Where The Boys Aren’t

When I die, it might be said of me that I was a bad uncle.

Not a creepy uncle, or a dangerous one, mind you. Just one who is occasionally derelict in his duty towards his niece. I like to make plans for my son and Bark’s son — plans for indoor karting, NERF(tm) guns, trips to South Carolina. Whenever I do this, Bark reminds me that he has two children. “You always forget about your niece,” he chides.

He’s wrong. I’m not forgetting about her; I simply think that she doesn’t need my help or involvement in any significant amount. She’s a talented young woman with a long list of accomplishments, outstanding bone structure, and a family history of staying thin. This is THE_CURRENT_YEAR and the deck is stacked in her favor.

I’m not so sure the same is true for our sons. Over the past decade I’ve gotten the impression that young American men are increasingly under fire, so to speak — that’s a metaphor, although it’s literally true for many of our least fortunate young men who see the armed forces as a way to escape what increasingly looks like a planned economic hollowing-out of our rural counties. The above chart, which has been circulating a bit on Twitter with no substantive refutation of its statistics, only serves to reinforce my concern. (You can see the original, and click through for references, here.)

This is what I want you to do.

0. Read the chart quickly;
1. Then consider your most immediate reaction to it.

Is that reaction some mixture of shame and annoyance? Do you feel a small (or significant) measure of contempt for the type of person who would even bother to create such a thing? When you hear the phrase “a war on boys”, is your first response to express your disappointment with, or contempt for, the sort of person who uses that phrase? If you’re like most of our male readers, I bet you have at least some of these reactions.

Would you like to know why? And would you like to know why it’s critical that you change your response?

Simply stated, this response has been engineered in you by the people who would like to see young men knocked down a peg or two. It’s Rule #5 from Alinsky’s Rules For Radicals, “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon,” combined with a keen awareness of “toxic masculinity”. Think back to your childhood. Weren’t you raised with at least some degree of American Stoicism? Work hard, endure pain, don’t complain about things, don’t snitch on bullies. Even if your parents weren’t big on that particular conditioning, I bet you got some of it from the media, from the portrayals by John Wayne and Steve McQueen and Sly Stallone and Vin Diesel.

Therefore, when you see the above chart, your first response is probably some variant on “suck it up, kids.” Yes, we all know that young men are far more likely to die on the job than women. That’s totally fine. It’s part of the plan, part of the culture. The ones who don’t die will no doubt be stronger as a result, right?

You’re also aware at some level that the men who investigate and discuss these sorts of statistics are ridiculed and derided as “MRAs”. They are lampooned on the left and detested on the right. You don’t want to be ridiculed and lampooned. Very few men can endure ridicule. That’s why Frank Herbert’s test of humanity didn’t impress me much. The average 17-year-old boy can endure a near-infinite amount of pain. What he can’t take: being laughed at, particularly if it’s a girl doing the chuckling.

I was reminded of this a few weeks ago when a female autowriter decided to refer to me and Bark on social media as “the Incel Brothers”. This lady doesn’t know me very well, and I’m not sure she has ever met Bark. She’s from the generation before mine; I remember thinking that she was perhaps sixty-five years old when I met her a decade ago, and she has visibly aged since then. Yet even in her seventies she has a keen awareness that the best way to undermine men is by suggesting that they can’t get laid, and that the power of that is ridicule is so potent that it can be wielded by anyone, even someone who is herself long out of the dating market.

The most fascinating part of the “incel” argument is that you can’t refute it without sounding even more incel as a consequence. So all I will say is this: I’m married to a very nice-looking and in-shape woman who is approximately half the age of my accuser, and if I am, in fact, involuntarily celibate then I blame that on Ray’s Indoor Bike Park, the place where my son refuses to quit riding until they close, and the time that they close is 10PM, and the drive time back is two hours plus, and I don’t believe in putting the bikes away afterwards until I have any mechanical issues sorted — so who can blame Danger Girl if she’d rather be asleep at 1:30 in the morning? Yes, involuntary celibacy is a tough gig, but I’ve heard it also gives you special abilities, which might explain why I’m now easily clearing the new quintet of oversized “box jumps” on the new downhill line at a time of the night when most 48-year-old men have already retired to bed. INCEL POWER!

Last but not least, there is the fact that some men have it very good indeed. If we point out that young men aren’t going to college, we are “debunked” by someone pointing out that most CEOs and pro athletes and long-lasting movie stars are men. Implicit in this response is the idea that you’re not much of a man if you’re affected by — or if you even notice — gender disparities which favor women. Note, if you will, that this line of reasoning is never acceptable when we speak about issues affecting the African-American community; “1,200 of you are millionaire athletes” is not an acceptable response to someone complaining of systematic racism. It is, however, considered perfectly normal to use it against men as a whole. Why that is so, and which interests are served by permitting this disparity, is left as an exercise for the reader.

