Not the real stepdad.

Not new, but new to me from the Onion:  You’re Not My Real Stepdad!

You’re not the boss of me. You’re not the guy who married my mom after she got divorced. You think you can just show up and start ordering me around like you’re the father figure I first met when I was 8? Well, you’re not…

…you’re just a phony who’s trying to make us forget my mom was already married, then divorced, then single for a while, then real sad, then remarried.

Well, screw you, Greg! I won’t let you replace the man who replaced my father. And I don’t care how long you stay married to my Mom—I’ll never call you Dennis!

I’m not going to sit by and watch you try to fill in for my true stepdad, who was there for me during those tough times in court until it was mandated by a judge that he not be there anymore.

This entry was posted in Feral Females, Manosphere Humor, Satire, The Onion. Bookmark the permalink.

50 Responses to Not the real stepdad.

  1. Durendal Almiras says:

    OT: Dalrock – there is a Christian Mingle movie coming out, here is the trailer – http://youtu.be/Z2eSj37_dHU

    On my cell, so apologies for the lack of HTML. The trailer alone has so many displays of modern female mating strategies that you have mentioned here on your site.

    Keep up the good fight. God bless!

  2. Pingback: Not the real stepdad. | Manosphere.com

  3. Will S. says:

    Reblogged this on Will S.' Sunny Side Blog and commented:
    The Onion at its black humour best.🙂

  4. Anonymous age 72 says:

    The sickest part of this is it isn’t that far fetched! Sick!

  5. Stand Watie says:

    “I want to find out who my real stepfather is. My natural parents won’t tell me where he is, but I’d really like to find him, I have this curious need I’d like to satisfy.” — Dennis Jennings

  6. The more ridiculous this society becomes, the more parody becomes indiscernable from reality. Fake Salon twitter account has come under fire for tweeting headlines that the average (and sometimes educated) person could not distinguish from real Salon headlines.

    If you permit an somewhat off-topic comment, I found another cringe-inducing pseudo-submission blog run by a non-submissive wife which I wish was a parody. I was looking for more scholarship on an interesting tidbit one of the seminarians told me which is that when God tells Eve that her “desire will be for her husband and he shall rule over” her, the Hebrew word used is ambiguous and can also be translated as “against.” I like the ambiguity as it does a nice job of explaining the “bentness” (to borrow a phrase from CS Lewis’ space trilogy) that women tend to in relationships while leaving room for the complexity of the problem. At any rate, this is the blog post. Here are some 93 octane turbo-charged hamsterizations.

    What are the results of a wife being denied any control/influence over her husband? In developing countries, the results are a big problem, with men spending money on alcohol and other vices while neglecting their families’ welfare. In my own background as a practitioner of Quiver Full teachings, I surrendered to my husband complete control over where we lived, how many children I had, whether I worked outside the home or not, whether I homeschooled the children or not, whether any of us received medical treatment or not, the “permission to participate in activities” of everyone in the family, how money was spent, what kind of vacuum cleaner we owned, etc. And I had no control/influence over how he spent money or time (which turned to vices during several seasons of our marriage). It was an oppressive lifestyle which sucked the life right out of me.

    In other words, “I’m ok with the idea of male headship, but you just can’t trust your man not to be an irresponsible a**wipe and therefore you must take control!”

    I used to read CBMW uncritically but I recall the watershed moment when I read Ken Sande’s assumption that my Genesis 3:16 DESIRE was to “control my husband”. This was so far removed from my personal experience in a woman’s skin that I began a journey of asking hard questions about the theology of womanhood which I had uncritically embraced and practiced- to the extreme- in my Quiver Full lifestyle. I can testify from living in a woman’s skin that my desire was to please him. It was a form of idolatry, and because of it my husband CONTROLLED (Ruled Over) me in a way which was extremely unhealthy for both of us.

    Here we have another Dalrockian theme: It was more holy for me to sin than to obey God’s word. i detect another veritable goldmine of goodies here.

  7. Anonymous age 72 says:

    TKI, I don’t like to get into p.c. but it seems to me as if submitting to her husband sucked the life out of her, she wasn’t really submitting to him. Merely obeying without submission. Just saying.

  8. Anonymous age 72 says:

    I did not intend to disagree with TKI, merely stating an opinion.

  9. Anonymous age 72 says:

    The Martel link on European men being so much more romantic, was Onion. But, on Mexican boards, I have often read women claiming Mexican men are so much more romantic than AM.

    I wonder if they realize they are admitting they put out a lot in Mexico? We know it anyway, but that is pretty slutty to openly admit it.

