same “psychologically frozen” and “independent and negotiable” woman.”

  21. greyghost says:

    Mayer knows the truth about the women in stem game. She knows when it happens her credibility and her standing will always be in question.
    Also this techique the liberals and femminist are using to deminish the uppity ones has been used on black people by the so called black leadership to keep the sheep in line. Obama is doing it now as stated it sounds like he is ripping Romney but more importantly he is keeping his ignorant voers ignorant and in their cages.( cages they believe they wouldn’t have if not for liberalism)

  22. I don’t think that I would consider myself a feminist. I think that I certainly believe in equal rights, I believe that women are just as capable, if not more so in a lot of different dimensions, but I don’t, I think have, sort of, the militant drive and the sort of, the chip on the shoulder that sometimes comes with that.

    This quote her could be attributed to every evangelical christian woman I have ever encountered. Summed up in this one sentence is the culmination of over 100 years of feminism and the ultimate completion of social feminization – feminists (both male and female) who are entirely oblivious to the tenets of the ideology they espouse.

    So complete is this social internalization that there is no pause for either a forethought nor an afterthought about the ideological principles that have become the fabric of a social normalization of feminist ideology.

    To Mayer, just as to evangelical women, self-identified “feminists” are despicable caricatures of hairy armpit, liberal hippies, predisposed to abortion rights, slut walking cartoon people. Yet they both “believe in equal rights, believe that women are just as capable, if not more so in a lot of different dimensions.

    I’ve kept up with Mayer’s honey of a story being bandied about on NPR; mostly being juxtaposed next to Anne-Marie Slaughter’s lament about not having it all and Mayer’s recent pregnancy. Neither one want to fully embrace a wholesale disillusionment with the feminine imperative: Slaughter from the burned-by-the-dream-regret perspective and Mayer from the “I’m not a feminist, but I really am” side of the equation.

    The real irony and humor in their contemplative interpretations is that both are obliviously unaware of the total, social saturation, feminization predisposes their understandings towards. It never enters their cognitive process that maybe it’s the normalization of the feminine imperative that’s the cause of their failures, their celebrity, their status, etc. They’re trapped in the Matrix, but wax philosophical about their conditions.

  23. slwerner says:

    The Continental Op – ”HP was ruined by Carly Fiorina, and Whitman will bury it.”

    Fiorina took over a strong company, and made bad decisions (reorganization, merger with Compaq).

    Marissa Mayer is taking over a troubled company in the hopes of reviving it (perhaps having a female CEO will create enough “buzz” to garner the interest which Yahoo has seen slipping away from them?). I wish her well in her effort, but I don’t think that any subsequent failing of Yahoo can be pinned (solely) on her the way HP’s change of fortune can be pinned on Fiorina.

  24. Dalrock says:

    @Lad

    RE: that bolded comment… I haven’t watched the interview but a misplaced comma here or there will really change the meaning of that “women are just as capable of men except when they’re more capable” comment.

    If anything the video makes it look worse. Check it out on the Feministing post I linked to. The only question is after she makes the bolded part of the comment there is an edit break. It could be for brevity, to edit out a pause, ums, etc. It could also be that she then went back and said that there are areas where men are more capable than women. If so, as head of a media company I’m confident she has the means at her disposal to correct the record after being taken out of context.

  25. Great Books For Men GreatBooksForMen GBFM (TM) GB4M (TM) GR8BOOKS4MEN (TM) lzozozozozlzo (TM) says:

    “da professional womenz ode”

    alpha f**ks and beta bucks
    dat is how we roll
    da butthexting cockass we f**ks and sucks
    and in our anuthes it doth deosul
    alpha f**ks and beta bucks
    it is da way of da fed
    to transfer assetss to dose who butthext
    cuckold dose who pay for our bread
    beta bucks and alpha f**s
    it’s what day teach us we;’re entitled too
    da assetts from betas we plucks
    after da alphas desol us through our hole for poo
    lzozozlzzolzlzlzlz
    cuckold da betas cockhold da alphas
    datsz what day taught us in mba grad school
    as da feiisnsits see no truth nor justice in their laws
    and say da great books for menz was all fools.
    yes, yes, i did very good on my gmats
    dey bernenakifed my soul away, left me with cats

    zlzlzzozozozo

  26. Twenty says:

    The amount of attention devoted to the fact that a failing tech. company just hired Larry Page’s ex-g/f in its latest desperate attempt to become relevant (or, more likely, bailed out by Google) is simple ridiculous.

    Mayer is just the latest in a long list of reasons to not work for Yahoo.

    She also demonstrates how easy it is for women, for all their whining, to get enormous free publicity for doing only what men do every day w/o remark.

  27. The created statistic they like is the one where they pick some fortune 500 companies, then compare those led by women CEO’s versus some led by men, and “prove” that women do better. They don’t mention any other factors, they don’t control for anything like economic cycles and demand fluctuation depending on whats being made and or sold, etc. etc.

    I keep imagining the company that makes cell phone covers doing better then the one making cell phones, as an example (Im not saying that is in any way true)….the “innovation” is changing from sequins to an applique in one, and in the other its some geniuses with a dull gray box making the next real technological jump in the industry.

    Which is better? Like that….

  28. Feminist Hater says:

    On Gareth from South Africa. The guy is partially right. Cape coloureds are mainly a amalgamation of the indigenous inhabitants of the Cape and the slaves brought there by the Dutch after Cape Town was first settled. 80 % or more of the Cape coloureds are that admixture. There was certainly a mixture of Colonial blood. From Dutch, English and other groups. Us Boers came over with families from Europe in order to produce food for the growing Dutch colony and generally went further inland as time went on and the English eventually took control and that led to the “Groot Trek”.

    He’s right, it’s not a pretty picture, as most of that colonial blood comes from sailors on their way to Australia and Nea Zealand. In other words, these children never knew the culture of their parents.

    That’s exactly why I will never go outside my ethnicity, it has zero to do with the hatred of other people or races but I will be damned if my children don’t know where they come from and what culture they belong to.

  29. Pingback: Father Knows Best: Live Bait Edition « Patriactionary

  30. Anon Name says:

    @Doomed Harlot.

    I don’t quite agreed with that. After all even before feminism we already acknowledged many women based on their merits alone- Florence Nightingale and Marie Curie comes to mind. And in countries that has almost no feminism there already a natural progression of women becoming leaders- like Aung San Suu Kyi from Myanmar and Yingluck Sinatra from Thailand.

    So Mrs. Mayer is not indebted to feminism in anyway possible, so of course she could care less about feminism.

  31. Rhino Tingley says:

    “I don’t, I think have, sort of, the militant drive and the sort of, the chip on the shoulder that sometimes comes with that.”

    Am I the only one dumbfounded that individuals in charge of multi-billion dollar companies express themselves no better than small-town lap-dancers ? (no disrepect to small-town lap-dancers intended : they at least earn their living honestly).

  32. lavazza1891 says:

    According to feminists there is not one activity where the threshold for getting in is so low and success is so objectively measured that women can prove that they are as capable as men (or more so).

  33. van Rooinek says:

    Their point is that feminism is what makes it possible for women to thrive based on merit.

    My Mom made a successful career in the 1940s/1950s, long before feminism. No discrimination, no glass ceiling, no sexual harassment…. just promotion after promotion because she was good at her job. The feminist myth that women were “kept out” of the career realm is simply not true: the reason why pre-60s women didn’t usually have careers is because most of them just DIDN’T WANT TO. The few who wanted to (or needed to), were more than welcome.

    Sexual harassment is a post-60’s, post-sexual-revolution problem — the old timers were far too honorable. And sex discrimination began in the 60’s-70s when women started entering the workforce with something to “prove” and with really annoying chips on their shoulders — instead of just working because they loved the work and/or simply needed money, as was the case for the few women who had careers in the old days. In other words, feminists’ own rotten attitudes CREATED the oppression that they pretended to be curing, and they then falsely projected it into past history.

    When the feminist movement got started in the 60s, at first my Mom was inclined to support it. After all, on the surface, they seemed to be asking for nothing more than what she, herself, had. But when she checked it out, she learned the truth, as she told me: “They’re just a bunch of child-hating lesbians!”

  34. TheMan says:

    I wondered why it took so long (for everyone) to say the first few words–namely:

    “Yes, everyone is equal, but some are more equal than others.”

    (That is not the exact way Dalrock said it, but I think I’ve made it a bit stronger.)