You get the idea. We’re trained not to complain about the bad hand that men have been dealt nowadays, and we also know that complaining about it will make us the target of ridicule. If we notice the fact that the modern American system is set up in many ways to favor girls over boys, the mere act of noticing marks us out to be lesser men, because we have a male President and male winners of, ah, many UCI cycling disciplines.

The incentives for all of us to shut up are powerful indeed, and I understand why we rarely speak out in the defense of young men. Let me offer you a reason to ignore those incentives: because our own sons, grandsons, and nephews need us to speak out where they cannot. I know that it’s tempting to fall prey to the same sort of stoic pride in this matter with regards to our own kids: “Oh, my son is talented and bright and handsome and I have a half-million bucks set aside for his education so I’m not going to talk about the inequities facing young men because they won’t apply to my boy.” To which I would say: don’t put your sons in the path of a bullet just to satisfy your own self-image as father/provider/whatever.

I’ll use a specific pair of examples: I find it hard to believe that my son won’t get into the college of his choice; he understands more about data science at the age of ten than the average professional data scientist, he’s a first-rate ambidextrous epee fencer, and he can hit a golf ball pretty well. But that doesn’t mean that I shouldn’t be an active advocate for all the young men who haven’t been that lucky. Bark’s son will probably be a National Merit Semifinalist at the age of thirteen, the way I was. It doesn’t mean that Bark shouldn’t worry about admissions policies which discriminate against young men. We don’t want our sons growing up alone, without friends or teammates or comrades.

There’s another alternative, of course: You could always advocate for a return to traditional gender roles, where men do all the dying and women do all the childrearing. I think that’s a lost cause, at least in the short term. Our modern hybrid society (in the sense that is a hybrid between Orwell’s envisioned future and Huxley’s) is literally unable to perceive any benefit to such a return. It will take some hard times indeed to make that a palatable option. Those hard times are perhaps coming, but in the meantime, to mention yet a third sci-fi author in a single paragraph, you should be aware that we will be playing by Harrison Bergeron rules for the foreseeable future. The most you can hope for is to reduce the amount of handicap given to your sons. Be an advocate for them. Your daughters and nieces won’t hold it against you. I’m not the greatest uncle in the world, but I know that much, at least.

69 Replies to “Where The Boys Aren’t”

  1. Avatarredlineblue

    My daughter (an only child) ‘has every advantage’ as they say, plus one: I’m free to cultivate her slight ferocity with the same energy I try to devote to her smarts. The system is teaching her Lots of rules, and I’m leaching in a little useful wariness of both.
    Try that with a 6-year-old *boy* in suburban DC, let me know what watch list you end up on.

    Reply
  2. AvatarJ

    Thank you for this article. I felt sadness reading those statistics.

    There are challenges with being female, and there is more an more information out there to help people cope and grow. I am thankful for that. The more functional people we have in our society, the better we all become.

    I don’t really see people talking about male issues anymore – something I thought we were getting better at acknowledging in the 90’s (think “Jeremy” by Pearl Jam). Recently it seems we are going backwards, and there has to be a better balance to be found.

    In my travels I was recommended this book. It wasn’t a cure for anything, but it was very much helpful in my search for becoming a better man: https://www.amazon.com/Dont-Want-Talk-About-Overcoming/dp/0684835398

    This book, combined with Jordan Peterson’s “12 Rules for Life” should be mandatory reading for young men/boys.

    Jordan Peterson’s book for BOTH boys and girls in junior high or high school. Terrence Real’s book for men before parenthood.

    I myself have been asked to participate in mentorship programs for multiple high schools that focus on supporting kids going into the STEM field. None of them have included both boys and girls – they are all female only. That isn’t equality of opportunity.

    The argument seems to be “men have had it so good until now, it’s only fair”, which to me sounds more like a terribly naive person trying to fix something they know nothing about. Defining our problems are the hardest part of any corrective action. If boys had support, and it served the individuals well, then removing support doesn’t solve the problems society is facing. It creates new ones – a discussion well articulated in Dr. Peterson’s book.

    Reply
  3. AvatarFrank Galvin

    I work in higher ed and have a front row seat to the unfolding of this toxic maculinity pearl clutching. It’s as every bit as bad as Jack states and then some. I’m doing my utmost to raise hellions with integrity. God help us.

    Reply
  4. AvatarJohn C.

    I hope Jack is wrong that a return to traditional gender roles is not realistic. I think it is the only way back from all those statistics that show males depressed and without purpose. The traditional roles would replace all the depression with stress over what is being built coming apart but the building provides purpose.

    Reply
  5. AvatarFrank Galvin

    I can’t think of another writer whose low hanging fruit is the Sci Fi references, but the overarching point is to establish he is in no way creepy, incelibacy for many of us is a temporary choice, today’s incels have no idea that our temporary fix back in the day was the greatest line-up of girl/girl VHS that has yet to be duplicated. They’re on neo-nazi kek threads meming away – we had Janine Lindmulder. Your title, is that of a connoisseur. Well done.