    No matter. There is a distinct answer to this stupid criticism. Mexican men teach other how to lie successfully to women, and they practice; practice; practice. At work. In the streets.

    Men in the US can’t practice because the dearies lobbied for laws which punish, even destroy men who want to learn how to be romantic. So, AM aren’t romantic? Your fault, stupids! You got what you demanded.

    Feel free to catch a major dose with those foreign guys!

  10. Just Saying says:

    More than a few times I’ve ended up on a real news story and had to check to see if I was actually on the Onion.. Life really is becoming more and more of a joke all the time.

  11. Highwasp says:

    and sometimes fact is stranger than fiction… Is It a Crime to Raise a Killer? A tragedy in New Jersey raises questions about where parental responsibility ends when a child becomes a murderer.

    “Parenting comes with responsibilities” says one man from small town USA who’s daughter was recently murdered buy a kid who’s parent(s) apparently didn’t realize that concept.

    Who knew?! Parenting and Responsibility go together. Wish I had thought of that! oh – and – wait for it… The 15 year old murderer is from a ‘single mother’ home…. black. Care to guess what color the 13 year old dead girl was?

    What the article unknowingly suggests is holding single mothers accountable for the crimes of their kids. Considering 80% of the USA prison population are from fatherless homes, prosecuting the parent (singular) for the actions of her kids – means prosecuting SINGLE MOTHERS in a majority of the cases – ain’t gonna happen folks – not yet – but if we can find a DEAD BEAT DAD to blame then we’d be more than happy to string him up because the Patriarchy!

    Here’s the link: http://news.yahoo.com/is-it-a-crime-to-raise-a-killer–190558283.html

    Here’s a clip from the article:
    [“Where were their parents?” grieving families asked after Columbine and Newtown, after Isla Vista and Troutdale.

    “Where were the parents?” asks Anthony Pasquale, sitting in the back booth of the Liberty Diner in Clayton, where his coffee is on the house now, because, as is the case everywhere else in town, everyone knows who he is. “Parenting comes with responsibilities, and one of those is to raise your kids right, to pay attention and know when they’re a danger to someone else. That’s a parent’s job.”

    To fail at that job is a crime, he believes. He’s recently taken his certainty to court, suing Justin Robinson’s parents for, essentially, being bad parents. He has also turned to Change.org and the New Jersey Legislature, advocating for “Autumn’s Law,” which would punish such parenting with prison.]

    Autumn’s Law – Yeah right – Holding single mothers accountable for the action of their kids – send those single mothers to prison for the actions of their “thug spawn” – I can hear the Grievance Industry now – “I am a victim. Owed compensation for the Financial Abuse which led to my Domestic Abuse which led to my Child Abuse… because ~ The Patriarchy.”

  12. Damn. That’s dark even for me.

  13. Pingback: The Onion strikes again | Honor Dads

  14. Pro-Truth says:

    Poe’s Law at it’s finest.

  15. Boxer says:

    Dear Rollo:

    Glad to see that someone else is an MPC reader.

    (Note: If you’ve never been there, you *will* be offended – save your caterwauling for someone who cares, and log off quietly to make the meanies disappear)

    Boxer

  16. Gunner Q says:

    The sadness crimps the story’s mirth.

    Highwasp @ 1:00 pm:
    “What the article unknowingly suggests is holding single mothers accountable for the crimes of their kids. Considering 80% of the USA prison population are from fatherless homes, prosecuting the parent (singular) for the actions of her kids – means prosecuting SINGLE MOTHERS in a majority of the cases – ain’t gonna happen folks – not yet – but if we can find a DEAD BEAT DAD to blame then we’d be more than happy to string him up because the Patriarchy!”

    Heh heh, that’d make a better story than the Onion’s. “The mother of Timmy Manson, the notorious Park Street Strangler, held a tearful press conference today to defend herself from a series of civil lawsuits. ‘Just because I said my little Timmy shouldn’t be held responsible doesn’t mean I should be instead. This would never have happened if his father had successfully defended himself from the divorce!’

    “Families of the victims have stated they will not seek damages from Timmy Manson’s father, citing his recent donation of all worldly possessions to charity as destroying all incentive for civil litigation. Instead, they are targeting Mrs. Manson’s alimony- and welfare-based future income for compensation which Mrs. Manson is unable by law to forfeit. If a decision is made against her, Mrs. Manson could be forced to make crimamony payments for up to 11,250 years.”