  35. ybm says:

    TFH says:
    July 25, 2012 at 2:33 pm

    The traditional customs as they existed as ‘patriarchy’ was truly what allowed women to ‘have it all’. Merely for the price of allowing the brute male access to her orifices she was given a willing slave who will work and provide, and even die on the basis of her whims.

    No thinking man should desire a return to the traditional customs, men should be pushing our society to the extreme limits of woman’s lib. Into the factories! Onto the battlefields! Shackled and chained in the prison-industrial complex! Fleshy toys to be played with and disposed! WE CAN DO IT.

  36. A♠ says:

    As Orwell wrote in Animal Farm:

    “All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others”,

    And, oddly enough, pigs were the characters that said it.

  37. A♠ says:

    @TFH {July 25, 2012 at 12:36 pm}

    From the article you linked:

    “I wonder if there were more shared responsibility if more men would feel guilty too and women would feel less of it.

    That quote says it all, really.

    Their viewpoint is unhappiness/suffering is Zero Sum.

    Therefore, the more they make others suffer, the less suffering they’ll have to endure.

    Sickening.

  38. Feminist Hater says:

    That is sick. Instead of thinking of ways to truly ‘make themselves happy’ they just want to shift the burden. They’re not happy being with children and at home, they’re not happy in the office, they’re not happy with a SAHD, they just not happy whatever it is they do. Always looking for the next better thing, man or otherwise.

    It’s funny though, if they’re SAHM, then’s it’s “the most difficult job in the world”. If they’re the office junky, then it’s “the most difficult job in the world”. I’m seeing a pattern, whatever they do, it’s “the most difficult job in the world”….. Someone just needs to tell them to shut up.

  39. an observer says:

    Since the industrial revolution, women have always been part of the workforce. Particularly since the gilded era, families have been able to survive on one wage earner. As opposed to starving, which commonly happened before.

    Fast forward to the seventies, we have the last vestige of the gold standard buried, contraception and the abortion revolution. Boo yah! Who needs to wipe noses?

    Fast forward again and what do we have. Oops. Working aint as glamourous as promised. Must be a mans fault, surely. Of course, the women are not in charge.

    So one of australias biggest building societies appoints a woman as ceo. Having run it into the ground, she promptly bails for a bigger bucket of money.

    Of course it wasnt her fault the bs almost fell over. Those evil men again. The comapny was so hollowed out, it had to be taken over. By a bank that knew where the skeletons were buried.

    As dave barry always said, i wish i was making this up.

  40. Dave says:

    On her statement that “I believe that women are just as capable, if not more so in a lot of different dimensions”, which I’m assuming was originally given verbally wouldn’t a lot depend on precisely how the grammar work? i.e. does “in a number of different dimensions” apply to “just as capable” or “if not more so”?

    I believe women have strengths in certain areas wherein they may typically be stronger than men. On the other hand I believe that in other areas, men may similarly have strengths that exceed those of women.

    [D: Check out the video.]

  41. Victimhood, low self esteem, and low confidence are trinkets to be worn. They are not agenda’s, they are not clever leverage, they are not true grievances in any shape or form. They are something akin to, say, having a therapist in 1950’s and 60’s Hollywood, or among the wealthy.
    They are the Asberger diagnosis, every family has to have one or what WILL they talk about at the club….
    These claims are less than schtick, at least schtick has a semi coherent goal

  42. Dave
    How can one be capable in a dimension anyway?
    There are 3 dimensions that are of a locus nature. Otherwise, something can HAVE dimension(s) but it cannot be better or worse IN a dimension.
    But who cares, her quote didn’t need to pass through the part of the brain that uses definitions and stuff

  43. bskillet81 says:

    There are 3 dimensions that are of a locus nature. Otherwise, something can HAVE dimension(s) but it cannot be better or worse IN a dimension.

    Some women are, ahh, “wider” in the horizontal dimension than others, which does indeed make them worse in that dimension.

  44. Feminist Hater says:

    TFH, we had a perfect example of that on the forum today. And it wasn’t Jennifer either. Original Trouble, aka Dubious Wonder, and Doomed Harlot were just coming back for more, over and over again. Pure poetry in motion. Hamsterlations in the mist.

  45. Opus says:

    In the single sentence by Marissa Meyer quoted by Dalrock, she uses the personal pronoun, I, no less than seven times (as well as the incoherent ‘different dimensions’). On that basis alone, she would not be my choice for CEO of even the local primary [grade] school.

  46. A♠ says:

    @TFH {July 25, 2012 at 3:15 pm}

    God save us all.

    And if He won’t, I pray He at least makes my end quick.

  47. van Rooinek, my mother says the same thing. In the 1940s and 1950s, there were women who pursued careers but most women chose not to. And class was often more important than sex in who went to university. This was in Australia. There was also an expectation that women would be supported by their husbands, which explains a lot of the supposed discrimination that modern feminists never stop bleating about.

  48. 39joshua says:

    Dalrock, You might find valuable this essay by Rod Dreher and the discussion on his blog which deals with Marisa Meyer and the trade-offs between work and domestic life for women. http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/the-pregnant-ceo/

  49. Jeremy says:

    @Doomed Harlot July 25, 2012 at 11:21 am

    … I don’t think Feministing is suggesting that it is impossible for women to succeed as Ms. Mayer has on merit alone. Their point is that feminism is what makes it possible for women to thrive based on merit. You may certainly disagree with that, but it would be incorrect to claim that Feministing thinks that women can’t succeed based on merit.

    I took their point to be historical in nature. They seem to be suggesting that without past feminism, Ms. Mayer could not have gotten to where she is. I personally couldn’t see more wrong with everyone’s thinking as displayed.

    #1) Science, math and engineering disciplines have been lagging towards achieving even male-female ratios as compared to other industries. Feminism has made almost no inroads into the hard sciences or engineering disciplines. The notion that feminism has tackled these discrepancies is laughable. They haven’t made *any* effort or I wouldn’t see what I see. I work in this industry, I can tell stories about discrimination against women that would make the men here cringe (take note that I am a man myself, women I know confide these things to me).

    #2) Ms. Mayer, having achieved becoming a CEO of a major tech firm by starting as an engineer herself, has (as far as I’m concerned) absolutely demonstrated, based on what I know of these industries, that she was capable of achieving CEO on her own merits without “Feminism.”

    #3) Feministing, I think, is indeed implying that no women succeed without Feminism. They have to do this. They are doing this simply because not doing so damages their support base. They can’t afford to let high-profile successful women outside of the fold, it undermines their entire basis for existence. They need a “corporate line” that they want people to tow to keep control of their message. This situation is not unlike the Black community, wherein despite existing real problems of subtle racism, the cartoon-like leaders of the community (Al Sharpton, etc..) latch onto non-problems and beat up everyone in the press over presumed nonsense.

  50. Retrenched says:

    “Since the industrial revolution, women have always been part of the workforce.”

    That’s impossible. Everyone knows that no woman ever had a job or an orgasm prior to 1965.

    Damn you and your oppressive patriarchal revisionist history!

  51. Johnycomelately says:

    In Australia we recently introduced the EOWA (equal opportunity for women In the work place) agency that will force any business with government contracts to produce annual reports showing their efforts to increase female participation rates.

    Emily’s list (http://www.emilyslist.org.au/) is Australia’s preeminent feminist fascist organization whose sole purpose is to network Australia’s corporate women and female politicians to push their agenda.

    The funny thing is that the irony of creating an organization forcing ‘equal opportunity’ quotas is simply lost on them, a bit like the ‘war’ on terror. 1984 here we come….

  52. Nas says:

    ybm,

    “No thinking man should desire a return to the traditional customs, men should be pushing our society to the extreme limits of woman’s lib. Into the factories! Onto the battlefields! Shackled and chained in the prison-industrial complex! Fleshy toys to be played with and disposed! WE CAN DO IT.”

    – If only. As you yourself said in a previous post, most men would only be too happy to return to a form of relationship where they are the sole breadwinner and work themselves to death as soon as women claim they are done with feminism. Esther Villar predicted this would happen because feminists (ugly women) directed their hatred and anger at their only allies and sympathizers (men) and not at their real enemies (pretty women and comfortable housewives). In fact Dalrock’s post today shows just this as women would say “Hey look feminists are ugly man hating lesbians. I am nothing like that” and men would go “Wow she is so nice and special”. Men are ALWAYS the losers, always the slaves.

  53. Nas says:

    ^ Women are gonna get their all.

  54. Looking Glass says:

    @Jeremy:

    On point #1: They’ve tried in the STEM fields. I believe the Australians even went to insane lengths (read: outright discrimination against men) to “correct” this problem. Didn’t make a dent in the numbers.

