On July 9th I authored a post called “Calling all Masculinists”, an opinion piece on some of the comments I saw under the MENZ article, “Feminism and World War III“. I’ve done some research and soul-searching based on the feedback I’ve gotten, and I owe these people an apology for two things:
1) I asserted that I understood your anger at women, which is ridiculous, seeing as I’ve only just learned about the men’s rights movement.
2) I admonished that anger, which is a big faux pas when talking to ANYONE. You don’t tell an angry person that their anger is wrong-what does that do? It makes them angrier!
I don’t regret making the post because it’s been a learning experience, but I think I just managed to piss off the people I was trying to understand. When you admonish a stranger for their view on something, you are effectively saying “all the experience and rationale that has brought you to your conclusions are invalid. You must be mistaken.” Hardly a way to make friends.
Now I’m wondering if I can take a stand on any issue that I don’t have a direct history with. Perhaps, but I’m guessing that it would be wise in the future to learn more about a movement before making a judgement on its participants (much less TO the participants), and to be more careful about passing judgement, period. You never know who’s on the other side of the computer, and to assume that you do isn’t very fair to them.
I thought I had a pretty good grip on the reason that these men would say things like “all women are psychopaths”, but that was just arrogance on my part. My “aha!” moment came when I was watching this video on Youtube about the basics of the men’s movement. For whatever reason, that’s when I asked myself to listen to the message as though I were a blank slate with no history in feminism, and, when I did, I felt….you guessed it: anger. If I could feel this way-a single woman who’s never experienced these injustices-how did the men who had been wronged by it feel? Then I knew it was time to put my literary foot in my mouth and apologize to these people for assuming I had any idea I knew what they had endured.
I do stand by my claim that blanket terms about any group of people are unfair. However, I realize that it’s damn near impossible not to lump people into categories based on personal experience, and that, when I think about it, I do it all the time. It’s nearly impossible not to. It’s not fair to stereotype any group of people, but stereotyping seems to be deeply ingrained in all people as a defense mechanism.
So what to do? I’m glad I wrote “Calling all Masculinists” because I’ve learned a valuable lesson, but damn if paradigm shifts don’t suck. And how do I reconcile feminism and masculinism? I agree with aspects in both of them, but one seems to work directly against the other.
I guess all I can do is to continue to approach issues with an open mind, and continue to seek the feedback of people from all sides of an issue. That being said, its time for your voice to be heard: and the question is this: What are your suggestions so that I can avoid making this same mistake in the future? Is it possible to fight for men’s rights and women’s rights without one oppressing the other? You’ve got an opinion and I want to hear it, so click on the “leave a comment” button at the bottom right of this post and let me know what you think.
-Vanessa
Glorious Taco 
Hi Vanessa,
For a western woman to appologise and begin to see the paradigm shift you are expreiencing is a rare thing. However it is happening more and more.
I don’t agree with people that make sweeping statements such like “all women are psychopaths”. I am not angry with women in general. Some of my best friends are women. The society and systems we have are a different matter entirely. Having said that, the system is only a tool. I have to consider how most women will use such devises.
The systems are not radically changing any time soon. So how do most women behave and operate within the current systems and society? We when talk about women. We mean relationship related issues with western women in the context of contempory society. Women for short.
Let me try to explain it as a question to you.
I am a confident, good looking, successful, intelligent, fit, kind guy. I have looked after myself and my family all my life. For example I am a good cook. I have a sence of humour and I am sociable.
I am not blowing my own trumpet. I am just pointing out that I am supposedly one of the many males that fit the typical female wish list. There are plenty of us. You wont be surprised I find it easy to get dates.
Note I use the word “dates” not long term relationships. Personally I am only interested in long term relationships. I could go into why that is hard to find but let’s suppose I was in a long term relation at the moment.
Personally I happen to be naturally affectionate and I love children.
Now for the cost of a wedding ceremony I can have my own biological child through surrogacy.
Why would a man like me get married?
Or have a de facto?
I carry virtually all the risks. The likelyhood of serious negative consequecnes for me and my children are 50% and the severity of those consequences are about as extreme as they could be.
Going to war is far less risky.
What are the long term rewards/benefits for me?
Consider the benefits vs the risks.
Women have priced themselves out of the market.
Just stop and think about that.
Think about equality of opportunity.
Think about the things that truly matter in life.