    Reply
    • AvatarJohn Marks

      Well, the title reference went clear over my head. But now that it is in focus, I think that that damsel’s family name was spelled “Lindemulder.”

      I also must confess that, on first reading, I wondered to myself, “What’s Jean Lindamood got to do with this?” Unless she’s the geriatric scrivenatrix who snarked on Jack.

      jm

      Reply
  6. AvatarEverybodyhatesscott

    What good is giving women all the advantages in the world if it dooms them to spend their life not having children because there are no decent men to have them with? The war on boys is a war on the family. My daughter can choose an incel or a guy with a rotation? Awesome choices. I have sympathy for incels, I was a late bloomer. When i figured out how women truly are (aka not men with boobs) i was furious for a bit but teaching a guy how to be attractive to the opposite sex is verboten.

    Reply
  7. AvatarGreg Hamilton

    I came across this incel thing quite accidently. To some men it is a serious problem and is very sad. That said judged by the authors previous writings, it would appear that he is the farthest thing from an incel and appears to have had what the supposed PUAs (pickup artists) called “game.” I never had game but I never really had a problem with women so it is depressing to hear what some men are going through, mainly from what I have read due to Instagram. Instagram, the so called incels say, has many women with many male admirers and the men can’t even get a response from the women when they post. I don’t use it so I don’t have any experience.
    On the subject of colleges, fortunately for the author and his brother, they and their offspring are quite mentally gifted so they will have little if any problems getting their children into a good school. I hope I am as lucky with my daughter.
    As far as colleges being indoctrination centers, one could always apply to a school with an open curriculum policy and take the courses that the student finds challenging and informative. It worked for me even though the college I attended was a very liberal school and thus proved provocative and amusing.

    Reply
  8. AvatarFrank Mansfield

    You can’t be a National Merit Semi-finalist at 13 unless you’re in your junior year of high school. You can score high enough on the PSAT to make the cut if you were otherwise eligible. At least that was the way it was in the mid/late 1970s. (Might be different in those backward ACT states)

    /consistent 99th percentile standardized test scorer/NMSF

    Reply
  9. AvatarSIV

    You can’t be a National Merit Semi-finalist at 13 unless you’re in your junior year of high school. You can score high enough on the PSAT to make the cut if you were otherwise eligible. At least that was the way it was in the mid/late 1970s. (Might be different in those backward ACT states)

    /consistent 99th percentile standardized test scorer/NMSF

    Reply
    • AvatarRonnie Schreiber

      I don’t think there’s an age requirement for taking those tests, but only high school juniors can use the PSAT for consideration by the National Merit organization.

      I’m not sure how high you have to score to be Nat’l Merit Finalist. I think my PSAT score was 1380 and I qualified back in the early 1970s. I’m not quite in the 99th percentile.

      FWIW, based on my experience as a finalist (and things may have changed since the ’70s), becoming a National Merit Scholar doesn’t necessarily mean you are smarter or more capable than those who are merely finalists. What school you go to, or major you pursue, can determine whether or not you get the scholarship. For example, Michigan State recruited me heavily. At the time, there were more National Merit Scholars at MSU than at any other school – because the school itself gave out something like 65 NM scholarships a year. Had I gone to MSU, I might have gotten one.

      My dad, who was an alum of MSU’s veterinary school, enjoyed the campus visit, though.

      Reply
  10. AvatarCJinSD

    The reason men still do most outstanding things is that Marxists are better at destroying boys than they are at turning women into things that they are not.

    Is Jean Lindamood calling you and Bark the Incel Brothers? Maybe imaginary falling pianos aren’t worth getting bent out of shape about.

    Reply
  11. AvatarPaul M.

    Maybe before we order killing of another country’s official, it would have been good to get a female perspective in that room.

    Seems to me like at the highest levels, our president is surrounded by men (Pompeo, defense secretary, joint chief of staff, kushner, Pence, whoever national security adviser is nowadays).

    Maybe it wouldn’t change a thing, but a female perspective brings a layer of analysis, sensitivity, and what happens next that all those men in the room miss. No wonder when I watched Pompeo next day trying to explain what was so imminent, he looked so lost.

    Reply
    • AvatarCJinSD

      Sorry Paul, but the left is so ridiculous that I can’t tell if you’re lampooning them or not. Hitlery did an excellent job of thinking about Benghazi until she decided that it didn’t make a difference who she let die.

      Reply
    • AvatarNewbie Jeff

      “…it would have been good to get a female perspective in that room.”

      Hmm. Maybe Iran is doing the same thing as they plot their retaliation. You know, to get the female perspective on the best way to kill Americans.