    But that comes down to Visual-Spatial ability. By the time you’re even talking college STEM programs, there’s around a standard deviation more men at that capacity level. You can’t level those numbers without, in the States, illegal levels of discrimination against Men. Ignoring the fact it would destroy our technology base in the process.

    Though the funny side issue to STEM is one that never gets mentioned. Especially as you go up in the skill levels: you need the personality to handle the field. It’s a tad more noticeable once you hit the Master’s degree & PhD levels in the pure sciences. Very few Men have the personalities to handle the work, but even far less Women do. It’s mental isolation like almost nothing else. If you can’t handle 2 months by yourself in a shack in Montana, don’t get a hard-sciences PhD.🙂

  55. Mencken says:

    jeremy doesn’t know wtf he’s talking about…. you can figure this out with a quick google….

    “Feminism has made almost no inroads into the hard sciences or engineering disciplines. The notion that feminism has tackled these discrepancies is laughable. They haven’t made *any* effort or I wouldn’t see what I see.”

    o rly???????????
    http://www.ieee.org/membership_services/membership/women/index.html
    http://societyofwomenengineers.swe.org/
    http://www.wes.org.uk/
    http://www.engineersaustralia.org.au/women-engineering
    http://www.engineergirl.org/?id=2950
    http://www.wepan.org/
    etc…

    im a card carrying member of the acm and the ieee if were gonna check creds…. i can tell u that women arent going this route because its hard and it aint sexy and its a lot riskier…. better to go to med school where you can reliably come out making $150k-$350k and have all the prestige of being a doc…. read ‘women in science’ by philip greenspun here http://philip.greenspun.com/careers/women-in-science

    plus med schools have a mandate for 50% women its just a way better roi

    “Ms. Mayer, having achieved becoming a CEO of a major tech firm by starting as an engineer herself, has (as far as I’m concerned) absolutely demonstrated, based on what I know of these industries, that she was capable of achieving CEO on her own merits without “Feminism.””

    lol….. engineering proficiency = c-suite potential? somebody better go tell steve jobs ghost…. no need to start a debate about what it takes to be a ceo…. point is that engineering merit is HA not it and politics is MOS DEF a factor

    ANYWAY: cut out affirmative action, eeo, title ix, etc and then see where mayer winds up in this alternate universe…..

  56. Anonymous Reader says:

    Looking Glass
    But that comes down to Visual-Spatial ability. By the time you’re even talking college STEM programs, there’s around a standard deviation more men at that capacity level.

    Agreed.

    You can’t level those numbers without, in the States, illegal levels of discrimination against Men.

    There is no such thing as “illegal levels of discrimination against Men”, in the US. That is, any level of deliberate discrimination against men is legal, so long as it is couched in the language of “fairness” and “equal opportunity”. See the K-12 system and increasingly the university system for clear examples. Mandating that 50% of all med school openings be filled by women is, if I recall correctly, over 15 years old now.

    Ignoring the fact it would destroy our technology base in the process.

    “We’ll just increase the H-1 visas and hire foreigners” is one very likely response. I heard a university executive say this a few years back, to be specific. No, I won’t name the institution, I might want another contract there some time. Cause and effect is not very well understood in academia outside of science / engineering / technology.

  57. BlackCat says:

    And Marissa, it is too bad that feminism has become a negative word. You know what’s also too bad? Your failure to acknowledge that without feminism, you could never have become the CEO of Yahoo.

    Like I Art laughing already pointed out, this is a quintessential “You didn’t build that” statement. And with typical liberal/feminist immodesty, feministing Marcotte goes even further by implying that by being at the forefront of the feminist movement, she did build it, by association.

    [D: Great point.]

  58. Nas says:

    “An excellent article in NO MA’AM that I think accurately predicts what the future holds.
    We live in a false sexual economy that is propped up by excessive government interference. Women are as independent as a tropical fern in a greenhouse in Iceland. Once the government can no longer adequately provide for them – as is fast becoming the case as our Boomer-topian cultures financially struggle to keep from collapsing under the weight of female inspired socialism – women will turn on a dime and insist that men live up to roles that suit women’s purposes again – and they will take away the two sticks and provide a carrot again if it so suits their purposes, not men’s. However, the carrot will likely have to be presented amidst a delicious stew with beef, onions and other tasty morsels in order for men to willingly don the yoke of “patriarchy” again. Until women come around to this conclusion, and devise their own plan for enticing us back, men should let them change their own damn oil and continue to follow the male principle by Going Their Own Way.” Translation: Men shall forever remain women’s slaves doing their bidding. Females would soon tire of feminism.

    http://no-maam.blogspot.com/2012/07/bull-herding-in-mrm.html

  59. Phantasmagoria says:

    After that jezebel about how women should marry other women and taking a look at some of the other articles in the sidebar, I am now finding myself wondering how the contributors on that website manage to breathe, let along type such biased, bullshit essays. The sheer stupidity of it is doing my head in.

    Though it could also be because I’m at work and having to listen to people spouting praise about 50 shades of grey and how it saves marriages… It’s Twilight fanfiction for crying out loud!

    This just makes me so frustrated.

  60. ybm says:

    Nas says:
    July 25, 2012 at 8:53 pm

    I find your take on things refreshing, allbeit a little familiar to my sensibilities hahahaha but I would say that the government is not the largest contributor to the problem of ‘subsidized’ feminism.

    I would blame the vast majority on beta boy daddy paying daughters way in life. Among white upper middle class women they basically have a free ride in life because of daddies money. Unfortunately the free ride will only last until the day they throw daddy into the grave. You’ll notice it is right around when beta boy daddy can’t bail daughter out of her problems anymore that white women start their husband search.

    We agree about the reason why, but my feelings are that the misguided direction the social safety net has taken (abandon the working man, subsidize the women) is not the biggest influence.

  61. Johnnycomelately

    They have been trying that pathetic policy for decades. Every business that does business with the Australian Government had to have an AA plan as of about thirty years ago. If not, they got named. It was pathetic. It had no effect. If anything the latest reboot of the same policy simply shows their impotence.

    As for Emily’s List, they have succeeded in putting women in the Labor Party into positions where they have spectacularly failed. The list is long and shameful, and as you know, includes two flop female premiers, both of whom lost recent elections by record margins. And of course our current ring-in female PM has created incredibly low party ratings, and her government is on its way to a predicted massive defeat.

  62. Looking Glass, I am not aware of any special efforts to get women into STEM in Australia. Feminism is comparatively weak in Australia, we are a small country, and we don’t have the resources to throw at non-problems.

    As for having the personality to do a pure sciences PhD, that interested me. Could you expand on that? I did a PhD in biology, and there was a great deal of mental isolation involved, which can be quite disturbing. I found the years doing lab work were surprisingly easy, but the year writing up, effectively on my own, was like solitary confinement.

    I could say that you have to be crazy to do a PhD. And if you aren’t when you start, you will be later.

    Science can be a very isolating field, and no doubt that is one reason why women tend to spurn it.

    William Wordsworth on Isaac Newton’s solitude:

    Her pealing organ was my neighbour too;
    And from my pillow, looking forth by light
    Of moon or favouring stars, I could behold
    The antechapel where the statue stood
    Of Newton with his prism and silent face,
    The marble index of a mind for ever
    Voyaging through the strange seas of Thought, alone.

  63. P Ray says:

    @Anon Name
    And in countries that has almost no feminism there already a natural progression of women becoming leaders- like Aung San Suu Kyi from Myanmar and Yingluck Sinatra from Thailand.
    So Mrs. Mayer is not indebted to feminism in anyway possible, so of course she could care less about feminism.

    Pretty sure some feminists will go on to say that these women are not examples of feminist success but merely got their position based on their relatives or parents.
    It’s funny to watch that – they want women in power, but only the “right” women. And even then, the position is one where they are appointed, by men.
    Cue “T3h patriarchy is to blame for everything!”

  64. P Ray says:

    @David Collard:
    Feminism is comparatively weak in Australia, we are a small country, and we don’t have the resources to throw at non-problems.
    “You” here is the general you, not you personally.
    Sorry, in many cases Australia and NZ share views and possibly laws – e.g. cohabitation period of 2 years means you are considered “married” (for the purposes of a break-up there is asset division).
    The only thing keeping it somewhat under check is that prostitution is legal in both countries.

