Real men don’t just carry purses, they restock them too.

A teenage boy’s supplicating instagram post has gone viral, and is upping the ante for servant leaders everywhere.

TO EVERY BOY THAT FOLLOWS ME AND CALLS HIMSELF A MAN OR SIMPLY A GOOD HUMAN BEING. Petition for all of us to start bringing a couple pads or tampons to school to help our girl friends. If you have a girlfriend or are friends with a girl, u should know that they do not always have tampons or pads on them, or that sometimes their period just hits them without notice and have a bit of a problem finding one. We should support them with this, after all, we don’t have to go trough all they they do because of menstruation, so it’s just logical that we help them…

The chick rags are of course delighted.  Huffington Post exclaims: The Awesome Reason Why This Teen Boy Is Carrying Around Tampons At School.  Liz Alterman at The Stir explains in Why This Teen Boy Is Asking Male Students to Bring Tampons to School that she hopes to raise sons like this:

As expected, he’s taken a bit of heat from guys in his class but he’s remaining steadfast in his sympathetic stance and we applaud his effort. Imagine a generation of guys who aren’t embarrassed to go out and buy tampons and maxi-pads for their wives or girlfriends? I’d like to raise sons like that!

Except, maybe her sons shouldn’t be like that:

Still, as a mom of boys, I don’t know if I’d want my son to morph into a human tampon dispenser.

Looking at the picture of the kid holding maxi pads with a please love me look on his face, my hope is that this isn’t real and is instead someone from the manosphere trolling the internet.  Either way, if you’ve ever struggled to understand beta creepiness this should help you understand the phenomenon.

Posted in Beta Orbiter, Chivalry, Foolishness, Game, Rationalization Hamster, Servant Leader, Solipsism | 306 Comments

Hey, that’s *our* trick!

Friday afternoon light reading, courtesy of the Dalrock Research Dept.

Mommyish has a post about Nick Loeb’s Op Ed piece at the NYT.  Loeb wants custody of the frozen embryos he and his ex fiancée created, and the ladies at Mommyish smell a rat. First up are Kathryn and Joanne;  they think this is a ploy by Loeb to get child support:


Valerie, Roberta, OkieMom, and Liawen have the same suspicion.  They think that Loeb is not only greedy, but is trying to use the family courts to punish his ex.  OkieMom accuses him of trying to pull off an “oops pregnancy”:


Edit:  More.  Danielle thinks he is only doing it for the child support payday:


koolchicken is outraged that a woman could have a child without her consent.  Sure this happens to men, but as she explains, that is different:


Posted in Child Custody, Child Support, Manosphere Humor, Solipsism, You can't make this stuff up | 57 Comments

Real men don’t hold purses–unless their wife tells them to.

Barnabas pointed out a sermon by Pastor Jason Meyer titled Fooled by False Leadership.  In the sermon Paster Meyer offers an example of “Servant Leadership”, a modern Christian term numerous readers have asked for a definition of.  I would say this example pretty much sums it up:

Showing his embarrassment is a way to show that this is not what he is comfortable doing. It is a little bit like when your wife asks you to carry her purse. There is no manly way to carry a purse. If you sling it on your shoulder, you show that you are a little too comfortable with it. But you can’t refuse because you really want to serve your wife and help her out. So you carry the purse in a way that shows your discomfort. You hold it by scrunching the handle and holding it out several inches from your body—just far enough away to show you are not about to sling it over your shoulder.

Real men don’t carry purses, unless their wife tells them to, and in that case they must make sure they show they are embarrassed to do so.

I have shared more of my observations on the sermon here, and others have done so in the same thread.

Posted in Attacking headship, Chivalry, Foolishness, Servant Leader | 80 Comments

Black Fathers [Don’t] Matter.

With the riots in Baltimore one of the issues being discussed is the breakdown of the Black family.  Phillip Bump at the Washington Post tackles this very question in Rand Paul cites a ‘lack of fathers’ in Baltimore. Here’s what the data actually show.