      I have a solution: our female representatives in Congress demand no war with Iran until there’s at least 25% female representation in the regime’s leadership.

      If Iran refuses, then Hollywood can lead a boycott… no Springsteen or Katy Perry concerts until they comply. That’ll show ’em.

      Reply
    • AvatarOne Leg at a Time

      I strongly doubt that Trump made this decision without DCI in the room.

      I have served with women – I don’t think “woman’s perspective” always means what you think it means.

      Reply
    • AvatarRonnie Schreiber

      “If women were in charge, things would be more peaceful!” eh? Because Margarent Thatcher, Golda Meir, and Indira Gandhi apparently never waged war. You sure you want to defend that particular ideological hill?

      If you think women won’t send our sons into harms way, perhaps you should familiarize yourself with the statistics that show that not only are fathers more willing to risk their own safety for their children than mothers, mothers are twice as likely to injure or kill their kids as dads are.

      It’s quite amazing the number of people that think that having a vagina makes one more moral than other humans. Almost as amazing as thinking that something is rare above diamonds, despite there being about 4 billion of them.

      Reply
      • Avatarstingray65

        Ronnie – you can see how some people would think that women will avoid wars, after all every woman that has ever run for office says so, and Obama just made a statement saying so – and we know politicians (especially female ones) never lie.

        Reply
  12. AvatarNotToday

    OMG THANK YOU FOR POSTING THIS. I’ve been needing an outlet to express my feelings on this subject and you opened the door.

    Two weeks ago we had a big family Christmas. Twice I heard my 18-year old niece giving my 4-year old nephew (her cousin) a hard time. He later told me about it and I told him it wasn’t nice of her. His dad stupidly said, “They tease you because they love you.” Nephew later gave me a hug and told me he loved me (that doesn’t happen in my family!!).

    A couple hours later, he and I were racing cars at the table and she was pestering him; I asked her to stop, “What if he gets mad and responds like a boy might?” She cocked her head and gave me attitude, “Good, that’s what we want!”. I was shocked. Her sister who idolizes her said she should listen to my parenting advice.

    I heard her razzing him a couple more times throughout the day while he was playing with his new “best toy ever!”, so I quietly told his mother that it needed to stop—“watch him getting angry, what if he responds and gets in trouble?”. She tried before she said, so this crap had been going on for months; the bully’s father heard us talking and got involved. Niece threw a fit, said I yelled at her (I didn’t), then her dad chewed me out, threatened me, and they both left.

    I stupidly called her and apologized profusely that I was sad she left and said nobody wanted her to leave. I have been feeling bad for over two weeks, but in my heart I know boys remember this bullying stuff, and I pray he remembers my defending him. He’s the most well-behaved, intelligent, kind kid ever and a couple of them want to change his spirit. F that. His uncle was there for him when no one else was.

    Thank you for standing up for boys.

    P.S. I make sure to also buy his younger sister a Hot Wheels every time they visit—she likes being included, she needs being defended also—may you find a way to defend your niece as well :]

    P.P.S. Sorry for the rant, but I wanted to provide an example! :/

    Reply
    • AvatarAoLetsGo

      You would be amazed about how much a little help/guidance goes for young men today. I have a son and 12 nephews and I have tried my best to help them out in the way I think benefits each one the most. They all need this from the one that breezed through medical school to the one I am trying to help not flunk out of high school.

      The thing is that it really is not work on my part; it is quite enjoyable to be The Uncle. Lately, when I enter a family gathering or wedding or whatever some of them have started yelling out my name like I am some kind of Viking God. I know it is mostly in jest, but still…

      Reply
  13. AvatarWidgetsltd

    I’m a 50 year old, married, white male from the suburbs, and I too am tired of seeing every damned thing run by some older white guy in a suit. Why not give an intelligent woman a shot at leadership and find out what happens?

    Reply
    • Avatarstingray65

      You raise in interesting point, but not for the reason you likely think. For over 50 years the schools, universities, politicians, social activists, and the media have been towing the feminist line that women are abused by patriarchy and toxic masculinity, and that women therefore need extra help to crash those glass ceilings. Thus schools are feminized with mostly female staffing (teaching and administration), while curriculum that celebrates mostly male accomplishments in science, politics, military, business, arts is taken out or put in a negative light (i.e. the founding fathers were slave owners), PE is cut because it encourages toxic competition, and universities set up special scholarships that only women (or minorities) are eligible for. Then upon graduation, females will find that organizations of all types have implemented unofficial or official quota systems to make sure women (and non-Asian minorities) get hired in the proper proportion, and special female only mentorship programs to make sure their career progressions are not stymied by lack of support. When girls watch movies and tv shows they will see women constantly portrayed as in charge or as experts in male dominated occupations (i.e. police, military, science), while constantly showing women as physical superiors (i.e. 105 lb 5 foot 4 actress beats up 3 rogue ex-Navy Seals without messing up her perfect hair or nails), and of course the bad guys (i.e. greedy executives, crooked politicians, terrorists, killers, rogue Navy Seals) will almost always be white males.