Then tell me why would I get married to a western woman?
What does that say about women and feminsm to you?
Think about it.
I remember watching a stand-up routine by Eddie Murphy, about the woman being entitled to half a man’s assets upon divorce, or something like that. I remember the way he repeated “Half. HALF”, with all the hilarious outrage he could muster. And then proceeded to talk about he was going to go to Africa and find himself a naked bush baby with a bone in her nose so she wouldn’t try to take half his money if they divorced. I was about fifteen, I think, and I remember being confused, but not horrified, by this double standard. I also was talking to my aunt recently (she and my uncle got divorced a few years ago), and she was talking about how she didn’t take him for the ride she could have, like she deserved a medal for it.
The more I learn about men’s issues, the more I come to realize that I was brought up in a culture that champions the woman and laughs at the man. And if I actually wanted to pursue equality, I needed to pay as much attention to men’s issues as women’s issues. I’m finding out that most men have no hope of success in divorce and child custody proceedings, and this makes no sense. If we aren’t allowed to discriminate against sexes in the workplace, why, then, in the justice system? Why does a perfectly capable person deserve alimony in divorce proceedings just because of her sex? Do men get alimony if the wife makes more than he does?
Why would you get married to a western woman? Because you guys got yourself a nice prenuptial agreement.
Learning about this has been awesome. I feel like learning about men’s issues has opened a whole new world that I was unaware of before. It also made me realize that I need to continually examine myself for bias. It’s difficult to kick out prejudices I didn’t even know I had, but it feels great once it’s done. Thanks so much for your thoughtful commentary.
If fathers only lost half that would be a vast improvement.
“Why would you get married to a western woman? Because you guys got yourself a nice prenuptial agreement.”
1. Outside of the USA prenuptial agreements are not worth the paper they are written on. Even in the USA they are often over ruled.
2. Having some protection of a prenuptial agreement is not a reason to get married. It is just an attempt to limit the risks.
3. For someone like me what matters is my relationships not money so even if you somehow fixed that one area it wouldn’t resolve the biggest area of concern.
Any way you obviously do get my point.
Vanessa,
Thanks for the apology which shows integrity.
Welcome to a journey into the hearts and minds of men.
I’ve posted here something I placed on the MENZ website a few months back.
It still rings as true to me today as when I wrote it.
However I was merely writing about the New Zealand context.
I understand from many years of research that conditions for men in other westernised feminist countries as just as bad or even worse. So as you read it please bear in mind that as you grow to understand my view of NZ I cannot get excited about living in any feminist culture and definitely am not willing to get any closer than online like this with any western woman. That may seem harsh, but the reality I live with is that the most benign supportive and male empathic can still at any moment relapse into feminist misandry…….and then my life gets crushed again. A life that has taken an enormous amount of valuable time and effort to rebuild.
Now having read that please read on.
Skeptik.
Why I choose not to live in New Zealand.
They say that distance affords clarity of view. From afar you get perspective. You get to see the bigger picture. Well, I certainly feel clearer about New Zealand having been away some time and now passing through other parts of the world.
It’s not a pretty picture, and I don’t envy the folks who frequent MENZ being there.
I’m confident that I could, despite recessionary economic conditions of late return to some sort of employment there, being as I am well educated and with a CV that has been described by senior managers and one professor as exceptional.
I could return bringing a wealth of cultural knowledge from recent travels to Europe, Asia and the Pacific regions.
I could bring ‘home’ the many skills I’ve acquired and honed on my journeying – gardening and landscaping, ethnic cooking, design and decoration, music composition, performance and recording, teaching and lecturing, photography and video editing, web design, home renovation; to name a few.
I am slim, some say attractive, moderately fit. I haven’t needed a doctor in the last two years except for a strained calf muscle from playing tennis a year ago.
I could return then and you might imagine fit in fairly well.
I could settle in, make friends, enjoy the lifestyle, get myself another woman as a romantic partner there.
I choose not to.
Been there, done that, got the blood-stained T-shirt to prove it.
Don’t get it?
Let’ start to unpack this then.
Returning to a job there means paying the state vast amounts of my hard earned income so it can fund my disposability.
‘How so?’ you may reasonably ask.
I could return and discover over time that I have prostate problems.
Too bad much more state funding goes towards breast and cervical problems.