  65. P Ray says:

    @Looking Glass
    They’ve tried in the STEM fields. I believe the Australians even went to insane lengths (read: outright discrimination against men) to “correct” this problem. Didn’t make a dent in the numbers.
    People are free to take any course they want on entering university as long as they meet the grade requirements.
    What they want is women graduating in equal numbers to men in the STEM fields, not 1st year genetic engineering students … that change courses to Psychology or Mass Communication in the next semester.
    The nice thing about properly conducted STEM courses is if you can’t demonstrate the ability to do the work … you don’t get the qualification.
    World-class education in an exacting field … demands a world-class number of failures.
    If everybody who joins the course in the 1st year gains the qualification – how much quality does that course have?

  66. namae nanka says:

    ““We’ll just increase the H-1 visas and hire foreigners” is one very likely response.”

    Angry Harry has a collection of articles expressing concern at how female physicians work shorter hours and how with their increasing numbers, steps like importing foreign physicians, have to be undertaken.
    Emasculating men, virilizing women who then don’t reproduce and then importing foreign people(usually men) to take their place.

    http://www.angryharry.com/esIstheTrainingofWomenDoctorsAWaste.htm

  67. Yes, prostitution is legal where I live in Australia. There are many things surprising to me about America, and I didn’t realise until recently that it is largely illegal in the US.

    I get the feeling that America is more tightly policed in general than Australia. The Government there seems very nervous of men in particular, and just more repressive, as if they are terrified of what men might do.

    Good point about science. It is impossible to fake competence, in most cases.

  68. namae nanka says:

    “The desire to free oneself from work was common to all classes and both sexes. Dr Joanna Bourke of Birkbeck College, London, has studied the diaries of 5,000 women who lived between 1860 and 1930. During that period, the proportion of women in paid employment dropped from 75 per cent to 10 per cent. This was regarded as a huge step forward for womankind, an opinion shared by the women whose writings Dr Bourke researched. Freed from mills and factories, they created a new power base for themselves at home. This was, claims Dr Bourke, “a deliberate choice. . . and a choice that gave great pleasure.”

    The 1960s work-world would have become really fabulous.
    This from the 1870s:

    “We acknowledge no inferiority to men. We claim to have no less ability to perform the duty God has imposed upon us, than they have to perform those imposed upon them. We believe that God has wisely and well adapted each sex to the proper performance of the duties of each. We believe our trusts to be as important and sacred as any that exist.
    It is our fathers, brothers, husbands and sons who represent us at the ballot-box. Our fathers and husbands love us. Our sons are what we make them.”

    “The proper sphere of woman we hold to be in no way inferior to that of man. That sphere is of the highest. As wife and mother she is queen of the most holy aspirations.”

    “The mothers, sisters and daughters of our glorious past will exist no more and the female gender will vanish into epicene.

    “We appeal to our women to be content that as mothers they control man in his early and impressible years,; and as wives they rule him not less surely in the riper hours, and share with him whatever of most worth life and the common lot bring. ”

    http://mypostingcareer.com/forums/index.php?/topic/5236-women-against-female-suffrage/

    But but saying that we are independent from men and then entering their institutions and copying their mannerisms means that it’s the end of men!

  69. I went to see a female GP (family physician) last week. Grumpy bitch. Normally I refuse to see a woman GP. Partly because I want a lateral thinking man on the job, not a woman. And partly because I don’t want a woman having that kind of power over me.

  70. Looking Glass says:

    On the hard sciences, it depends a bit on the field. The more abstract the subject, the most noticeable and requiring the personality type, that can handle isolation, becomes.

    If you’re in something like Programming, you can come up for air quite a lot and you can explain what the project you’re doing produces to other people of general competence. So, you can talk to other people. Engineers can generally do the same thing, so long as what they’re building produces something people have seen. If you’re working on carbon nanotubes, it’s a slightly different issue. So, those types have something of a “work wall” that they don’t get to go past too much, but they’re almost always around a group that understands what they’re doing.

    The “taken to extremes” side of the personality requirement are theoretical physics and abstract mathematics. For theoretical physics, a DSM-qualifying mental problem is pretty much a requirement. This isn’t a complete joke, either. To do the work right, you really end up needing to qualify as delusional, at minimum. It’s generally not “all consuming” like a true mental disorder, but they really have to operate in a mode that is generally considered clinically and significantly deviant.

    But, the theoretical physicists generally have a larger group of people than the abstract mathematics guys. Those guys have to accept 2 things: 1) sacrifice their sense of humor on an altar to the god of Math (no joke, it’ll kill your sense of humor for all time) and 2) never have more than 10 people who understand your work. And that’s if you’re lucky. High-end mathematics is the most mentally isolating of all of the discipline. Someone working “close” to your area can be brought up to speed in 30-40 hours, over the course of a week or so. The rantings of a crazed lunatic in a shack in Montana has more people that understand them than a professional mathematician.

    So, even at the limits of human mental abilities, which is what research science is, you still need to possess a specific type of personality that can handle massive amounts of isolation and mental confinement. Irrespective of Visual-Spatial variance issues, not many women would sign up for that type of work environment.

  71. P Ray says:

    and then importing foreign people(usually men) to take their place.
    Don’t forget paying them less or telling them they have no “experience of the local culture”.
    And have them under the sword of “if you lose your job you get deported”.
    It ain’t all nice and rosy for foreign men either.

  72. P Ray says:

    @Looking Glass
    not many women would sign up for that type of work environment.
    But they will sign up to be managers – whether or not they have the qualifications or the competence necessary to evaluate the work of the people under them.

  73. Thank, Looking Glass. Interesting. I trained as a biologist, and I worked as an applied scientist for a number of years. Biologists seem mostly pretty normal mentally to me. I did have a job for a long time that basically involved reviewing massive amounts of data on drug tests in animals. That job required a certain obsessiveness. But there were plenty of women doing it, and doing it fairly well.

    I know very little about the truly hard sciences, and pure maths is well above my capacities. But it is abundantly clear that it is likely to remain a masculine preserve. Same with theoretical physics.

    In terms of personality types, it is my impression that there is quite a range. Some top mathematicians and physicists are kind of weird: Kurt Godel and PAM Dirac, for example. But some are or were quite normal blokes: John von Neumann and Richard Feynman.

    Steve Sailer poked fun at the idea that aggressive and domineering men were making women uncomfortable in mathematics, referring to a documentary on Andrew Wiles:

    http://isteve.blogspot.com.au/2011/03/pc-whipped.html

    Wiles does come across as the sensitive type. But he has a pretty cute wife, so he must have some clue about being a bloke.

    Sailer also mocked ideas about women in science more recently here:

    http://isteve.blogspot.com.au/2012/07/npr-women-scientists-find-science.html

  74. an observer says:

    David

    I see gps as a last resort. Normally, they discount my observations too much. And they toe the party line.

    I saw a female gp recently, for a minor issue that was resisting diagnosis. She was grumpy as, contributed little and merely wrote a prescription. Best she could offer was to correct my pronunciation of latin terms.

    It took another week but i did finally work out what caused the issue that prompted the visit in the first place.

    I have been doctor shopping since my own gp of ten years retired. Mostly we talked about current affairs, because he at least had some degree of respect. I would research the problem compare the possible treatments and recommend one to him. Much like being at work.

    No such luck now hes retired.

    Of course, the ama promotes the nonsense of more female med students, and lengthening gp training times, contributing to shortages and maintaining demand. Thanks, team.

    Thank goodness for the web. . .

  75. I have genuinely found women GPs to be pretty hopeless. They either can’t or won’t bring their best game. I don’t have a problem with some female professionals, but my having a woman GP just feels wrong.

  76. Opus says:

    I had to attend A&E a couple of years back. They put me in a cubicle and I put on the gown and laid down on the bed. A female Doctor came in to examine me and asked me to lift up the gown. I did so, and she almost fainted with squeals of embarrassement. I am surprised that she did not seek to have me prosecuted for indecent exposure with a claim against her employers the hospital for allowing herself to be sexually harrassed.

    My Dentist however is female and as I lay back and look up at her when she says ‘Now open wide Mister Opus’ it is as much as I can do not to pull her towards me – a problem that strangely I never had with my previous male dentist. I will NOT have my hair cut by a woman.