      So can you guess what happens when women get all this “help” and white males are constantly portrayed negatively and discriminated against? Many of the boys who aren’t physically or cognitively gifted, and/or without good male role models will soon realize the system is set up against them and stop trying very hard – they will be the ones doing poorly in school, not applying to college, spending their days playing video games in their parent’s basement, and perhaps drowning their sorrows with drugs. Meanwhile, the boys who are gifted and/or who have supportive parents who haven’t beaten the “toxic masculinity” out of them will realize the system is set up against them, which means they will have to work twice as hard to get recognized and rewarded. They will be the ones working 60 hour weeks, and volunteering to take the tough courses and risky work assignments as the quickest way to stand out and gain competitive advantage. On the other hand, girls will quickly learn that the system is set up to support them, so no matter how little effort they put in, or how poorly they do, or whatever poor choices they make, they will still get a scholarship, or a nice indoor job, or parole instead of prison, or public assistance (paid mostly by male tax dollars).

      What this means is that all this female centered “help” will destroy half the male population from being productive citizens, and will deincentivize most females from putting in much effort or taking any risks. Meanwhile, the other half of the male population males will get extra motivation to work extra hard and take the risks that will put them in the corner office, or make them self-made billionaires by age 40, or President of the US with a super-model wife. In fact, the 2016 election is a perfect reflection of the new reality. Hillary was basically appointed the Democrat candidate because she was female and had name recognition (meanwhile Bernie gets sabotaged behind the scenes). She had no career accomplishment that could not be directly traced to her decision to marry and stay with Bill Clinton, and no vision to promote beyond being the first female president. As a result, Hillary ran the most leisurely campaign schedule in modern history, spending most of her time at events with big donors who wanted to be supportive of the 1st female president, rather than attend “retail” events with “deplorable” ordinary citizens. Meanwhile, Donald Trump had to overcome not only the Democrats and Hillary, but also the Republican leadership who wanted low energy Jeb or little Rubio, and the most viscous and one-sided negative media coverage in the modern presidential history. But instead of giving up, he worked harder than anyone, attending more “retail politics” events than any candidate in history (despite his age), and although he had only half the campaign money of Hillary, convincingly won by taking states that had not voted Republican in years. In other words, giving people stuff they don’t earn or deserve, means they will almost never try hard enough to get to the top.

      Reply
      • Avatardejal

        “As a result, Hillary ran the most leisurely campaign schedule in modern history, spending most of her time at events with big donors who wanted to be supportive of the 1st female president, rather than attend “retail” events with “deplorable” ordinary citizens. ”

        My sister lives in a mixed neighborhood. Rich and poor. She’s not rich. Her ex grew up 2 doors down from a Gov. and current US Senator. 5 houses away Hillary had 2 fund raisers in the last election with the security that goes with it. The entry fee was pretty steep.

        The back door neighbor went to college with Pelosi and died. Pelosi attended the funeral. 3 days my sister had to show ID to get to her house. I still take it as badge of honor when Kerry ran for President. I took her boys trick or treating. The backdoor neighbors owned the newspaper. Went into their house Big Kerry sign inside the vestibule. Middle kid says “Kerry sucks”. It was an awkward moment.

        Reply
      • AvatarWill

        To be fair to Mary here, a lot of men screwed that up for them not to try her. GM is a microcosm of the US I suppose.

        Reply
        • Avatarstingray65

          Mary is an interesting case. As someone with an engineering background, she is in once sense a return to GM’s glory days when most of the top people came from engineering backgrounds (e.g. Sloan, Knudsen, Wilson, Cole) versus their downturn days when the top people came out of finance (Murphy, Smith (Roger and John), Wagoner). On the other hand, I’ve never heard anything to suggest that she got the attention of top management because she was a star performer or innovator, but instead that her rapid rise was the result of the Obama administration leaning on GM to elevate women to the top floor during the bankruptcy/bailout period (along with leaning on them to sell unprofitable green cars such as the Volt). I would say her performance compares favorably to some of the more recent GM heads, but that isn’t a very high bar to clear.

          Reply
    • AvatarCJinSD

      Please reveal the location of this magical place where people still have their jobs because of what they can do instead of who they are so that I might relocate there.

      Reply
      • AvatarOne Leg at a Time

        Not necessarily part of this conversation – but Manufacturing in the Midwest is dying for people.

        In my experience – the only thing that they care about is what you can do.

        To a larger point – skill in a trade completely insulates one from the requirements of identity politics. I strongly doubt that there are electricians or tool&die makers who are losing their jobs for being the “wrong sort”, or for holding the “wrong opinions”.