I could return and marvel at the amount of resources poured into female health in general whilst noticing the state providing nothing especially that nationwide targets men’s health issues specifically despite their longevity lagging behind women’s by 6 – 7 years, despite men comprising by vast majorities the homeless, drug addicted, suicides, heart attacks, industrial injuries and deaths, victims of violence, imprisoned, mentally unwell, alcoholic, socially isolated and alienated.
I could return to a workplace and tip toe on eggshells around women who may at any moment and for god knows what reasons allege that I have sexually harassed or in some other way violated them. I could also note with some alacrity and irony how the very same women could turn up at work looking sexually provocative like hookers replete with deep plunging necklines, stilettos, brief and figure-form clothing, padded bras, make-up etc.
I could return and get a job as a teacher for which I’m very well qualified.
That would mean facing the daily risk of somebody either out of ignorance or out of malice alleging I was a pedophile or some other form of child abuser – Peter Ellis 2nd. No thanks, I’ll pass on that one.
I could return to heterosexual dating and run the gamut of entering the matrix at the more personal level.
It would mean living with several constant and very grave threats.
My ‘lover’ could at the drop of a hat accuse me of any number of ‘crimes’ which would see me carted away by police and quite possibly sentences to mandatory anger management ‘counseling’ with attendant community approbation.
I could rile against a system which sees her being able to render me so helpless and traumatized as a result of her uncorroborated claim that I so little as raised my voice in concern about something she provocatively thrusts upon me. I could be criminalized on her mere word that I ‘looked at her threateningly’.
I could also find the wonderful lovemaking we engaged in the night before gets re-branded by her after the fact as an uninvited act of rape.
Too bad she would only get a proverbial slap on the wrist with a wet bus ticket when discovered to be in perjury. Too bad that my life gets ruined in the meantime because I’m suspended from work and face locals who prejudge me to be a violent sex – offender.
So, I could return therefore to a domesticity which to me would seem like living in a prison with my own in-house warden as constant supervisor-dominatrix.
Too bad if she chooses to get vindictive because she doesn’t get her way about something and flexes her emotional and legal muscles.
So I could return to being more judicial fodder for the feminists there.
I could return to academia and marvel enviously that despite paying much more tax than many women in NZ and despite dwindling numbers of male graduates how only women exclusively have recourse to their very own state sponsored academic advisors, scholarships and grants, campus counseling and medical services, women’s ‘spaces’, campus media, whole women’s studies departments even.
I could return to state sponsored TV which routinely portrays men as violent offenders despite numerous easily obtainable and academically respectable studies showing that women abuse just as often, and in the case of child abuse violate much more.
I could return on an Air NZ flight which then asks me to move from sitting next to an unaccompanied child so some woman passenger who is also a stranger to the child can sit there instead.
I can return to reading the likes of Rosemary Mcleod sounding off regularly in the NZ Herald vilifying men for all manner of supposed faults. I could read the popular Press and watch TV glamorizing all sorts of female excess – think Sex and the city and Weeds.
I could then pick up in social gossip as I move about the place the anti-male and women-are-great attitudes that have been inculcated by lazy, uneducated and supremacist feminist media and their hopelessly outdated chivalrous consorts.
I could return and feel bewildered and perplexed at how my hard earned income tax money is squandered on state ‘education’ which marginalizes, minimizes and misrepresents men’s issues whilst funding legions of solo moms who narcissistically choose as a lifestyle to ‘raise’ fatherless and therefore under-parented and uncivilized children.
I could return and yet again face the terrible helpless pain of having to empathize with men who have no reproductive rights whatsoever. Who get no say in whether a conception goes full term to birth or not. Men who aren’t even allowed by law to prove they’re not fathers with valid DNA paternity testing. I could witness the deep sadness of separated fathers who are alienated from their kids by vindictive ex-girlfriends and ex-wives who lie to get their way and yet remain unaccountable due to widespread feminist ‘jurisprudence’.
I could return and get my hopes up that the ‘democratic’ system will deliver and men’s issues will get a fair go; only to yet again see female numerical superiority meaning I end up living in a political system which is a tyranny of the majority I’m not part of as I’m male and not a pro-feminist man either.
I could return and have to counsel yet more male buddies who find themselves driven to despair being on the receiving end of the above mentioned conditions.
I could of course then return, and in brief no doubt be plunged right into a cesspool of gender politics there.
