Thursday, December 29, 2016

Men vs Women

While doing research on housework for one of my previous posts, I found a discussion on a Dutch forum about modern women. Most men complained about their appearance and attitudes and stated that women nowadays are ungracious, unsubmissive, unfeminine and lazy. Then a lady came and said something along the lines that it was all true, but modern men were totally not masculine, either.

"If the men start acting masculine again," she claimed, "the women will fall back in line."

Well, what do you think? True or not true?


  1. The funny thing is that the guy who initiated the thread said that he wanted a "traditional, submissive" woman, who cleaned and cooked but also earned her own income:)

    Because housewives are lazy or something.

  2. Housewife from FinlandDecember 30, 2016 at 3:32 AM

    ^^men like that drive me crazy. Why in earth would any woman be submissive and traditional if she has to make her own living? What would she do with a "man" like that? Man like that is nothing but a nuisance to his wife.

    To your original question: I do believe that if men want feminine women, they need to be masculine first. That is, in general, in society's level. In some cases wife can make her husband more masculine by becoming more feminine. But even then there must be some manliness to begin with.

    One very big probelm is that in modern society people have the most perverse idea of a manly man. Think about pages like "Return of the Kings" or MRM-men.

    Oh, I remember one interesting article about guide dogs. There was this old man who was blinded at war. (WWII, that is.) He said that when he got his first guide dog, guide dogs where mostly german shepherds. But nowadays retrievers are more popular. And he said: "It is because more and more women have guide dogs and -well, nowadays men are like women, too." I think it was well said.

  3. Funny that, about dogs - Golden retriever will basically get along with anything, while a German Shepherd is quite a dog:)

    I should add for all that talk about feminism and empowerment, women of the past year used to be tougher, too. They didn't need "safe spaces" and fainting couches and knew how to deal with cheeky men and how to hold their own.

    Now considering the topic in question, I think that a liberal, feminist society produces a certain type of women. A lot of men who complain about these women want an impossible thing: a liberal society (because anything goes) with traditional women. It simply doesn't work that way.

    Funny you mentioned ROK, they basically teach men how to bang sluts, but these sluts better be traditional:) In a real patriarchy they'd most probably be shot by the angry family of a girl they tried to seduce.

  4. Sites like ROK are sick. They want "patriarchy" yet they focus only on themselves. It's all about THEM. Roosh actually had an article about why men shouldn't rape women and the reasons were all about the damage it might do to the MAN. Those like the red pill men are all about using women, and it's always young naive women who are too inexperienced to call them on their BS. In traditionalist society men would not get away with stringing women along for the sex and refusing to marry them or going around and claiming rights to illegitimate children they procreate from these encounters.

    And if I have my own money I'm going to do my own thing. Why on earth would I stay with a man or submit to him when I carried the same load of responsibilities that he did? Men like that are ridiculous.

    MRAS are terrible. They take away from the value and wellness of women by teaching men how to take advantage of women. They should be teaching men how to be men and protect the virtue of their wives, daughters and sisters. It's all about getting their and screwing everyone else.

    MRAism is kind of like a town that's being rioted. Instead of being like "Come on guys, let's restore order and get this place cleaned up!" The MRAS instead are saying "Look! Chaos! Hurry, let's go loot their stores and rape their women while the authorities are preocupied!"

    They make me utterly sick. They literally damage women and society then complain about the mess they created. Shame on those men like that. They deserve whatever hardships befall them.

  5. There was actually one group of men which could get away with such behaviour, aristocrats vs serfs; though if they went too far, the peasants would revolt. But I thought we kinda have progressed since the Middle Ages:)

  6. And even aristocrats of old often chose to care for their bastards and support them (and mothers) financially.

  7. Anyway, I don't think ROK has something to do with MRAs as MRAs officially are all about "equal rights" and stuff like that, while ROK fans are all about learning "game" to score with women. I don't think they care about equal custody or similar things.

    The point is, this player lifestyle is only possible in our liberated society, not in a traditional patriarchy, where men like that were mostly relegated to the company of prostitutes and lower status women. The players, on the other hand, want the company of high-status women by pretending they are high-status themselves (or thusly goes the story).

    Hence the complains about involuntary celibacy and other nonsense. Most men, unless grotesquely deformed, have little trouble finding willing partners, if they aren't too picky. But the problem with a lot of them is that they see this type of women as beneath them. And they project this attitude on the women, when they claim that 80% of all women only want to sleep with 20% of men.

    The funniest thing is that they state all this while claiming they are all pro-patriarchy and traditional family!

    1. I think a lot of them grossly exagerate how often they get laid too. Sure, a man can find sex. Men have always been able to find and get sex even if they paid for it. But I have read some of them say how they've slept with hundreds of women and stuff like that or some very old men who claimed they slept with dozens of 21 year olds and stuff like that. I have a hard time believing most of what they say. Unless it is with young women who looked up to them and they were very important to their lives most men aren't out there constantly screwing women 30 years younger than them unless the woman is a total sl*t who's sleeping with everyone else too.

      ROK is better than some sights but it's still all about using and hurting women. And the only time MRAS care about children is if it can control women or get them an easy pass out of responsibility. They don't care about children or families.

    2. I also wonder if some of these old men claiming they sleep with women half their age on a regular basis can really even perform sexually anymore and aren't just making these claims as a coping mechanism.

