“I’m so tired of masculinity. And male aggression. And male voyeurism. And male arrogance. And male mediocrity. And how we’re conditioned to normalize it.”
— Zuriya at Tumblr.com
What inspired that declaration? That 24-word anti-male outburst was published on Tumblr a week ago and has already acquired more than 3,000 likes or reblogs. The young woman who posted it is the child of Eritrean refugees, living in Southern California, and has absorbed from her American education many typical progressive attitudes inculcated by our public school system. She is a Muslim, and does not seem to recognize (or at least does not acknowledge) that the anti-male attitudes of her feminism are fundamentally incompatible with Islam.
Good luck getting your imam to sign off on that idea, Zuriya. Now, let’s hear about your actual relationships with men:
I was talking about my boyfriend/partner/whatever . . . to a good friend a few weeks ago and like, I don’t get giddy about men. I never have. I have never seen men as an essential and important and necessary part of my life. If we broke up, I’d just keep it pushin TBH. I was with a guy for five years and I hardly felt butterflies. It just isn’t my demeanor. Men are overwhelmingly to some extent f–kboys and I’m just not concerned with getting into my feelings about them. Idk, outwardly displays of overzealous affection are just corny AF me.
I love being in a long distance relationship. I have horrible anxiety and depression and have been trying through medication and lifestyle changes to get that under control. Right now, my priorities include work, school, my bills, friends and then my relationship. I’m grateful for this indefinite separation because it gives me time to get my life together. I’m not getting married for another few years at least, until I have my Masters and life set together . . . I need to be committed to myself before I can commit to someone else and this solitude gradually allows me to do that.
Well, there it is again, you see?
How often have we noted the correlation between feminism and mental illness? Depression and anxiety seem to be nearly ubiquitous in the feminist movement. Self-harm and eating disorders are also common, and we occasionally encounter diagnoses of personality disorders as well. There is a clear pattern: Young women who view men as irresponsible and untrustworthy “f–kboys,” women whose emotional instability is serious enough to require psychiatric intervention — such are the unhappy women who find that feminism’s hostility to the existing social order offers a rationalization of their discontents.
Have they never read Eric Hoffer’s The True Believer: Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements? Do they not recognize themselves as the frustrated misfits Hoffer described?
Those who see their lives as spoiled and wasted crave equality and fraternity more than they do freedom. If they clamor for freedom, it is but freedom to establish equality and uniformity. . . .
Those who clamor loudest for freedom are often the ones least likely to be happy in a free society. The frustrated, oppressed by their shortcomings, blame their failure on existing restraints. Actually their innermost desire is for an end to the ‘free for all.’ They want to eliminate free competition and the ruthless testing to which the individual is continually subjected in a free society.
So it is that the feminist movement attracts to its banner frustrated women “who see their lives as spoiled and wasted,” women who require a scapegoat to “blame [for] their failure” and who find in feminism’s anti-male ideology a ready-made excuse for their unhappiness. Yet for every miserable misfit grumbling about “masculinity . . . male aggression . . . male arrogance . . . male mediocrity” on the Internet, there are many more happy women going about their normal lives, without mental illness and without feminism. If we compared the objective circumstances of any two women, one self-identifying as feminist and the other rejecting the “feminist” label, what difference would distinguish them?
Are anti-feminist women on average more “privileged” than the militant man-haters? I seriously doubt it. In fact, I think generally the opposite is true: One does not commonly encounter working-class women reading Judith Butler and ranting about the gender binary and the heterosexual matrix. Whatever the normal woman’s complaints about her relationships with men, she does not construe her problems in terms of academic theory and political ideology.
Understanding the ‘F–kboy’ Syndrome
There isn’t a lot of theory in Zuriya’s feminism. She cites no authors and does not sling around trendy academic jargon. Rather, she expresses anti-male attitudes in the rhetoric of popular culture. For example, the term “f–kboy” seems to have originated as a homophobic putdown, suggesting effeminate weakness, but was adapted by women as an all-purpose slur, so that “f–kboy” is now “a pejorative toward men who are perceived as oversexed or disrespectful toward women.”