  77. I have always found that dental nurses have an analgesic effect.

  78. I had a female GP for years, having placed myself in the care of their clinic upon moving here, it was a husband and wife team. I had a small cardiac scare and was in hospital so it was the woman who came to see me, hence she was then my Dr. After awhile, I could no longer manage and found not only a man, but a man from Texas who stands 6’4″. If you are American and maybe even if not, you get the Texas part.
    Funny anecdote along the lines of Opus post, I had one of those camera up the front side exams recently and as I lay waiting for the male Dr. a female came into the room, a young reasonably attractive black female. She raises the gown and starts narrating. “I’m going to touch you now”, Dr. came in with a horror show of a machine in tow, she says “Im going to grip you now”…..OY!
    At that moment it was a dilemma I wrestled with, theoretically, is it better to have a female or male assist on that procedure. In the end, I decided female.
    STEM aptitude is evident. I am a Chemical Engineer, when I studied in the early 80’s there were 35 in class, 6 female, one of those I would say was excellent, intuitive, a thinker, etc. The others were the more common who learned to parrot and regurgitate enough to manage the academic training. In the industry, petrochemicals, ive been 30 years and there have been a smattering of women, as I wrote in my post Just a Dang Feminist Moment at my place
    http://empathological.wordpress.com/2012/03/07/just-a-dang-feminist-moment/
    That is exactly the behavior I see from them, procedures and rules….good, throw a new problem at them, they will try and fit it to procedures and rules.

    Now, I need to go see if the wife will try that narrating bit….

  79. Opus says:

    On the subject of STEM I was having a drink last Saturday evening with an old friend I had not seen for a while (himself an Oxford graduate Physicist) and he told me that his daughter was now at a ‘red-brick’ reading Engineering. He said ‘she can do the Maths alright, but seems to have little real interest in the subject’. Being Oppressed by the Patriachy I suppose.

  80. Opus says:

    I should have added as to my A&E experience – so that you can see that far from liberating women Feminism seems to have made them hopeless:

    When I was a pre-pubescent youngster at an English boarding school we of course had a Matron, who had her own Surgery. One of the boys in my year had some complaint and went to see her. ‘Pull your trousers down’ she said. He balked at this, as she was a woman, and she responded to his reticence, ‘For heavens sake, I’ve seen plenty of THOSE before’.

    They don’t make them like that any more it seems!

  81. lavazza1891 says:

    “The “taken to extremes” side of the personality requirement are theoretical physics and abstract mathematics. For theoretical physics, a DSM-qualifying mental problem is pretty much a requirement. This isn’t a complete joke, either. To do the work right, you really end up needing to qualify as delusional, at minimum. It’s generally not “all consuming” like a true mental disorder, but they really have to operate in a mode that is generally considered clinically and significantly deviant.”

    I am not so sure. I knew some theoretical physicists who studied in Uppsala and most of them were socially normal, but that’s maybe because it used to be the only engineering degree you could take at that university. Most of them now work in the Swedish telecom industry in fields where they need some people skills. I had a theoretical physicist in my company during my military service and he was closer to the cliché, but not worse than I was able to spend 3 weeks alone with him on a mission at another military facility.

  82. lavazza1891 says:

    Sorry, it was “engineering physics” (teknisk fysik), not theoretical physics” (teoretisk fysik).

  83. The average score on the Autism Quotient test is 16. Top mathematics students average 24. The cut-off for clinical autistic traits is 32. I always score about 42.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autism_Spectrum_Quotient

  84. bskillet81 says:

    The “taken to extremes” side of the personality requirement are theoretical physics and abstract mathematics. For theoretical physics, a DSM-qualifying mental problem is pretty much a requirement. This isn’t a complete joke, either. To do the work right, you really end up needing to qualify as delusional, at minimum. It’s generally not “all consuming” like a true mental disorder, but they really have to operate in a mode that is generally considered clinically and significantly deviant.

    But, the theoretical physicists generally have a larger group of people than the abstract mathematics guys. Those guys have to accept 2 things: 1) sacrifice their sense of humor on an altar to the god of Math (no joke, it’ll kill your sense of humor for all time) and 2) never have more than 10 people who understand your work. And that’s if you’re lucky. High-end mathematics is the most mentally isolating of all of the discipline. Someone working “close” to your area can be brought up to speed in 30-40 hours, over the course of a week or so. The rantings of a crazed lunatic in a shack in Montana has more people that understand them than a professional mathematician.

    Most of this is actually misconceptions buil by the media and particularly Hollywood. A Beautiful Mind, Good Will Hunting, Sheldon from the Big Bang Theory are all built on this incorrect stereotype. Hollywood builds this stereotype out of jealousy: With the exception of George Lucas, Spielberg and a few other true geniuses, most actors etc. are dumber than a bag of doorknobs.

    So they lash out against those who are certainly far more intelligent than they. It’s jealousy, nothing more. I’m a mathematician, and work with other mathematicians and physics Phd’s. The popular idea that these folks are all severely autistic or paranoid schizophrenics is pure fantasy. The vast majority are well-adjusted, sociable, and emotionally stable.

  85. Pingback: Why are women so unhaaaappy? « Complementarian Loners

  86. Random Angeleno says:

    As a math major myself, I recall fondly that we math majors were a rambunctious lot. That’s not to say there weren’t nerds among us, there were, myself included, but even they tended to be regular people. Even the most brilliant guy in my class who subsequent went for his doctorate was just one of us socially. The true genius who is a loner is definitely rare.

  87. lavazza1891 says:

    Pictures of maths students at Uppsala university in the eighties.

    http://www.moebius.se/historia.html

  88. lavazza1891 says:

    Maths students playing rock/punk.

    http://www.moebius.se/rockbanden.html

  89. Jacquie says:

    The key is finding those you feel comfort conversing with and want to spend time with. When you get criticized repeatedly for how you express your thoughts or the subjects discussed never get beyond trivial the tendency is to shy away and stay to yourself for the most part. Sometimes it seems that the only choices are to tone down intelligence or suffer ridicule by others who need to make themselves feel superior. It has been difficult to not feel like the odd one out, especially when the most contempt comes from a parental source.

  90. Patr333x says:

    The reason the feminists are angry is that they have to create the illusion of women being equal to other women, not just women being equal to men. Trying to connect Mayer getting her job with feminism is a way for any feminist women to say that they could have done the same. It is just smoke and mirrors.

  91. Feminist Hater says:

    Trying to connect Mayer getting her job with feminism is a way for any feminist women to say that they could have done the same. It is just smoke and mirrors.

    It’s probably even much simpler than that. If they don’t show to the world that they were the cause of her success, the wider population will start to question the very ‘need’ of feminism and feminists. Once that starts, funding from government and the private sector are cut, new legislation bills are scrapped before being passed and old legislation is scrapped as it is seen as worthless, universities and other tertiary institutions cut back on their feminist quotas and instead start seeking those more competent, which inevitably leads to more men being allowed in and masculine traits, that are now dormant, will start to reassert themselves.

    Feminist lobby groups will thus have a major reduction in their political power and their sponsorships; and I think that truly frightens them.

  92. Nas says:

    Patr333x says:

    “The reason the feminists are angry is that they have to create the illusion of women being equal to other women, not just women being equal to men. Trying to connect Mayer getting her job with feminism is a way for any feminist women to say that they could have done the same. It is just smoke and mirrors.”

    – I think you really hit the nail on this one. This is exactly what is happening and will happen more and more. Ordinary women are just starting to figure this out and over time this will get even clearer for them; that feminism primarily benefits rich white women.

    We will see more and more women try to distance themselves from feminism or at least the feminist label and men would be only too happy to get them thinking “Oh she’s so special.” I think we see a microcosm of this with the Men’s Rights Movements as men flocked to women like Susan Walsh who ostensibly claim to be against feminism.

    Doesn’t matter if feminism stays or goes, things are not gonna get any better for the American man.

  93. Nas says:

    ybm,

    – Thank you for your response. I think we might have similar views because we are both young and perhaps read (some of) the same books.

    You say: “I would blame the vast majority on beta boy daddy paying daughters way in life. Among white upper middle class women they basically have a free ride in life because of daddies money. Unfortunately the free ride will only last until the day they throw daddy into the grave. You’ll notice it is right around when beta boy daddy can’t bail daughter out of her problems anymore that white women start their husband search.”

    – I understand what you are saying. It makes sense that wealthy women do not have any particular need for a provider husband. Feminism just got rid of the social stigma associated with being a slut or a spinster.

    But to me it still doesn’t explain the acceptance of feminism amongst the general female population. I have asked you before why do you think women freed the slaves? Did they feel (rightly haha) they can just pick up a slave when they need one; once they reach 40? Did they just get fooled into thinking that it will help them the same way it has helped their rich white sisters? Or that society has reached a level of advancement that government provides a suitable replacement to a man of the house?