It would mean returning to a labyrinthine matrix – of corruption masquerading itself as ethical, of the absurd spun as common sense, of the brutal and course paraded as civilized.
But I won’t.
Because I deserve better than to be a second class citizen in my own country.
I deserve a rest after burning out trying to cope in a place so utterly hostile to me being ………….a man.
So I currently live in self imposed political exile far away from NZ geographically and culturally.
My thanks extend to all those who choose to stay there and battle away to right the injustices I’ve outlined.
Hopefully success will eventually come and one day I will be able to return to a much saner and peaceful NZ. But for the foreseeable future I’m one more Kiwi male who’s out in the world warning folks to stay clear of NZ. That idea is one more export item you can add to NZ’s balance sheet.
Vanessa,
Don’t be too quick to believe what you hear about these issues just because it is new to you and you are being met with unrelenting criticism from some commenters. The video you linked is quite sensational and misrepresented the significance of some of the “facts”.
For example “circumcision” for a male is not analogous to the vast majority of procedures denoted by the same word applied to females. The right not to be circumcised is an important men’s issue, but to compare it what happens during the majority of female “circumcisions” is absurd-it would be like cutting off anything from the glans to the entire penis. If female circumcision consisted of removing a part of the clitoral hood and there were as many African Muslims and traditionalists as there are Christians and Jews in this country, this practice might well be legal for women.
..And lets just say for the sake of argument that the claim and 40% of the men in jail for rape have been falsely accused is true: This doesn’t necessarily mean that women are going around inventing rape stories, but more probably that perpetrators have been misidentified. This would be consistent with large body of current research that suggests eyewitness accounts are far less reliable than our legal system gives them credit for.
40% of accusations being untrue is a travesty, but more appropriately attributed to broad sweeping problems in our justice system than misandry. Also, the reason the majority of the Innocence Project exonerations were of convicted rapists is because the majority of the cases they work on are rape cases! The Innocence Project only works with cases that involve biological evidence or DNA that can be better analyzed through modern techniques. If just as many people were falsely convicted of insider trading, robbery or even murder, we wouldn’t know it because rape cases are so much more likely to involve DNA evidence.
It is also ridiculous to spout statistics about non-paternity among men who are ALREADY using DNA tests to determine paternity. So men who already had significant doubts about paternity to the point where they’ll pay hundreds of dollars to find out discover nonpaternity 30% of the time? And those weren’t even necessarily all “duped dads” , but include men whose partners were honest about not knowing in the first place.
I could go on and on-but does it really need to be said that a guy in a bearsuit kicking a comedian in the crotch is not comparable to rape? Or that it is, in fact, just as illegal to assault men as women? There may be some important issues at the root of this, but you are not called upon to untangle them from the claims of people willing to deceive you in the name of their opinions. As respectful as you’re being, I think you deserve to be answered with reasonable and reputable sources.
@Efromnextdoor
“For example “circumcision” for a male is not analogous to the vast majority of procedures denoted by the same word applied to females. The right not to be circumcised is an important men’s issue, but to compare it what happens during the majority of female “circumcisions” is absurd-it would be like cutting off anything from the glans to the entire penis. If female circumcision consisted of removing a part of the clitoral hood and there were as many African Muslims and traditionalists as there are Christians and Jews in this country, this practice might well be legal for women.”
You are aware that male circumcision removes more tissue and more nerve endings than female circumcision, yes? The real analogy if you want to compare them tit-for-tat is that male circumcision is like cutting off the clit, the labia, and a breast too.
Oh, and yes, men do get alimony if the woman makes more. I think part of the problem is that your aunt (like so many other people) think of it as “taking a man for a ride” when it’s not actually just HIS money. A marriage turns two people into a fiscal entity no matter what kind of work each of them is putting toward the household. In a legal marriage all of the assets are owned jointly by both partners. If one partner’s career is completely abandoned to become a homemaker or even put on the back burner in favor of the other spouse’s career then they are entitled to share what the working spouse is earning. It is entirely reasonable that in a divorce they would get half, or even HALF if they are being left after a number of years with less earning potential than the spouse with the dominant career. And yes, of course this applies to men-look at Liz Gilbert and Mo’Nique’s divorces. It may not be as common for men to get it, and that may be in part because of court bias, but it’s also because men still have much more professional development than women, especially married ones.