Is Zuriya correct? Are men “overwhelmingly to some extent f–kboys”? No, but a wise woman is naturally cautious toward any man who shows an interest in her, lest he prove to be a “player” who wants to run his game on her. Anyone observing the behavior of young men on the prowl recognizes the “f–kboy” type who seems to think himself entitled to an unlimited supply of enthusiastic partners for casual sex, and who has no interest in a committed relationship.
The question feminists cannot answer is, “Whence does this f–kboy attitude arise?” Where do these guys develop the attitude that every woman they meet is irrepressibly horny and ready to go?
Feminists are eager to blame “culture” and “society” for men’s bad attitudes toward women, because it would not advance the feminist agenda to admit that f–kboys are f–kboys because too many young women actually are irrepressibly horny and ready to go. These young women have adopted the ideas of sexual “empowerment” advanced by so-called “pro-sex feminists” and, abandoning all concern for their own dignity, pursued a false “equality” by enacting a simulacrum of what they suppose to be a male prerogative, shameless promiscuity. Ask any parent of teenage boys how it is. If your son is reasonably attractive and popular, he will be more or less besieged by lovestruck girls by the time he finishes middle school. Certainly, a good-looking teenage boy doesn’t need to expend any strenuous effort to land a girlfriend, and the reversal of customary roles (wherein the boy was the romantic pursuer and the girl was pursued) is so common that every day is now Sadie Hawkins Day.
This “Girls Gone Wild” culture of unrestrained female promiscuity, which “pro-sex” feminists have actively encouraged, creates an environment where the f–kboy attitude becomes commonplace. Lectures about “safe sex,” combined with a systemic hostility to religion and traditional morality, have the effect of turning public schools into training camps for sluts and f–kboys. Young people are taught that sex is only about hedonistic pleasure, and that any sexual behavior is acceptable so long as it is “safe.”
Schools now teach kids: “God is dead. Sex is fun. Use a condom.”
Parents in many cases actually endorse this attitude, because today’s young people were born in the 1990s, when “safe sex” became the prevailing mantra of public education.
Irresponsible parents raise irresponsible children, and the flight from responsibility — the childish desire to live in NerfWorld, where everything is padded to protect us against the consequences of our actions — produces f–kboys, selfish hedonists who cannot be trusted.
From a semi-humorous list of their habits:
He’s constantly begging for nudes.
F–kboys are hungry and desperate for female attention. They feed their f–kboy ways with nude pics from the dozens of girls they talk to on Tinder, OkC, Reddit, and other random sites. He hides his phone when he gets a Snapchat because he knows it’s gonna be some girl’s nudies. For every one nude pic you send, he’s getting like 10 others from other chicks. . . .
He’s disrespectful to his mother.
A man who doesn’t respect his mother is just a f–kboy you don’t have time for. If he treats his mom like sh*t, just think about how he’s going to treat you when the honeymoon phase wears off. Yes, it’s important to see how he treats both of his both parents, but how he respects his mother is a clear reflection as to how he views women in his life.
He never wants to be seen in public with you.
He always has some excuse for why you two can’t be seen together. He’s busy, doesn’t feel like going out, whatever. If a man isn’t proud to be seen with then obviously you’re just a sidepiece for this
f–kboy. . . .
Read the whole thing, and ask yourself: Where do guys get the idea they can treat women like that? Answer: From women who let themselves be treated like that. From women who have been taught that it’s “empowering” to be sexually promiscuous and pursue hookups, women who have been taught to scoff at virtue, women who have been taught that “equality” is the only moral standard.
The Inexorable Logic of ‘Equality’
Whether or not a regime of “sexual equality” is even possible, we ought to ask whether such equality is actually desirable.
“Wow, he’s so equal,” said no woman ever. A woman wants a man who is in some way her superior, a man she can respect and rely upon, someone who brings to a relationship personal attributes, economic assets and social status greater than her own. Of course, no woman wishes to be weak, helpless and dependent, and she does not want a man to treat her as his inferior, but she can never love a man she cannot also admire. A man must bring “value added” to her life.
Feminism’s advocacy of “sexual equality” actually deprives women of the opportunity for that kind of positive relationship. Feminists constantly derogate masculinity and express an ideological hostility to male achievement, viewing male-female relations as a competitive zero-sum game in which a man’s success can only be explained in terms of discrimination against women. If men achieve success only though the oppression of women, as feminists believe, then the most successful man must therefore also be the most oppressive man.