    – I personally am glad for feminism. Heresy in the manosphere I know but I will say it. Men have less responsibilities and can finally live freely. The occasional call to man up is only an annoyance and unlike before can easily be shooed away and called for the blatant manipulation that it is. It exposed female nature for all to see and made ordinary men like me think deeply about things. If I hadn’t confronted these circumstances of exorbitant female privilege, male exploitation and slutty old women refusing still to marry I would have almost certainly have become a husband working myself to death for an ungrateful family. Like my poor father.

    The Beta drones of course don’t want to be free. They feel directionless without their masters. You will in fact hear them say “Men like to feel needed.” I have mentioned several times by now that I think the most likely future outcome will be that females will say they are tired of feminism and want the “traditional gender roles” back. I guaranfuckintee you, men in this country will not see this as a bad thing. They will gladly work themselves to death in return for regular access to a vagina.

    – BUT, you have hinted that things might be different for the upper classes. You have written that white upper class men are tiring of their women and are no longer interested in bailing them out. My question to you is do you think this will hold true for the men of my generation? Or do you think that these men will turn beta and gladly play white knight to their used up cum buckets when the women claim that they are reformed and promise to disavow feminism?

    I admit that I am a sucker for justice and would like nothing better than to see these women get what is coming to them. But I have come to the depressing conclusion that this will probably not happen.

  94. ybm says:

    Nas says:
    July 26, 2012 at 2:36 pm

    Oh God I’m computer illiterate I hope this works!

    I have asked you before why do you think women freed the slaves? Did they feel (rightly haha) they can just pick up a slave when they need one; once they reach 40? Did they just get fooled into thinking that it will help them the same way it has helped their rich white sisters? Or that society has reached a level of advancement that government provides a suitable replacement to a man of the house?

    For the bottom class of women, the government has stepped into the role of husband. As the social safety net was gutted, and anti-union sentiment was indoctrinated into men (notice how most of the world’s largest unions are public servants, teachers, and nurses? The government has become a tool to subsidize women of all classes. The lowest class women simply have access to the largest amount of benefits.

    For middle class women it is indeed because they feel they can pick up a slave. This is what Dalrock rails against with: Man up and marry those sluts! And what white women who comment on blogs are so afraid of, and will abandon political feminism to maintain. Marriage 3.0 so the phrase goes.

    I personally am glad for feminism. Heresy in the manosphere I know but I will say it.
    I guaranfuckintee you, men in this country will not see this as a bad thing. They will gladly work themselves to death in return for regular access to a vagina.

    Agree on both counts. I would expand “this country” to all anglo countries however. In Continental Europe class lines are far more clearly defined, and continental women, despite being more promiscuous, have none of the Anglo ‘princess’ synrome. Continental women are cynical realists and do not expect a ‘slave’ of top caliber. I would even recommend an anglo male expatriate there if he has the monetary ability to do so. As Continental women are….intoxicating to say the least.

    You have written that white upper class men are tiring of their women and are no longer interested in bailing them out. My question to you is do you think this will hold true for the men of my generation?

    The problem of the middle and upper-middle class is that they lack something the upper class has: Generational Wealth. Meaning that I could not consume the wealth of my family in my lifetime even if I were to dedicate myself to the task.
    For these (almost 90% white) women, they have the harshest reality of all: They will consume their inheritance quickly, and because they lack access to the benefits lower class women have, they will fall into the lower class. My hope is that upper class men will have the foresight to pick from working class women instead of our peerage or ideally, expatriate. Which all upper-middle class white men are capable of doing. In doing so they could easily turn their wealth into generational wealth in their lifetime.

  95. ybm says:

    Even after attending an English all boys school and a decade of English lessons I still cannot get your grammar correct….

  96. farm boy says:

    feminism primarily benefits rich white women

    Poor women also. They get lots of government goodies, and bad boys also. Kind of win-win for those types. Feminists would scream bloody murder if they were reduced. It is all for the “family”, you see.

    Middle and working class women are the losers all around. Many might want to get married, but it will not happen. But don’t feel too sorry, for those that do marry, there is divorce theft.

  97. farm boy says:

    He said ‘she can do the Maths alright, but seems to have little real interest in the subject’

    Women just are not interested in STEM. At most it is just a means to an end for them. Why can’t people see that the genders are truly different?

  98. Women are interested in biology. Much less so in the harder sciences.

  99. Anonymous says:

    A little off-topic, but… filed under “How dare those men die defending us and expect us to be worth dying for” in regard to the Aurora, CO, shooting:

    “The Soapbox: The Aurora Shooting & The Myth Of Men’s Obligation To Be Heroes,” by Jessica Wakeman, The Frisky, 25 July 2012
    http://www.thefrisky.com/2012-07-25/the-soapbox-the-aurora-shooting-the-myth-of-mens-obligation-to-be-heroes/

    “Today In WTF: WSJ Columnist Wonders If Women Saved By Their Boyfriends In Aurora Were ‘Worthy Of The Sacrifice’,” by Amelia McDonell-Parry, The Frisky, 25 July 2012
    http://www.thefrisky.com/2012-07-25/today-in-wtf-wsj-columnist-wonders-if-women-saved-by-their-boyfriends-in-aurora-were-worthy-of-the-sacrifice/

    The Frisky rides again.

  100. jg says:

    How is it that Danica Patrick is able to ga back and forth between Indy500 and Nascar? I have never seen any of the male NASCAR or Indy500 drivers ever do this!! Woudn’t there be a difference between the two types of cars being driven and hence different driving styles? Wouldn’t she also have an advantage over other male drivers irrespective of what car she drives because she small made and lighter in wieght than her male counterparts?

  101. Retrenched says:

    @jg

    Nah, it’s not unheard of. A lot of famous drivers have done both NASCAR and Indy Car (AJ Foyt and Mario Andretti for example).

    As for the weight issue, I’ve heard that NASCAR adds weight to the cars of smaller drivers to even things out so that all cars weigh the same. Indy however does not do this, so Danica did have an advantage over the men there. Robby Gordon made an issue of it, which of course made him the target of lots of shaming language.

  102. Anonymous Reader says:

    farm boy
    Women just are not interested in STEM. At most it is just a means to an end for them. Why can’t people see that the genders are truly different?

    That’s overstating things a bit. I personally know women in engineering and science who are good enough at their business to be quite functional. Some have earned PhD’s. The problem is, they are a minority, and given what we keep learning about brain function likely always will be. A semi-wild guess would be 10% to 20%, varying across science and engineering disciplines will be qualified women. Equality of opportunity has been around for a long time. The problem is, feminism demands equality of outcome, and there’s just no way to get to 50% of all computer scientists, or chemical engineers, or biochemists, etc. being female without throwing all standards away.

    At least a couple of the woman PhD’s I know (engineering, chemistry) are livid at the idea of Title IX being applied to STEM, because it would make their own credentials meaningless in a few years, while forcing them to teach classes “full of airhead blondes” (their own words).

  103. People outside America, like myself, tend to assume that any prominent woman in America has benefitted from affirmative action. This Title IX thing simply completes the picture.

  104. Phantasmagoria says:

    Equality of outcome is a stupid idea. Unless you drag everyone down to the same level of stupidity, it can never happen.

    Besides, they say never to argue with idiots, they’ll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

  105. Twenty says:

    How is it that Danica Patrick is able to ga back and forth between Indy500 and Nascar? I have never seen any of the male NASCAR or Indy500 drivers ever do this!! Woudn’t there be a difference between the two types of cars being driven and hence different driving styles? Wouldn’t she also have an advantage over other male drivers irrespective of what car she drives because she small made and lighter in wieght than her male counterparts?

    Ah, cars. Not as much fun as guns, but a close second.

    Drivers do change series, and occasionally dabble in multiple series at once, although the latter is not really compatible with a dedicated championship challenge. There is quite a difference between driving an Indycar and the NASCAR CoT. As a general matter, lighter drivers do enjoy an advantage. Even when overall car weights are equalized, a lighter driver still gives a team an advantage as they can choose where to place (more of) the ballast weight on the car for superior balance and handling.

    Patrick’s real advantage is money. She attracts sponsorship dollars, and how fast remains a question of how much. Because of her high profile, she’ll typically enjoy a better-than-otherwise car.

  106. namae nanka says:

    “Women just are not interested in STEM.”

    Remove the M already, iirc the percentage is in 40s.

  107. Looking Glass says:

    @bskillet81:

    Hollywood normally only talks about truly intelligent people when there is something wrong with that person. So, there’s definitely a level of jealousy, but also a lot of selection bias as well.