  17. I’m surprised the Onion ran that sexism in nature piece, but that was twelve years ago.

  18. The Brass Cat says:

    @MarcusD

    The mother in the FMLA article… is there a father who could help? She mentions a FIL (father in law?) but does not mention a father/husband. If he was there they could split up the work absences. Also, she infers that all four of her children have these random flare ups, which is a medical curiosity.

    She needs to find a new sitter who isn’t sick. Is everyone in her life sick all the time?!

    Here’s the scoop on Family and Medical Leave Act leave ( http://www.dol.gov/whd/fmla/ ):

    Twelve workweeks of leave in a 12-month period for:

    * the birth of a child and to care for the newborn child within one year of birth;
    * the placement with the employee of a child for adoption or foster care and to care for the newly placed child within one year of placement;
    * to care for the employee’s spouse, child, or parent who has a serious health condition;
    * a serious health condition that makes the employee unable to perform the essential functions of his or her job;
    * any qualifying exigency arising out of the fact that the employee’s spouse, son, daughter, or parent is a covered military member on “covered active duty”

    She definitely does not qualify for FMLA leave.

  19. Blake says:

    I think the Onion has fired half their writers and is just rewriting current events as satire.

  20. Splashman says:

    Here’s a nice big steaming pile of hamster for y’all to enjoy:

    Yes, I have a FWB. No, I’m not slut.

    My favorite part:

    We all have different boundaries when it comes to having sex, but being a little casual about it doesn’t make you any less “wife-material.” It’s not your friends’ (or strangers’) place to judge, and it’s certainly not your place to judge yourself.

    That’s not from an Onion article, honest.

  21. Spike says:

    All too true, Dalrock.
    “You’re not my (step)dad. You’re not the boss of me!” Is a refrain heard by men throughout the post feminist Western World. It puts these men in their place as the tag along money providers (suckers) and it shows that children recognise the mother as head of the family. This is why men HAVE TO leave women who are single/ divorced to their own devices. It is called being consistent: She demanded independence. We should now let her have that independence, no matter how sexually willing, how genuine or how dire her situation is.

  22. Anonymous age 72 says:

    Amen, Spike.

    In the early 90’s, several of us older men at work were discussing how to advise young men how to select wives — if they were determined to marry in the new era now known as Marriage 2.0.

    Of course, we quickly noted that divorced women; unwed mothers, and daughters of unwed and divorced mothers were not safe to marry. They simply don’t know what marriage is like because they haven’t seen it. They do know what divorce is, though…

    Next, someone tossed out to make sure to select a woman who had ever, at least once, in her life, done something for someone beside herself. As strange as it sounds, most AW never have done anything for anyone else.

    We came up with a fictional example of two sisters. The dad comes in from work, with a button on his shirt half ripped off. One sister pays no attention. The other sister runs into her room and comes back with needle and thread and sews the button on again.

    Of course, N-count was on the list. One man married a woman who was not a virgin. He said he was aware N was on the list, but in her case, she never committed to any of the men. He took a chance based on her overall attitude, and they are married over 40 years now.

    Later, I was discussing this with a young man. He said, “You stupid f*****s are making an easy thing hard. Just watch how a woman drives.”

    We did some investigating at work. By coincidence, every divorced woman and unwed mother in our department admitted she drove like she was insane. Some thought it was funny how they drove and didn’t get tickets.

    And, every stable long-term married woman in the area claimed to drive within the speed limits at all times.

    Of course, in large metropolitan areas where most people don’t have cars, this easy test is out. Also, in foreign countries where women seldom drive.

    Let me add a note. Do not marry an unwed mother in the USA at this time. They are almost all busted, to put it mildly.

    With great care, a rare unwed mother in rural Mexico might be an optimum choice. But, only with great care.

    One of the sports of the men here, very macho, is to court a good girl from a good family, and promise her marriage. Then when he gets her knocked up, he dumps her and calls her every name in the books.

    And, of course, most of them go into the cycle of more babies, just as in the USA. But, once in a while, you will encounter a young woman who realizes she totally messed up, and will buckle down and start hustling to support that one child. (Two births to an unwed mother is a fail.)

    And, will have absolutely nothing to do with dating other men. She learned her lesson.

    The catch is you’d have to ring it to get it. That means old fashioned dating with family members (and the baby) along. (If you don’t adore the baby, walk,) And, sitting together on the pretil (a concrete bench on the front of a house built partly for that exact purpose) in the evenings, just talking. (Doesn’t that sound archaic in Marriage 2.0?)