The logic is inexorable. If ending women’s oppression requires ending male supremacy, this will require the enactment of policies to deprive men of educational and economic opportunity, to redistribute wealth and social status from men to women. Men must be discouraged from pursuing high-paying careers in order that women may have a greater share of those careers, for how else is “equality” to be achieved?
Is it any wonder, then, that the young woman finds the men she meets are selfish, immature f–kboys whose only interest in women is whatever hedonistic pleasure they can provide? In a world where male-female relations are viewed as a remorseless power struggle between antagonistic competitors, what basis can there be for voluntary cooperation between men and women? Where are the incentives for men to be anything better than f–kboys?
Many problems facing young women today are actually caused by feminism’s “success” in destroying the social order. If feminism is the cause of your problems, the solution is not more feminism.
This is no different than any of the other progressive projects. They start from a position of hubris, rejecting the idea that the current order was the result of a long, evolutionary process. To them, there is no reason things are the way they are, they only exist to be destroyed and replaced.
Then, when things inevitably blow up, they’re mystified as to how this happened.
I have horrible anxiety and depression and have been trying through medication and lifestyle changes to get that under control.
If that medication is something along the lines of Xanex or Prozac, then she should be aware that many people who take such meds often complain of the side effect of ‘not caring’ and some have said that, while on them, they feel an ‘absence of God’.
“A woman wants a man who is in some way her superior…”
This is the “one weird rule” of happy and healthy relationships. This unassailable fact should be uncontroversial, but feminists have been so successful in obscuring it that it now seems radical.
Prediction, this sad pathetic loser will end up in a burka somewhere in the Islamic State.
The problem with these posts on Feminism is that there is s surfeit of evidence supporting the thesis. While some might suggest the continual highlighting of the latest lunacies is overkill, it seems that until Feminism is seen for what it truly is, the drumbeat must continue.
[…] Common Man-Hating Feminism. […]
How about we put all the man-hating feminists on their own island and
see how long they last. Bet they would be gone in a generation. Do the
math…err…biology.
By the way, one of the side effects of Prozac is loss or diminishing of sexual desire. DAMHIKT
Some men are revolting…not in the feminist meaning of that word in how they see men.
ironically these very same young women will hit 35 and be desperate for husbands, and realize how feminism betrayed them. When that happens I say let them rot.
A lot of men think of their wives as different but superior in ways they are not and the reciprocal applies to the man. The idea is not marriage as a zero sum game but a win win blending of strengths that cancel out weaknesses each individual may have.
Saudi claims American women drive because they don’t care if they get raped…
http://comonocreerendios-lem.blogspot.com/2015/02/saudi-historian-claimed-american-women.html
Better hope daddy doesn’t hear of this little girl, or else you may find yourself declared “dishonorable” and subject to the standard punishment to restore a family’s honor….
I will concede that a wife doesn’t want to be completely outclassed by her husband — there’s no stability or future in that kind of relationship.
But I think the idea that a good marriage is a well-balanced spreadsheet of strengths and weakness is a egalitarian feminist mistake that deliberately obscures an important truth.
A happy wife admires and values her husband for things that make him superior to her. The fact that he is generally superior makes her happy
I’m not saying that perfectly balanced and equal couples can’t be happy, I’m simply pointing out the fact that an emotionally normal woman is happiest when she can think of her man as her superior.
I’ve not seen a happy marriage were both husband and wife admire each other. But I agree perfectly balanced rarely if ever exists.
I know most woman want a man who acts like a man, not a boy and most certainly not like a woman.
Long clip but worth the time.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=04j1RqInHjE#t=1091
Not only does “perfectly balanced” not exist — it’s not even desirable. No woman wants a man who is roughly “equal” to herself. Suitably matched? Yes. Equal? No. Maybe in the ideological abstract she thinks she wants equality, but in her heart she does not.
You’re right about that. When my 7-yo had a series of grand mal seizures that nearly killed him, I was freaking out, and the doctor gave me xanax. Took one and didn’t care about anything. It was creepy, and much more unpleasant than my mommy breakdown. I stopped taking them, and never will again.