        Reply
      • AvatarAoLetsGo

        Not a magical location, but a magical organization. It is not a university/school, not a big corporation, not the government. It is the small private company. The one I work at is innovative, cutting edge and the best in the world at what we do. We hire only the best and the drop-out rate is very steep. In our hiring we need the highest quality, hard working people so we don’t discriminate. While we do have 3 very talented females, we somehow we ended up being a company completely dominated by white males.
        The competitive, testosterone laden atmosphere is so thick you could cut it with a knife.

        My favorite example is our mission statement hanging on the wall. You know the one that has the standard pabulum about doing the best we can for our clients, blah, blah, blah. If you take it off the wall you will find that the president wrote on the back “Stop whining and work harder!”

        Reply
      • Avatardanio3834

        >I think Peterson explains it best; why women don’t tend to want to spend the prime of their lives working 80 hours a week like so many men do.

        This is a good point. I recall perusing LinkedIn recently and saw that someone posted about how in Sweden they’re pushing for what amounts to a part-time work week for everyone. The comments on the post showed the divide.

        I was perhaps a little obtuse and suggested that if people wanted to work part time, they select a job with part time hours as there are many available. Several women chimed in with comments along the lines “there are no professional level high paying jobs with benefits that are only part time.”

        Oh I see. You want something for nothing.

        Reply
  14. Avatarstingray65

    Very thought provoking essay once again Jack. I believe there are a couple of other points that could be raised. First, the anti-male climate in the US (and most other European heritage majority countries) is almost 100% directed at heterosexual white boys and men. There are lots of parties looking out for and favoring non-white males whether it is the current “lets let the criminals out of jail” movement, or affirmative action, athletic scholarships, or special “minority only” financial aid at elite universities. In fact, there is a recent story from the UK where two universities turned down a substantial financial gift from an elderly wealthy benefactor because he wanted it used to set up a scholarship program directed at white males from disadvantaged backgrounds. Similarly, homosexual or transgender males have lots of parties looking out for them to give them everything from free surgical reassignment to protection against “hate speech”, and the right to marry and/or adopt children, plus they are media darlings and far over-represented as attractive/prominent characters in movies and TV shows.

    Second, despite getting nearly everything they ever asked for in terms of equal rights and encouragement to take on any role, education, or career they desire (as denoted in the chart you displayed in your essay), studies consistently reveal that women are unhappier than ever. Could it possibly be that those hated “patriarchal” sex roles that evolved over thousands of years weren’t some evil plot hatched up by generations of toxic males to keep their women barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen, but instead were the roles that were found during much trial and error to maximize the happiness and welfare for the vast majority of both sexes? I wonder what the best and brightest in the gender studies department think about that?

    Reply
  15. tmkreutzertmkreutzer

    I think the article’s thesis is a good one and your observations about gender inequality are spot on.

    I disagree, however, with the idea that you should withhold opportunities from your niece because her brother needs more opportunities. That’s the exact same approach the other side is taking – limiting the opportunities of men & boys’ as a way of making women & girls more equal. That’s not right no matter which side you are on.

    It’s like a grand buffet where some people only eat the steak and the crab legs while others graze a little of everything. Ultimately, the goal should be that there be enough of everything to allow everyone to eat everything they want. While it might seem logical to withhold some of the steak and crab legs from to ensure there is enough left over for the grazers, it leaves those people who want more steak and crab legs unsatisfied. So, rather than limit some to the advantage of others, why not just add more to the buffet and allow everyone to be fully satisfied?

    The other part of the article, in which a female autojourno insults you suggesting you can’t get laid and you responding by saying she is old – which really means she is well past he child bearing years – is hilarious. I guess both genders have their own special weaknesses when it comes to insults.

    Reply
    • Avatarstingray65

      You raise some very good points. Feminism has tried to turn the relationship between the sexes into a competition, when the “natural” relationship throughout human history has been one of cooperation due to the specialized assets each brings to the table. After all, you can’t propagate the next generation without a functioning womb, and a pregnant woman or new mother is pretty much wolf food without the protection and resources of a man. The problem with the competition mode is the neither gender wins by putting the other down or ignoring them, they both just end up miserable and alone.

      As for insults – nothing hurts a man more than a woman’s comments about his manhood, and nothing hurts a woman (especially an older woman) more than an honest evaluation of her appearance by an attractive man, except for being ignored entirely.

      Reply
      • Avatardejal

        “After all, you can’t propagate the next generation without a functioning womb,”

        HOW DARE YOU!!!!!!! Their truth says that they can.