    Right now, I only know one woman like that. She is the daughter of my BIL’s mistress in Cordoba. Her sweet and adorable daughter is in early primary school, and my BIL says she absolutely avoids dating because she is afraid of getting knocked up again. She and her mom run a small restaurant in BIL’s driveway, and she works hard.

    The difference is, Mexico doesn’t pay women to be single moms. That changes the culture of young women dramatically.

    I never found the women in Cordoba to be appealing. Something to do with the tribal ancestry. In fact, most AM find those of Aztec ancestry to be more appealing. Just as the Spanish did in the 16th Century.

    When this woman was 17, she was the first pretty woman I had ever seen in Cordoba (to my personal preferences). I even saw the official Miss Cordoba and didn’t find her appealing.

    Ten years later, she isn’t as pretty as she was at 17, but still cute with a nice smile and dimples. And, nice legs. She was a big chunky after the baby was born, but it’s all gone now.

    My BIL keeps trying to fix me up with her. That is my wife’s own brother. Hee, hee.

    As I said, that’s the only one I know right now.

    If you are an older man the days of coming down here and going home in a month with a beautiful 18 year old virgin are long gone. You would end up with a young widow with kids, or a woman as I just described.

  23. Anonymous age 72 says:

    Re: Spashman’s link to the slut who says she isn’t a slut:

    If it walks like a slut; if it quacks like a slut; and if it swims like a slut, it’s a slut.

    If she is not a slut, who is?

    I have thought about this over many years of my life. We don’t get to decide what we are, except in choosing our own behavior.

    If we rape, we are a rapist. If we steal we are a thief. If we kill people we are a murderer. If we drive drunk, we’re drunk drivers. If we beat up our spouse we are a husband beater. What we call ourselves is pure delusion.

    Our only choice is the choice of how to be have. If we choose to do the things listed, we can’t just avoid the label by announcing, “I’m not that way.”

  24. The Brass Cat says:

    @Anonymous age 72

    We did some investigating at work. By coincidence, every divorced woman and unwed mother in our department admitted she drove like she was insane. Some thought it was funny how they drove and didn’t get tickets.

    It is not just unwed mothers and divorsees. It is all women who have a high potential to enter one of those categories. They seem to have no sense of danger and a weak self-preservation instinct, and these traits of course spill into other areas of life.

    I read somewhere that women think of cars as safe cocoons that magically whisk them away to wherever they need to go rather than large machines that need to be actively operated.

    The difference is, Mexico doesn’t pay women to be single moms. That changes the culture of young women dramatically.

    Then when they come here it’s a veritable explosion of babies. My high school class was more than half Mexican. At least half the Mexican girls became pregnant while in high school. You’d think with them being majority Catholic they’d have more control of this problem, but you’d be wrong.

  25. JDG says:

    The difference is, Mexico doesn’t pay women to be single moms. That changes the culture of young women dramatically.

    It’s amazing how far a little common sense (uncommon in the US) will go.

  26. Anonymous age 72 says:

    Good points on the Mexican high school girls. They aren’t stupid and they very well know if they can get knocked up in the USA they can get a government check, just like their big sisters in the USA.

    When you add in the fact that Mexican girls often marry or ‘marry’ at around that age in Mexico, and it is totally predictable.

    Our analysis of the women and how they drive involves women who recognize no external morality. If it feels good, do it. That includes divorce and abortion.

    Also, they have no concern for the welfare of others. Others such as their husband and their children when they pull the trigger.

    Yes, Virginia! We can tell all that by the way they drive.

  27. Boxer says:

    Willie D (of Geto Boys) tells it like it is…

    Hopefully after you get out there and live it up some, you’ll come to your senses and realize that life is not one big party. You will be hard-pressed to find a man respectful of a woman who broke up her family because she wanted to try something new.

    Makes me wonder if all my teenage rap/rock idols ended up reading Dalrock, just like me.

    Much more at…

    http://blogs.houstonpress.com/rocks/2014/09/ask_willie_d_september_11_2014.php

  28. Tam the Bam says:

    “It is all women who have a high potential to enter one of those categories. They seem to have no sense of danger and a weak self-preservation instinct concept of Newtonian mechanics or cause-and-effect, and these traits of course spill into other areas of life.
    fixed that, Brassy.
    The sense of danger becomes like a Spidey-sense when they’re placed in the passenger-seat, and they’re not shy of expressing it. Loudly and constantly, thinking they’re preserving themselves by grabbing anything within reach and writhing about in apparent agony. I ought to buy a taxi-cab, one with a solid perspex screen, locking doors and a little tray for tips.