@Efromnextdoor
“Oh, and yes, men do get alimony if the woman makes more.”
Not always. Sometimes men don’t get alimony, even though if they were female in the exact same economic situation they would. In addition alimony for men is a VERY recent development in American law:
http://books.google.com/books?id=Y0pa0KOsvroC&pg=PA212&lpg=PA212&dq=%22alimony-for-husbands%22&source=bl&ots=i5lYbRRAZA&sig=e0SN8ybm8t-FdkVqyMF4Ylz3Biw&hl=en&ei=BLuNTKTMGdCinQfYuoC4DA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CBkQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22alimony-for-husbands%22&f=false
Truth be told, it’s hard to say if things won’t revert back to alimony being a female only right. The inclusion of men into the spousal support system has been viewed by some states as an “unnecessary burden.” Alabama still holds this view, but can’t act on it, due to the Supreme Court decision mentioned in the article.
Yes. If men only lost half, that would be an improvement. After my wife snatched our children and left me for another man, she proceeded to defraud me of four-fifths to five-sixths of MY entire net-worth acquired BEFORE I even met her (cost of the divorce for me plus I had to pay her attorney’s fees plus many other incidental costs – her attorney was pro-bono until she won the divorce and then she became one of the most expensive attorneys in the developed world – prenuptials are ignored by most courts), plus almost all of the net-worth acquired during marriage, and approximately two-thirds of my NET income after divorce till our children reach their age of majority. In addition to all the financial losses, I have not seen my children in three and a half years, as the courts are very aggressive at enforcing child support (including imprisonment) but do not enforce visitation at all and actively discourage shared parenting (if they shared parenting, there could be no child support order and the State would not be able to collect its federal subsidies). So, basically if she regards our children as possessions and property, which many if not all women do, then she is never going to let them see me again.
Also, for the first two years or so after separation (it took about two and a half years to finalize the divorce), I had to pay for her health insurance, which she used to purchase oral contraceptives so she could boink her boy-friend. In the room next to where my son slept. How’s that for insult to injury. It seems in every step of the way through the divorce process, she didn’t exercise any sense. Understand, when I found out she was sleeping with another man while we were married, I confronted her about it, and of course she denied it, but when I produced evidence, she tried to kill me – with a pair of butcher knives in the back. It wasn’t the first time she tried to kill me in our marriage and it wasn’t the most successful attempt either. She tried poisoning me and pushing me down stairs and running me over with a car, which all had varying degrees of impact except death. As a judge explained, …”that doesn’t make her a bad mother, just a bad wife”. You think? Actually, it makes her a pretty bad mother and person too.
My experience is not an abberation, but common. As my attorney explained, if we charged, tried and sentenced all women who do this kind of stuff, all the women would be in prisons. Attmepts on the lives of their husbands is so common among wives that scientists have actually established statistical probability or priorities of mechanism, and surprise, the top three are knives, poison and vehicular (I think – there might be another one in there too). I doubt my wife actually read these reports or manuscripts. My observation that “ALL” women are psychopaths is not a generalization as the behaviors apply to such a large population of them that they practically all are. If they haven’t actually done something like this, I argue it’s simply because they haven’t had opportunity. As I explained, statistically, almost all women in the US have made false allegations of a crime against a man. I do not like to generalize. I think generalizing is wrong. But almost all women in the US have falsely alleged a man of a serious crime. That puts almost all women very high on the continuum of psychopathy (as compulsive lying is one of the most important symptoms of psychopathy and most other serious mental illness or impairment). We’re not talking about a little white lie like “yes, Dear, I like that dress on you.” We’re talking about putting a man away for decades. I don’t want that to be true. It scares me for it to be true.
But it IS true and that truth must be dealt with. Instead of condemning the facts as generalization, maybe ask yourself why are so many women lying about men with no concern for the consequences of those lies for the men. Why do so many women lie about rape for revenge and entertainment and as an alibi? Why do so many women lie about domestic violence and child abuse? Why are there so many lawsuits where I work for sexual harassment – when there was none. If the incidence of these kinds of lies was just epidemic (apprx 5% of the pop), then it would be a disaster. But we’re talking about 90% of a population lying about serious crimes, either accusing the wrong man or lying that a crime even occurred at all. That’s not epidemic – I don’t know what you call it. So, no generalizations – all women are psychopaths driven to do evil without remorse and without guilt and without empathy or responsibility. Don’t forget, almost none of these women who have falsely accused a man of a serious crime has ever been punished – not even a slap on the wrist. In my place of work, men do NOT talk about women or say anything about women no matter how benign or innocuous. The costs could be devestating. They are terrified. Because the circumstances under which the men work is terrorism.