    However, while Hollywood characterizes those types, neither Hollywood’s issue or your own experience undermines my point. I was talking about the “extreme end” of things for a reason. There’s simply not a lot of guys working in those areas, as they take both the intelligence (of the people you work with) and a specific type of personality able to handle the outer edges of that type of work.

    This doesn’t mean they won’t seem normal to most people nor are they truly abnormal (except in intelligence). At least until you know how to push their buttons. When dealing with a set of people that have spent most of their lives holding back how they interact with others, you have to understand that much of what you see is partially a facade. It’s not fake, but it’s only a small part of who they are. If you do get past the barriers, you’ll see why that “extreme end” can be characterized as a mental disorder (it’s not, but that doesn’t mean they wouldn’t actually qualify if it carried throughout their personality). It’s a level of thinking that’s foreign to almost all of the rest of humanity, which to the profession of Psychology, would be a mental disorder.

    And, since they came up, it should be pointed out that Richard Feynman was a well noted player, when he so chose to be. So, yeah, he had Game, haha.

    Andrew Wiles, or any professor of a hard science at a top university, actually have monster Alpha streaks to them. A lot of it comes down to the work, thus making them massively aloof. But among who they tend to marry (generally the more intellectual females), they generally do pretty well. Go figure that research work actually creates a natural Dark Triad trait in those that work in the fields.

  108. Yes, Sailer doesn’t understand Wiles. The bloke is English. That is how they behave. I wish people would learn that quietness, reticence and introversion are not signs of a small ego. As I said, Mrs Wiles is, IIRC, a very attractive woman. You don’t get to be a Professor of Maths without a solid ego and good political skills, and the man must have a huge ego and drive to have thought he could solve the huge problem he took on.

    These guys think cold. Really cold. They may not be clinically autistic, but they can focus on the crucial facts, while excluding the background distractions, in a way that most people just can’t.

    The next time some guy seems shy and aloof, it may not be because he is nervous about talking to you. Maybe he just thinks you are too stupid to be bothered with.

  109. Opus says:

    @David Collard

    My sometime girlfriend (very good looking of course) recently said to me ‘You are very English’. I asked her in what way? She said that it was hard to define, but eventually, she said, that I was aloof but caring (especially of under-dogs). I am entirely unconscious of being either.

    I think America is perhaps very different – as maybe Australia, Bruce.

  110. Looking Glass says:

    @David:

    You spend a lot of time thinking “how little effort can I put out because this person is dumb as a rock”. Trying to explain concepts becomes hard, as you spend most of your time attempting to downscale the concept. It gets really weird when you start having to think that way with professors at good schools.

    Yeah, there’s a lot of ego involved.

  111. Australians are not the way we are portrayed. We can be very reticent. Even when we are garrulous. As Nietzsche wrote, one way of hiding one’s true feelings is to say a great deal.

  112. 8ball says:

    I’ve never understood this attitude. the evntual outcome for an social justice movement (that’s honest about its motives at any rate) is eventual obsolescence. The fact that Mayer feels that she hasn’t felt discriminated against should be a victory for feminists.

    But, of course, feminists dont appear to be honest about their motives

  113. van Rooinek says:

    Women just are not interested in STEM.

    namae nanka: Remove the M already, iirc the percentage is in 40s.

    The M stands for “Math”, not Medicine.

  114. imnobody says:

    @Nas

    Your Danielle Crittenden video shows what I have always said about these so-called “traditional women”. In the whole interview, there is nothing about how men feel or what men need. It is everything about what women want and need and how society has to change so women have their way.

    The one sentence Ms. Crittenden devotes to men is to say that women should demand more from them: more commitment, more responsibility.

    As I have said before, feminism and so-con women are two branches of the same female pedestalization movement: it is everything about women fulfilling their desires and men paying the bill for this. Men as tools for women.

  115. imnobody says:

    @Nas

    But to me it still doesn’t explain the acceptance of feminism amongst the general female population. I have asked you before why do you think women freed the slaves? Did they feel (rightly haha) they can just pick up a slave when they need one; once they reach 40?

    In a word, yes, they did. You don’t know how the Patriarchy was (I lived it in my country). Marriage seemed a fact of physics, like the law of gravity. Everybody got married (and has been this way for centuries) so nobody contemplated the possibility of marriage not being there for everybody. No women imagined a world where men didn’t want to get married.

    As I have said before (scroll down to see the relevant part)

    http://www.the-spearhead.com/2011/05/23/kay%E2%80%99s-man-child-revisited/#comment-92075

    women accepted the feminist movement because they thought they were going to get a better deal in marriage and in life. They were going to have more privileges and men would still be willing to hold their end of the traditional deal. After all, men need women, right? It’s biology.

    This is what the mantra “having it all” means. All the old privileges (marriage with kids, white picket fence) with the new ones (wonderful career, hot sex with alphas). They never realized that, by pursuing the new privileges, they were giving up the old ones.

    In fact, the first generation of feminist women had it all. After having a feminist youth, they were able to get a traditional marriage, because men hadn’t still changed. The second generation has had harder and this would be harder and harder but most women hadn’t still realized. This is why Heather (see Dalrock’s post) is able to

    Women didn’t know that, by freeing themselves from the traditional duties, they were freeing men from the same traditional duties (what Danielle Crittenden regrets in his video). If they had knew, they would NEVER have supported the feminist movement.

  116. Feminist Hater says:

    Just as well, men needed to see women for what they were. Now the cat’s out the box and men can now discern which women are really deserving of the sacrifice of marriage and which women deserve to be kicked to the curb and left to rot with the cats that were let out of the femcunt box.

  117. Anonymous Reader says:

    “Women just are not interested in STEM.”

    namae nankae
    Remove the M already, iirc the percentage is in 40s.

    Thanks to a variant of Title IX. Don’t confuse Federal mandates with the law of supply and demand.

  118. Anonymous Reader says:

    imnobody
    In fact, the first generation of feminist women had it all. After having a feminist youth, they were able to get a traditional marriage, because men hadn’t still changed.

    Exactly.

    The second generation has had harder and this would be harder and harder but most women hadn’t still realized.

    This is what the HUSsies are all about – clinging to their “right” to ride the carousel, or a carousel-lite version of “only” 5 dicks prior to “settling”. This is why SW gets so worked up and angry at the androsphere – her Beta didn’t mind that she’d ridden the carousel-lite, so how dare younger Betas become choosy, just because they weren’t among the 5 (or 10, or 15…) ponies ridden. How dare men decide they get to be gatekeepers of commitment! The idea!

    In aviation there is the concept of being “behind the curve”, i.e. trying to fly the aircraft as it was a few minutes or seconds ago vs. how it is. Falling behind the curve can lead to a stall-spin, at low altitude that breaks your airplane. The 2nd stage feminists are way behind the curve, because they never conceived that men would react to their actions, ever, and can’t come to grips with the fact that we have reacted, and we continue to react.

    And now, for a moment of nostalgia….

    They. Just. Don’t. Get. It.

  119. Feminist Hater says:

    This is why SW gets so worked up and angry at the androsphere – her Beta didn’t mind that she’d ridden the carousel-lite, so how dare younger Betas become choosy, just because they weren’t among the 5 (or 10, or 15…) ponies ridden. How dare men decide they get to be gatekeepers of commitment! The idea!

    Yes, stop painting them with a Scarlet ‘S’! The nerve of these men! Sheesh.

  120. Nas says:

    imnobody,

    Thank you for your response. I have read that comment of yours on the Spearhead before and thought it was really excellent. In fact I often browse through that site to look for comments by you or Keyster but I don’t comment on there myself since I have no interest in engaging lunatic racist bigoted idiots that seem to frequent that site.

    Not to detract from the rest of your comment but I think it is still relevant. You said: “You don’t know how the Patriarchy was (I lived it in my country). Marriage seemed a fact of physics, like the law of gravity. Everybody got married (and has been this way for centuries) so nobody contemplated the possibility of marriage not being there for everybody.” Actually I too have seen this patriarchy where EVERYBODY gets married. I am not white American and actually immigrated to the US while quite young from a country that is traditional and patriarchal (and of course poor). So I too have witnessed firsthand that patriarchy isn’t exactly rosy for men.

    I can’t find the link to a previous comment on this site where you said that things are actually better for men now than before because “we actually have a choice”. You say we are not burdened by responsibilities of being the sole breadwinner of the family. Also since women want alphas and all can’t marry alphas, they will make the life of their hardworking non alpha husbands miserable. Then you cited the example of your own father and mother to make the point. That really spoke to me! I saw parallels to that of my own family. I actually feel this way and would dare say that I am glad for feminism because it freed us men from our traditional burdens.