In 2013, the Department of Health and Human Services released a study of father-child interactions between 2006 and 2010. It looked at how often black, white and Hispanic fathers lived with and interacted with their children.

The stats he presents are a bit of a let down, and at times don’t make sense.  More striking however is how the Health and Human Services report he is getting his data from defines a father.  Who’s your daddy?  Why any man who is living in the same house while banging your mom!

Not all men are biological fathers and not all fathers have biological children. In addition to fathering a child, men may become fathers through adoption—which confers the same legal status, protections, and responsibilities to the man and the child as fathering a biological child. Men also may become de facto fathers when they marry or cohabit with women who have children from previous relationships, that is, they are raising stepchildren or their cohabiting partner’s children. In this report, men were defined as fathers if they had biological or adopted children or if step- or partner’s children were living in the household.

I understand that the lines can become blurred here with stepfathers, but not only does this government report not distinguish between legal fathers and stepfathers, it expands the definition of stepfather to mean any man currently shacked up with mom.

HHS is not the only US government agency to do this though.  As I’ve shared previously, the US Census uses a very similar definition of father:

Children are defined in this report as all individuals under 18 years old. The survey asks respondents to identify the child’s mother and/or father if they are present in the household. A separate question asks respondents to identify the type of relationship between each child and parent, whether biological, step, or adoptive. All living arrangements are as of the time of the interview.

Stepchildren are identified by the survey respondent, and their stepparent may not be currently married to the child’s other coresidential parent.

While HHS says any man currently shacking up with mom counts as the father, the Census says any man currently shacking up with mom counts as the father so long as mom says so.  Either way, fathers clearly can’t matter that much to the US government if distinguishing between the actual father and the man currently banging mom isn’t important.

There are other ways we can tell that fathers don’t matter (and therefore Black fathers don’t matter).  Under our current family system fathers are a sort of deputy parent.  Just like a sheriff’s deputy serves at the pleasure of the sheriff, a father in an intact family serves at the pleasure of the mother.  Our entire family court structure is designed to facilitate the removal of the father should the mother decide she no longer wants him to be part of the family unit.  How important can fathers really be, when we have a massive and brutal bureaucracy devoted to helping mothers kick them out of the house?

Lastly, a comment on What Do the Ten Most Dangerous Cities in America Have in Common? that I’ve shared previously is highly relevant:

On a side note, this post catalogs the effects of marriage; but not just any kind of marriage. It documents the need for the kind of marriage where parents, especially men, exert a substantial moral influence, and doing so in neighborhoods which maintain that moral influence. It’s not only that we have parents, but that those parents have a job to do, and society depends on them doing it effectively.

As Cane Caldo astutely notes, the Baltimore single mother of 6 being feted by the media as mother of the year for severely disciplining her riotous son would have been seen very differently if she were a father:

…The media and civil authorities would be outraged if there were video of the young man’s father whooping his son’s ass up and down the street; punching him in the face, jerking him around by the hoodie, and pushing him back home. I imagine that cops would take time out fighting for their lives to arrest such a father.

Posted in Child Custody, Data, Denial, Fatherhood, Foolishness | 202 Comments

On exceptions and rules.

Dr. Helen kindly linked to my previous post in: Is Imprisoning Men for Child Support a Way for the Government to Destroy Traditional Marriage?

In the discussion of her post I made a point I’m not sure I have made directly here, and either way I feel it is worth repeating.  Nearly everyone believes that we have merely modified our marriage based family structure to include an exception for the child support model.  The truth is the opposite.

We didn’t modify our marriage based family structure to allow an exception for the child support model, we replaced the marriage model with the child support model and created a very limited exception for marriage.

The child support model is now the rule of the land, our official family structure.  Parents are permitted to opt out of the child support structure only so long as both of them wish to continue opting out.

Posted in Child Custody, Child Support, Denial, Fatherhood, Foolishness, Motherhood | 335 Comments