So, what are you like, Vanessa? Are you the only woman in the developed world who has not accused a man of a serious crime? Ever accuse a man of rape? Ever lie about pregnancy or contraception? Ever accuse a man of abusing you? Ever fake and orgasm? What are New Zealand women like that drove so many men from your island that the sex ratio is out of balance by 10% and growing (I checked and cross-referenced data concerning the demographics) and one-quarter of women don’t expect to have children and there aren’t enough children to replace the population over the next few generations. Your wiping out your race. Doesn’t sound like a great place for men. Sounds like ALL the women have conspired to drive the men out for no reason.
Think about offcial reports out of South Africa a decade or so ago (maybe fifteen years) that accused one-tenth the male population of that country of rape, only to discover after a few years of intense investigation that almost all of those were false allegations, and none of the women were ever punished. Rape is not a nice thing. It’s a bad crime. BUT there are much much much worse crimes with far far far more important implications for personal and community well-being. Rape by all standards of criminal activity, is not a particularly egregious crime, especially compared to the kinds of crimes that men are much much more likely to experience during the course of their lives. Furthermore, when we think about crime and its frequency, consider the number of children that never see their fathers again. Ever. In the US, it’s about 26% of them in the last forty years (another 26% have such limited access to their fathers that they might just as well not see them – for a total of 52%). Now that is a real problem – a real crime. Not the one-tenth of one-percent of women who are raped. Rape is a bad crime, but it affects such a small part of the population and is so limited in its consequences and there are worse crimes, and child-snatching of any kind is much worse and when you consider that 52% of all children in the US over the last forty years have been snatched and only one-tenth of one-percent of all women in the US have been raped in that same time, I’d say the child-snatching trumps rape.
But when you consider the resources directed at preventing rape instead of child-snatching, you’d think that rape was epidemic and it’s not and most don’t even regard child-snatching as a crime (although in most parts of the world sometime not long ago, it was considered so egregious because of its long-term implications for civilization that it was punishable by death). Actually, real rape is a very rare crime and always has been. Child-snatching is beyond epidemic and is so common as to be normal – more than 50% of all children in the US over the past forty years have been snatched – by their mothers, none-the-less. Could it be that mothers enabled by other women lie about rape and its frequency to disctract everyone else from the real serious and pervasive crime of child-snatching (once called kidnapping). I don’t know, but it wouldn’t surprise me.
So, what kind of woman is a female kiwi. I’m curious because I’m the curious type and am always looking for new experiences around the world – meet new people and the like. But I’ve read some pretty discouraging things about NZ women. Not necessarily worse but different than other parts of the world. And since its a small island, that has some implications for any characteristics. (Oh, the best hat I’ve ever used is from NZ – it’s a Hill’s Hats – just thought I’d throw that in as an endorsement – I’m not getting paid or anything.) I’m just curious about what kind of women drive 10% of the men off an island. Usually, by having an island, you have a captive audience. Things must have gotten pretty desperate. Not that it’s worse than the US, as the reason there are passport restrictions in the US for men victimized by divorce is to keep them here, otherwise they would all leave too, and probably a lot more than 10%.
Is it true that NZ women sleep around – more than women in other countries? And maybe just use one man as her personal piggy bank, while she enjoys the (eh-hm) company of other men. That’s the way it is in the US. Although the demographics are changing dramatically the past few years, for most of the past forty, approximately two-thirds of women were married and slept with the other one-third of men who weren’t. Often having their children and lying to the husbands about it. That there wasn’t nearly the frequency of adultery among the men is supported by infrequency of incidence of out of wedlock births and infrequency of misassigned paternity among out of wedlock births.
So, I’m curious for more information about what inspired you to investigate the masculinist movement (and I still don’t like that term). Did your boy-friend leave you alone and you can’t figure out why you can’t replace him so quickly as you or others have previously? Do you recognize for the first time in your life that the quality of life you have enjoyed for so long may not be at your disposal anymore and you’re wondering why or if it continues, at whose expense (hint – men). And that only a small handful of men throughout the history of the world have enjoyed the quality and standard of living that more than one-third the population of women do around the world today.