    I only wish more of my peers would see it this way but I sadly noted in my previous comments that most men don’t. Why don’t they want to hear that things are better now?!! They don’t want to be free but in fact long for the good old days (as if they actually know what patriarchy is really like) and a return to traditional gender relationships. There aren’t very many like you telling us young men the truth; that patriarchy isn’t what is cracked up to be. But American men want to be slaves to their women and would gladly work themselves to death in return for semi regular access to a vagina and will justify it all saying “Men like to feel needed.”

    So if and when American women decide they have had enough of feminism (or certain parts of it or whatever), things are not gonna get any better for the pussy worshipping American man. Women will just blame everything (societal decay, whatever) on men and burden them with more responsibilities. Women will get their way and men will be suckered once again. That is a depressing thought but I have accepted it.

  121. farm boy says:

    • Although women fill close to half of all jobs in the U.S. economy, they hold less than 25 percent of STEM jobs. from
    http://www.esa.doc.gov/Reports/women-stem-gender-gap-innovation

    Also,
    More than half of STEM degrees awarded to women were in the biological sciences from
    http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2010/03/22/stem

    Doing some very approximate math here, assume that of the 25%, half are biology related, that leaves 12.5% for the rest of the STEM fields, physics, math, engineering and computer science. I am familiar with CS and engineering, and the women are not there. The question is why? A combination of factors, I do think.

    1. Biology is the STEM field most oriented toward women’s learning style, which is memorize and regurgitate. The herd does what the herd is told to do. Also, it fits in well with the “one with nature” green ethos so prominent among the females.

    2. The other STEM fields are difficult, and for one to be good, require more than regurgitation. The best engineers and CS people have an intuitive understanding of things, and can come up with creative, non obvious solutions to problems. Females rarely have this quality, for whatever reason.

    3. Women, for whatever reason, are just not interested. In High School, I was gobbling up electronics, physics, computer science, and chemistry on my own time because I loved the subject matter. There were other guys who had similar dispositions. Not so the girls, they were interested in “girl stuff”.

    4. There are more smart guys than ladies. The IQ curve for guys is much more distributed. This means that there are lots more really smart guys than gals. Sorry, that is the way it is. Many of these intelligent guys are attracted to STEM, as they should be.

    It is best not to try to fit a signal with a 2 MHZ bandwidth through a 1 MHz bandpass filter.

  122. As a biologist, let me make a couple of comments. Yes, one does have to learn a lot of detail. But making sense of it and coming up with new insights is not easy. Good biologists are good scientists. Darwin was as great a genius, in his own way, as Newton.

    Some people have physical intuition. Some people have biological intuition.

    The skill in biology is often spotting patterns and noticing crucial detail in a mass of data. It is a synthetic skill, whereas the physical sciences depend more on analysis. Good biologists think like House MD. It is a diagnostic type of skill, and not everybody can do it.

    Women do like biology. At least half the honours classes in zoology, when I did it, were girls. This was in the late 1970s. There are some good female biologists, but the best are men. Wilson, Trivers, Hamilton, Dawkins and so on.

    Mathematics requires a high raw IQ and few men, and even fewer women, can handle it. This limits the number of people who can do engineering, for example. But there are plenty of ways of doing good science that do not require much, if any, maths. Geology, biology, organic chemistry, and so on. Some people are mathematical chauvinists, but important insights and discoveries do not always require maths.

    Lastly, just because a subject looks easy, don’t assume that making progress in it is a trivial matter. Coming up with something novel and true in subjects like biology, history, anthropology or sociology is not easy. Just try it. I have seen physicists trying to do biology or sociology. It is not always a pretty sight.

  123. Pingback: Linkage Is Good For You – 7-29-12 | Society of Amateur Gentlemen

  124. imnobody says:

    @Nas.

    You are so right. Excuse me for telling you how things are in the Patriarchy. Being from a patriarchal country, you don’t need any explanation.

    About American men, after a few years of writing and reading in manosphere sites (mostly to improve my English), I reached the conclusion that, although feminism has been a very destructive force, it hasn’t been the main cause of the bad state of gender relations in America.

    The main cause has been pedestalization. You cannot understand America without realizing that women have ALWAYS been put on a pedestal, pampered, obeyed, cherished. Men have put pleasing women as a center of their existence and have always eager to sacrifice all his life for a woman. It’s like Esther Vilar says: “Man’s natural state is slavery and he is only happy when he is a slave”.

    Pedestalization predates feminism. Jung noticed in the early XX century that, in America, men tend to consider their wives as their new mommies, which they are happy to obey by returning to their boyhood. This is why the word “Mom” has so much strength in America. You can see this pedestalization in the temperance movement of the XIX century and some people think it goes back to the Great Awakenings. I suspect that the Puritans were already somewhat pedestalized, because the society they built reflects female values and not male values (read “Albion’s seed”)

    As a result of so much time of pedestalization, American men are born to serve women. They want to be slaves, à la Esther Vilar. They are only happy this way. They don’t want to be free. His entire identity revolves about being a provider and a protector of a woman. This is why a man can be shamed very quickly with the sentence “you don’t get laid”. Translation: Since your worthl in life is to be a tool for women and no woman wants you, you have no worth. This goes straight to the bone, to the center of male identity and women have used it very effectively with shaming purposes.

    If an American man is lucky, he finds a female master and is ruled by her throughout her life. If an American man is unlucky, he doesn’t find a master or he finds a master and loses it. Only in these circumstances, American men can start to question their innate pedestalization. Most of the guys who you see in the manosphere are the unlucky ones. But there is always the melancholy of serving the female, the longing to be reunited again with Mom, (as some psychologist say) the male wound. This is why many men in the manosphere long for a mythical patriarchy that never existed. Since they didn’t know the patriarchy, they think it is like “Daddy knows best” fantasy. They long to be the mule slave for females again. Like Esther Vilar says, “since men can only be happy if they are slaves and feminist women have taken the happiness of being slaves from them” (I’m quoting by heart and the wording is not accurate at all):

    This is why feminism has reached such ridicules extremes in America. Anything to serve the ladies. Anything to make the ladies happy. Men and women have internalized that women are to be served. This is why this crap of the “inner goddess”. If a woman in my (now feminist) country will say she has an inner goddess, men and women will roll on the floor laughing. She would be mocked for the rest of her life.

    As you said, this is why, when feminism ends, nothing will really change: women will just blame everything (societal decay, whatever) on men and burden them with more responsibilities. Women will get their way and men will be suckered once again.

    Anything to please the ladies. When the ladies wanted a patriarchy, American men gave them a patriarchy. When the ladies wanted feminism, American men gave them feminism. When the ladies want another-thing, American men will give them another-thing. Laws are changed only to please women. The problem is not feminism (which is very bad): it is pedestalization.

  125. Jon says:

    Cohabiting rights in this instance in the UK….

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2180436/Ex-girlfriend-soldier-killed-Taliban-blast-row-father-65-000-payout.html#comments

    Seems strange – if she had a baby then that would be appropriate of course but strange when troops aren’t even kitted out properly due to cost measures….

  126. Feminist Hater says:

    Jon, once again showing their true colours. All about the money.

  127. farm boy says:

    People outside America, like myself, tend to assume that any prominent woman in America has benefitted from affirmative action

    Not just prominent women, pretty much all women in traditionally men’s fields here in the States. It is very pervasive in engineering and computer science.

  128. farm boy says:

    @David Collard
    If one checks out the “The Bell Curve” by Charles Murray, one will find that intelligence improves job performance on any job, including ditch digging. Yes, it is true that many high powered math types have trouble navigating other fields; it is primarily because they do not build good models of how the rest of the world works.

    With respect to creativity, here is an interesting link,

  129. farm boy says:

    The problem is not feminism (which is very bad): it is pedestalization.

    The question is how this pedastalation came to be. I was watching some 50’s westerns the other day, and saw lots of it there. Of course, the ladies acted very much like ladies, and might have been worth some admiration. Back to the original question, how did this come about?

  130. evilalpha says:

    @imnobody

    Does pedestalization explain sweden? How about those other feminist strongholds? It doesn’t explain those at all! Pedestalization does indeed catalyze feminism, but lets not put the cart before the horse ok?

    Feminism is the problem!

  131. Pingback: What Gets Susan Walsh Angry At The Androsphere » Pro-Male/Anti-Feminist Technology

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s