She wants a participation trophy just for living. Now we see why it’s a bad idea for lefties and bleeding hearts to hand those out to kiddie tee ball players…they set unfortunate expectations.
Yes, it’s not a matter of power struggles. That’s just dysfunctional. It’s a matter of the separation of responsibilities. I do what I’m good at; that is, being a beautiful, delicate and charming Southern belle. And he does what he’s good at, which happens to be the dirty and sweaty things that I don’t want to do. This seems inherently equitable to me.
As long as feminists, communists, the government and other deviants control the schools, society will continue to decline. Exponentially. I don’t really want to still be alive when this latest batch of credulous suckers grows up; I can’t bear to see it.
I do Christian counseling, and I’ve got this poor kid (under 13) right now saying stuff to me that you wouldn’t believe, and I’m 100% sure he’s hearing this garbage at school. And the idiot parents are either brainwashed as well, or they are oblivious.
Yeah. Let them see what their stupidity has wrought. Part of life is taking responsibility for your own ill-conceived actions and ideas.
They can’t accept how much higher the stakes are for women when it comes to finding a partner. Women were never meant to act like men who can throw the dice far more often when it comes to mate selection.
But they fritter their prime years away by taking unnecessary medications, and causing decent men to consider them “damaged goods”. Because someone led them to believe that every time they are out of sorts, or down in the dumps, they’re depressed and require treatment.
In reality, somebody needs to tell them to man up and get over it. Probably they also don’t get enough physical activity outdoors. Depressed? Try endorphins. They’re free.
Think of them as an evolutionary dead end.
I was going to say something similar. Yes, a woman wants a man she can look up to in some way, you want someone you can admire and feel like you’ve married up. But I think that the other way around is true too. Men want also to feel that they’ve married up, that she’s superior to him in some respect. I can’t think of anything worse, really, than feeling that you’re way better than your partner. That’s sort of, you know, biological failure.
The fact that a man is expected to be superior to his wife in stature and strength is universally uncontroversial. But when we move out of the realm of physical attributes, the same idea is nearly unspeakable. This is a testament to the profound success of feminism.
But I don’t think a woman’s need for male superiority ends with physical attributes. Emotional strength, courage, leadership skills, earning potential, even intellect… superiority in all of these areas are attractive to the vast majority of women.
There is no mirror image of this phenomenon among men. Psychologically normal men are not attracted to women with superior attributes.
The only notable exception to to this rule is in the area of womanly beauty.
A sociopathic cult of mental cases which doesn’t know the difference between right and wrong and that which works and that which doesn’t. Modern feminism doesn’t appeal to that sort, modern gender abolition feminism simply IS that sort. Reading people like ’70s nuthatch Shulamith Firestone is like reading a hyper-intellectual cowardly Hell’s Angel who dares not come out of the closet but would nevertheless like to smash things. The newer generation is just as hateful, bigoted, racist. The main difference is with improved meds and almost 100 million more people in the American population, they’re not stuck in a mental institution anymore. You just can’t keep an eye of that many crazies. It’s even more of a problem when you call on what would formerly be mental patients to be teachers and bloggers.
That’s the danger of medications and recreational drugs. There’s some pain we absolutely should feel, so we can work towards fixing it instead of pretending it doesn’t exist.
Really? You know men who don’t want to proudly consider that their wife is brilliant? That they aren’t proud to point out this or that thing that she’s better than they are at doing? That men only say “better half” as a joke because if they are psychologically normal they absolutely don’t want a *better* half?
Not everyone is uniformly great at everything, of course, but are men really programmed to value their own superiority over all else? You know strange men.
100% with you on that.
I’m having trouble parsing that.
When I’m sick of all the man hating, I’ll just go and snuggle with my wife; a good woman.
Do you know any man who proudly points out that his wife is 4 inches taller than he is? Even if you do, you get my point.
Isn’t it remarkable how uncontroversial physical preferences are? On the other hand, other preferences — although they are just as deeply ingrained as the physical ones — scare the hell out of people. Again, behold the power of feminism.
~~~
“Better half” comments might be based in truth in many cases, but generally it’s just chivalry. But feminism and chivalry are incompatible and “better half” comments are a conspicuous anachronism in a feminist society.
That reminds me of “Gelding, by Lily” at Fred on Everything. I haven’t actually read any of his other stuff yet; I just saw that one somewhere, and it was an instant favorite.