        Reply
  16. Avatarhank chinaski

    To quote le Chateau, ‘women get the men that they deserve.’ This will sort itself out in a generation or two. The ‘fierce’ women are behaving as Giant Pandas do and will become extinct as such, or else will be taken and bred by the apparently more manly invaders (as they deep down want to be). Men are rational, and respond to direct incentives. Our young best and brightest men are pumping out TikTok, Snapchat, and Tinder, debt instruments and high frequency trading. The invisible men who keep the lights on, the bits/bytes, water and sewage flowing, the bad guys behind bars and the barbarians behind the wall are laying down their burdens to say ‘fuck it, poolside’. By most self reported metrics, today’s young women are miserable. The barbarians by comparison are quite fertile. At the grave, a man is judged by his accomplishments and a woman by her grandchildren. This is the way.

    There’s a clever cartoon arguing who got it right, Orwell or Huxley, and I’ve posted the link here before.
    I’ll mention another fiction author who broached this subject, although not in the same breath as those giants: Palahniuk in ‘Adjustment Day’ (a little try hard, weak ending, also written as a screenplay that unlike Fight Club will never, ever make it to film). Cliffs: these unwanted males figure out that their leaders plan to be rid of them in a war, and preemptively bury them in pits, covered in lye.

    If I were a betting man, I’d wager on those rogue Navy Seals and their contemporaries that have been fighting insurgents overseas for the last decade and a half. They’ve learned a thing or two and it ain’t Fortnite.

    Reply
  17. AvatarDisinterested-Observer

    It seems like every time I am in the Rust Belt I see a UAW widow paying for lunch for her adult son and his out-of-wedlock child. That is not as it should be.

    Reply
  18. AvatarMrGreenMan

    They’ve broken most of the women with the victim cult. The fixation on hating someone and blaming him – The Man – for life’s difficulties makes people weak and keeps them adolescent, which is what American women are in the main.

    There was a news piece on local media about some Karen trying to get Home Depot named-and-shamed because of an abbreviation that did not mean “see you next time!” to her on her missed delivery slip. She went on and on about how she was doing this for all women, and that this sort of thing scared women, that it was threatening because the deliveryman knew where she lived, she invoked “Me Too”, etc.

    Women who respect men and care about their sons are mentally tough enough to wave off that sort of thing. I asked ones I know what they would do in the situation; the answers I got ranged from – “Well, I’d like to get my stuff” to “if someone said that in person, I’d insult back” to the more obvious “did the deliveryman really write this, or is it that neighbor who hates her?” and even the classic “I’d kick him in the nuts!”. No need to preen for Facebook to get a victim’s chorus going.

    This I-am-a-victim-so-I-have-a-voice Karen was mentally weak. You could tell from her remarks as well that she hates men, because she’s a “strong, empowered woman” who lives in fear that the deliveryman will rape her at any moment.

    Women who hate men and do not care about their sons are mentally fragile; it’s a real shame America creates so many of them and then lets them make decisions to burn civilization down rather than getting rid of the neurosis.

    Reply
  19. Avatar-Nate

    Wow ~ you guys are scaring me here, I’m an introvert I guess as I learn all this new stuff every time I read the comments .

    “raise hellions with integrity”

    Yes indeedy . I prolly watched too many 1930’s & 1940’s movies as a child because I got this message loud and clear .

    Never start a fight but always end it one way or t’other .

    “It seems like every time I am in the Rust Belt I see a UAW widow paying for lunch for her adult son and his out-of-wedlock child. That is not as it should be.”

    Agreed .

    Come to The Ghetto it’s the same damn thing .

    -Nate

    Reply
  20. Avatardejal

    Men killed in war, women most affected.
    Men are broke, women most affected
    Men work more than women, women most affected
    The Dating Gap: Men less likely to go to college, women most affected
    There are more homeless men than women, women most affected
    Climate change disproportionately affects women and young girls

    Reply
  21. AvatarDirty Dingus McGee

    I’m really glad that when I grew up, men were men and women were glad for that. Also that when you went to college, full time or nights, you acquired knowledge, not adjustment to your “feel’s”.

    On the increasingly rare times I hit some of the local pubs, it’s almost comical to see the parade of 35-50 year old women that are desperately trying to snag themselves a companion. They are slowly coming to the realization that they wasted their prime years, and are now reduced to riding the carousel of bar fly’s. They have created such a toxic environment in the workplace, that many men now refuse to be in a room alone with them, or even socialize with them away from the work place, even in the company of coworkers.

    I’m also not an incel, but have at times been a VOLCEL (voluntarily celibate). I would never be mistaken for Studley McMann, but I’m not Igor either, and never had trouble finding female companionship. These days as women are becoming more shrill and hateful, I often times have no interest in hearing them constantly piss and moan. The ones that do make it to a second or third date often times start talking about how well we “click” and should only see each other. GTFOH, I don’t even know how many cats you have (usually at least 2).

    Women today are reaping what they have sown, and I don’t see it changing for at least a couple more generations. Glad I’m old and will not see the likely worse to come times before it turns around.