  29. Dave says:

    It really amazes me. Maybe it is a bit more than a sense of cause and effect; maybe it is more about poor self preservation instinct; maybe it is both wrapped up into one. I don’t know.

    I was having a conversation with a friend recently on something similar. You know, you will hardly ever see a guy disrespect another guy that can clearly beat him up. You will not easily find a 100-pound guy yelling in the face of a 250-pound ripped boxer, and taunting him. But you see these measly and asthenic women yell in the face of guys that can break them in two in no time. It really amazes me.

  30. Anonymous age 72 says:

    Not only that, but when the big man walks away, they really believe he is afraid of her.

    I have a theory that I cannot prove or disprove. When a woman gets plowed by her husband, often during a vicious divorce after years of non-violence, they are horrified that the brute would actually hit them.

    My theory is the real reason they are so terrified is they suddenly realize that all those years of insults and threats by her, at any moment he could have killed her with his bare hands.

    Because to hit a woman contradicts the basic male wiring, the men absorbed the verbal and emotional abuse. She imagines he didn’t hit her before because he was ‘skeered’ of her. How funny.

  31. JDG says:

    What exactly is a REAL step dad?

  32. Bluepillprofessor says:

    Wait, I still don’t get if it is real or a joke, which I suppose is the real joke.

  33. Mark says:

    http://returnofqueens.com/manosphere-sites-worth-checking-out/

    “”I wonder if you’d also consider Dalrock? He’s a conservative Catholic and self – avowed happily married man who is nonetheless a manospherian (but not the PUA variety). He has a lot of wise things to say and usually the stats to back it ip.””

    GREAT stats to back it up!!!!!!…….if only they could get the traffic at ROQ as Dalrock does here…….but,we know that will never happen!……L*

  34. Anchorman says:

    Dalrock is Catholic? Makes no difference to me, but I was under a different understanding.

    [D: You are correct. I am Protestant.]

  35. Anonymous age 72 says:

    The Real Peterman says:
    September 15, 2014 at 5:23 pm

    http://jezebel.com/what-former-sluts-tell-their-daughters-about-sex-1633617878?utm_source=recirculation&utm_medium=recirculation&utm_campaign=mondayPM

    The attitudes on the comment section are right out of Sex And Culture, by Unwin, 1934. When women have complete sexual liberty, that generation will see the end of their civilization.

    And, even with large amounts of historical data available, never does the next failing civilization see it coming. Amazing.

  36. Anonymous Reader says:

    JDG, Bluepillprofessor….that makes the joke funnier, you know. If it helps, read the original piece in a 1990’s Pauly Shore voice…

  37. Mark says:

    @Dalrock

    “”[D: You are correct. I am Protestant.]””

    That is what I thought from reading your former comments.

  38. Kate says:

    This is some effective satire. Its horrible when a second marriage doesn’t work out for the wife and the children have to go through all of that again. The only good that might come from it is that the children might stop bonding to the men she chooses and seek out their REAL (biological) father, who was pushed out years ago. #bringbackourdads

  39. Phillyastro says:

    Off topic, but it appears one must be a lesbian comic-strip writer, a race poet, or investigator of Native American women’s domestic abuse to be considered a recipient of a MacArthur “genius grant.”

    http://www.pennlive.com/nation-world/2014/09/macarthur_genius_grant_recipie.html#incart_river

  40. I have nothing but sympathy for Native Americans, but I can’t help but wonder why only women were studied. The lesbian poet was the creator of that “Bechdel test” that so many SJWs prattle on about, hardly an accomplishment worth half a million.

  41. Anonymous age 72 says:

    I remember when the MacArthur foundation first started. MacArthur specifically was quoted as saying he wanted the money to go to non-conformist people, to see what they could come up with if not hampered by earning a living.

    It worked that way for a very short time. Then the committee started changing it to those who have already achieved something, like a mini Nobel. And, like the Nobel it became leftist, politically correct, environmental wacko based nonsense.

  42. Painful to read. This is child abuse and it is absolutely real. Only the kids are just completely bewildered. Confused to the point where they develop mental illnesses to cope with the trauma that their mother’s are putting them through. I cannot believe that America, claiming to be a just society, allows this kind of horror to be inflicted on children.

    I’m a child of feminism. A child recovering from massive abuse as a direct result of feminism. I still am shocked that our broken culture allows such rampant abuse of innocent children.

    Child murder and family destruction are somehow normal.

Please see the comment policy linked from the top menu.

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