And for the record, children in sweat shops in China isn’t even a remotely good comparison of what women have done to men. China is a different country AND culture half a world away, and we do not have ANY influence on how their leaders treat their people and people treat one another (except in the most abstract and indirect way). I personally do not buy any Chinese products because even though my influence on the quality of life for workers there is abstract at best, it makes a difference (also, most of their products are crap), but I don’t expect everyone to be that consciencious (I confess to being a bit extreme in that sense and recognize it tends to put some people off – it’s not a deliberate character trait, so I can’t do too much about it). So, I am presenting myself as an extreme example of conscience (not necessarily practical but it is what it is). I do not expect everyone to follow my lead and I do not judge anyone who doesn’t. It’s my choice. HOWEVER, I am very critical of women who predate upon other people (men and women) in their own culture, their own country and their own families. I do not expect my choices to benefit me, but I certainly do not expect them to be used against me. There is no excuse for an adult woman in a country as isolated and small as NZ or even within the US failing to see the consequences of her behavior. As a woman, whether or not you have made an attempt on a man’s life or collected child support or divorced your husband for self-serving reasons, you have benefitted directly from the post-feminist dystopian police state that is NZ and the women who are guilty of these crimes (although I argue the US is much more a police state than NZ, NZ is certainly equal or more of a feminist state than the US, from what I’ve read lately), but how could anyone go on living their lives with so much bliss while men jumped ship in droves and their quality of lives plumetted and children suffered. Responsibility for that is not a choice – you are responsible because the spoils of the war against men have gone directly into your pockets. That means for everything you took from the State without working, it took away from a man who did work for it, and it was obvious in divorce statistics, fatherless children, male suicide, economic decline, etc… Didn’t you see all this and didn’t you understand your direct responsibility. This isn’t like somehow your consumer choice affected the quality of life of a child in another country and culture half a world away. It affected the life of a man or a child next door or even in your own household. How drunk or blind or cold-blooded can you be to miss all that.
Even after my wife tried to kill me, she still tried to make me responsible for her attempt on my life, claiming that it was because of my alleged abuse of her. What alleged abuse? I disagreed with her about our family’s budget or about her snatching our children from my physical custody or about her adultery or about her attempt on my life. She actually believed that my objection to her attempt on my life is a form of abuse and that her attempt on my life is evidence of my alleged abuse of her. How absurd is that? And that is exactly how it was portrayed in court and the court accepted that argument as legitimate and rewarded her for it. And women in the community clucked and shook their heads and ostricized me because I had abused her. When you accepted the spoils from the war against men, you accepted responsibility for its consequences.
I have a morbid curiosity about you. Far from being vulnerable, you sound dangerous. The road of my life is littered with the bodies of many men who encountered vulnerable women whom they wanted to take care of and protect but then were eaten by them. I do not wish women harm. I want them to be happy and I want men to be happy. But women’s brains work differently. They are obsessed with control and power – it is an addiction. And like any addict, you can’t be involved with them because they will do anything to satisfy their addiction. Including destroy your life. They may not mean to do it. They may actually have remorse or regret it. If they understand what they’ve done at all (but I doubt it). But they still do it. And that is a very accurate portrayal of all women. They are very dangerous. And the consequences or a relationship with one is considerable. As one person on MENZ put it, you’ve priced yourselves out of the market. As much as I want a relationship with a woman, the cost is too high, so why bother. I would love to come to NZ and meet you and enjoy our new acquaitance, but the reality is a woman can never be trusted. There are no consequences to her actions. And she obviously can’t check her own behavior because she can’t even see beyond her own addictions and excess. I’m off to another country for reconnaisance. Unlike men from NZ, if I leave the US, I will be an outlaw – an illegal immigrant like so many other men who have left the US. Unlike NZ men who leave, I will not have access to money or property and I will not be able to travel freely as I will have no passport and no residency. That’s what has been done to me and so many other men. Who’s minding the shop while I’m gone? Probably no-one. Let me know if you ever want to put me up in NZ. I’ll need a place to live and to be fed and watered occasionally. Daily walks are good too. But I have nothing else to offer because your sisters took everything.