    Reply
  22. AvatarRonnie Schreiber

    There’s no such think as an incel, just guys too cheap to pay for it.

    Seriously, they can get that particular itch scratched for $100, $150 for full service. Would you rather spend your life in resentment and anger or just skip going out to dinner for a week and hire someone whose job it is to please you?

    As the father of two daughters I’m not going to say that all women are whores. Women do, however, have their own terms. With some it’s a middle class lifestyle and with others it’s $150 and would you please stop and get a pint of E&J brandy on your way.

    For a while, every time I’ve heard the “women make 79% of what men make” canard, I ask, “What about 94%?”. “What’s 94%?” they’ll respond. “The percentage of on the job fatalities that are men. You think that might be worth a couple of dollars an hour?”

    Reply
  23. AvatarKevin Jaeger

    I don’t have much of a problem seeing fewer young men in higher ed. They’ve figured out that outside of some core programs the rest of it is a scam that just isn’t intended for their benefit and they now quite logically avoid it. Many young baristas only figure that out after they have more than $100K of student loans so I don’t see how this really advantages women anyway.

    A much bigger social problem is that women won’t marry anyone that they or their friends believe to be of lower social status, so this will lead to many, many young women with degrees living alone with their cats which they will find doesn’t lead to their happiness, either.

    We have a massive social problem that will certainly lead to a couple of broken generations but I’m not sure I’d call it just a war on boys or even discrimination against men. It’s something much more insidious than that.

    Reply
    • Avatardejal

      The biggest issue with that is higher education makes connections. Sometimes those connections lead to politics.
      On the state and higher levels everyone has their secret college handshake. Not too many proles that get their hands dirty in those groups. They end up passing laws like the gig economy law in Cali. You lose your job and complain and the pols tell you to shut up because your job wasn’t a good job anyways. They are your betters and know better than you if your job is worthwhile or not.

      Speaking of the gig economy law. Vox laid the lumber down on their people because of it. For yucks, I went to one of their sites in December. I think it was their Golden State Warriors sports site. The people who were going to be out of work in a couple of weeks were blaming Trump. Can’t fix stupid.

      Reply
  24. AvatarJohn Matrix

    so a couple of weeks ago i was on a plane, one of those budget airlines where they cram 189 seats in a 737, had a widow seat and sitting directly behind me was a mid 20s white gal and next to her was a mid 60s korean couple. overhearing the gal talking to the couple telling all about the great time she had at the city we just left and then her babbling about her great job and all the responsibilities she had blah blah blah. then it got quiet back there and she proceeded to kick my seat for an hour and fidget and constantly crinkle her giant chip bag. so i had enough and turned around and said could you stop kicking my seat. well holy hell she looks at me and says HEY BUDDY I AINT KICKIN YOUR SEAT , then goes on a tirade about how would i like it if she turns her over head light on, then turns it on just to try to piss me off. i was ready to explode and tell her what i thunk about her but then thought why bother, it could get me tased. i am an old white guy and that gal was a nice looker but really who in their right mind would want to be with a demon shrew like that, maybe for a night or a weekend but my god to live with that entitled millenial would be a living nightmare.

    Reply
    • AvatarJohn C.

      If you are living in your parents basement like so many males her age, you were probably in love when she said she had a real job. When will our alleged prosperity lead to recruiting and the multiple offers with benefits and security from real entities that our parents had?

      Reply
  25. Avatar-Nate

    This article is really thought provoking .

    ? What if you just don’t give a shyte what the pointy heads think and work diligently to make a good life and teach your kids the value of honesty and hard work after getting a decent education ? .

    FWIW, when my son graduated high school at the top of his class, there was a less than 50 % graduation rate, I taught him in grade school to work hard and develop good study & homework habits, no folded / wrinkled home work etc., etc….

    He’s doing _far_ better than I ever did .

    He’s able to maintain a stay at home wife who’s full time job is raising and teaching their two kids to be smart , educated , inquisitive and ahead of the crowd .

    People who say ‘you can’t’ should be side stepped .

    -Nate

    Reply
    • Avatardejal

      I don’t have kids. I’ve told each one of my nephews to not screw people over but you and yours come first then “them (society)”. If you have anything left over, then them. If you defer you will be trampled. And no one will care.

      You get into your late 20s these days and if you don’t have it nailed down with a plan, you are old news and have defects to people that are judging you. And we get judged 24/7.

      Reply
    • Avatarthrowaway account

      That’s good stuff. I will say that a careful and discriminating perusal of the old Anarchist Cookbook by father and son is a good way to bond. Also lets you check in with you son to see if he’s developed critical thinking skills at the same time.

      Reply
  26. AvatarSerge

    Woke narcissism vs old school family values has just been put to the actual live test by Mr Harry Markle. The outcome of that experiment will be fascinating. Would have been even better if it didn’t involve an actual live child.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.