It’s simple. How many of these feminists write articles about either how nice guys are entitled losers, or how they have now come to a place where they will graciously allow a nice guy to provide for them after giving their most attractive and most innocent years to bad boys? How many articles about “the ten types of guy you should sleep with” include the bad boy, and maybe grudgingly the nice guy?
For those who can choose which archetype to embody, which one should they choose? The one who tries to treat women nicely and is mocked and rejected, or the jerk who gets all the women he wants?
It’s all about incentives, as most societal things are. They reward the jerks with sex and then act surprised that they keep doing what works.
Besides, do you ever notice how women act like these situations just happen? That women just find themselves in relationships where the guy is asking for nude pictures of them (which they send!) while also getting them from other women? Do they not understand that women of any decency would never find themselves there because they would reject such a man long before that point?
I’ve done a little writing for fun — enough that my dreams became character-driven narratives — and I would not have been able to make that up.
It takes time to develop individual wisdom. That’s why we need a culture that trains us in wise habits from the beginning. What looks like self-harm is really a symptom of the breakdown of society.
You are having trouble parsing it because I left a word out:
I’ve not seen a happy marriage where both husband and wife didn’t admire each other.
D’oh!
With regard to your Hoffer quote:
Freedom really IS slavery for these people, isn’t it?
Sad.
“Feminists are eager to blame “culture” and “society” for men’s bad attitudes toward women…”
And they’re exactly right. They just fail to understand that it’s the current society and culture…that feminism demanded and helped create.
Mr Lee wrote:
Really? I absolutely
lust forlove tall women, 6′ women. (I’m 6’2″ myself).Of course, my wife is 5′ nothing, but I wouldn’t trade her in.
But think about the current fantasies: men are looking for women who can compete physically in all sorts of things. Most men like strong women . . . unless they are weak men who can’t match up.
I’m not sneering: I honestly shall have to ask my wife about this. May not like the answer…
Emotional strength, courage, leadership skills, earning potential, even intellect… superiority in all of these areas are attractive to the vast majority of women.
Seems reasonable. Harkens back to when the man wasn’t just somebody who shared the household / child-rearing duties, but who had to be relied upon to literally put food on the table and physically protect woman and children.
The physical issues are hard wired, women look to a man for physical protection (it’s genetics and evolution, the science is settled). So are issues on child rearing for women.
Mr Lee wrote:
Well, I did date one girl who was 6’4″, but, alas! it turned out that I was a lot more interested in her than she was in me.
It’s fairly uncommon for the wife to be taller than the husband, but if it works out that way, so what? If the man is so insecure that it bothers him, he shouldn’t have married her in the first place.
Tom Cruise, who’s 5’7 or 5’8, was supposedly insecure about being married to 5’11” Nicole Kidman, dumped her, and then married 5’10” whatever her name was; she dumped him after a kid or two.
think about the current fantasies: men are looking for women who can compete physically in all sorts of things. Most men like strong women .
Interesting idea. I suggest some reasons that this might be true:
1. A physically fit, active woman is more likely to be physically attractive (i.e. nicer body) than an inactive woman (ditto for men, of course)
2. Men who like to be active – naturally want their woman to accompany them… or, at least, be able to
3. Physical fitness / strength is a proxy for competence: what man wants a woman who can’t handle life? Gone are the days when the woman had to be able to do her share of hard physical labor on the farm, but the idea that a woman should be capable of more than just keeping the couch from running off is still with most of us
4. Popular culture celebrates the (hot) physically tough / capable / “bad@ss” woman. I wonder what men a century or two ago would have thought of Katniss Everdeen or Natalia Romanova or “Alice” from Resident Evil…
Thank you for posting that link. Fred rocks!
I made the connection as soon as I realized her main job is the same as Mikki Kendall and Lauren Chief Elk: to spew low-I.Q. rationalizations for hating white men on Twitter from dusk til dawn and Sunday to Saturday with never a day off. That’ll build a lot of civilizations as long as “civilization” is defined as complaining. I’m trying to imagine the 18th century competition to perfect a device for time-keeping at sea feminist-style and it would involve a lot of hand-wringing, hashtags, and blaming oppressors.