    3. Yeah and the claim that 80% of the women sleep with 20% of the men is bogus. But isn't this whole Alpha male thing really a product of the matriarch anyways? Unlike other mammals, Humans don't mate solely for reproductive purposes but also for emotional/human connection and I think we lose the true value and meaning of sex whenever it is seen as only a physical thing. It is much deeper than that.

      For example, every heterosexual male likes to ogle hot, slender 20 year olds but that doesn't mean they want to be with them in a meaningful way.

  8. In traditional patriarchy if you slept with a woman or got her pregnant you MARRIED her. Most from ROK talk about how they're all bad-*** because they went red pill and refused to marry. They are anti-family and anti-children/woman/marriage.

    And let's be real the only reason "the wall" exists for these guys is because a) no woman over the age of 25 would buy their BS and b) it's the perfect revenge fantasy against all the pretty women who rejected them in their past.

    It's like, what do these guys want? They cant have it both ways. The more women become independent the more they complain and don't want anything to do with them! Like you don't want to marry yet you don't want to support your illegitimate offspring either? You want an independent woman yet you want a traditional chaste homemaker? You want a society full of easy sl*to yet you complain that modern women are sl*try bar hoppers? Which is it?? It was also considered crude and barbaric in the past for unwed fathers to be allowed to take the children from the mother without just cause as it was believed God/nature had placed the children in her care, which is the truth. It's absolutely terrible what men's rights groups have done to families and society.

  9. I think that a lot of men and women don't even know what a normal, healthy male female relationship is, nor what is the purpose and meaning of marriage. Much teaching is needed in this area. But first we have to get them to listen.

  10. Radical, I keep thinking about the story of Dinah from the Bible. You know the one that ended up in bed with Shechem? He thought he got lucky, that is until her brothers came along and slaughtered everyone. And the reason they gave was: he had treated our sister as a harlot...

    Obviously, I don't agree with MRA philosophy because I don't believe in the whole equality stuff. As for Gamers, some things they say ring awfully true and ROK actually had articles defending housewives. It's just that they often sound so confused and their fixation on sex is really borderline unhealthy.

    Mrs. WMC, it's true, unfortunately!

  11. I wouldn't be too hard on the MRAs or the adherents of ROK and other similar sights. These sites are a reaction to the devastation wreaked by current divorce laws, and the rape culture hysteria on American campuses.

    Read some of the stories on the Community of the Wrongly Accused web site and weep. Too many men have had their lives ruined by divorce-rape. They have lost access to their children, the homes, cars and income were taken away. Many men now live in flop houses with winos after a particularily nasty divorce settlement. And what about the effects of false accusations of rape. Young men are turfed from universities, and their futures ruined, all because of regret sex, or the retro-active withdrawal of consent the morning after.

    These are the wages of feminism and the devastation inflicted upon the young men of today.

    I won't even get into the denigration of men by accusing them of "toxic masculinity."

  12. The expert, I live in Europe and I have yet to meet one man ruined by "divorce-rape." In fact, they all seem to do relatively well and quickly embark upon new relationships. It can be different in America, I won't argue that point since I don't live there.

    As for criticising MRAs and Gamers, what solutions do they offer? MRAs want "equality" and abolishing child support. Strangely, they don't want to abolish no-fault divorce which make me think they are fine with divorce, as long as they don't have to pay.

    Gamers state that they want the return to patriarchy (which I respect), but I doubt it can be brought around by whore-mongering. Sorry, I'm just so cynical.

  13. Housewife from FinlandJanuary 2, 2017 at 3:48 AM

    ^^I think that the divorse laws in America differ greatly from those in Europe.

    This was an interesting conversation to read. I actually realized what annoys me the most in ROK, gamers, MRAs and such. They seem to think that ALL WOMEN ARE THE SAME. I wouldn't mind if gamers would admit that game is possible only with slutty women and there are women -majority, I hope, but don't really believe- who are at least somewhat virtuous. Women who are not to be played with. With whom Game would not work because there is absolutely no way they would have casual sex. I really do not mind if men think that 90% of women are slutty as long as they acknowledge my moral superiority. :) (Have I mentioned that pride is my biggest sin? ;))

    Below is an interesting link. Now it has been scientifically proved that nobody likes people who sleep around (it was very small study but anyway):

  14. Housewife, yes, they do. Here one can have a marriage contract which stipulates that an adulterous wife gets very little or nothing of her husband's money. Custody laws are also more equal.

    I agree with MRAs that it's unfair that if the woman wrecks her marriage she gets financially rewarded; however, the remedy to this should be simply the abolishing of no-fault divorce. Let the court establish the guilty party and let the guilty party suffer. People who destroy their marriages are basically oath-breakers and in less enlightened times we believed they would spend eternity in Hell.

    However, once again these guys aren't entirely fair since they equate filing for divorce with being a guilty party. Now let's say a mother of three is abandoned by her husband who doesn't divorce her, though, but refuses to support her and the kids. What is she supposed to do in this situation? I know in some countries one can sue for living expenses but mostly the only recourse she has is to file for divorce.

    As for Gamers, look at the background of men like Roosh and draw your own conclusions.

  15. Housewife from FinlandJanuary 2, 2017 at 8:59 AM

    Very good points, Sanne.

  16. Sanne

    "The expert, I live in Europe and I have yet to meet one man ruined by "divorce-rape." In fact, they all seem to do relatively well and quickly embark upon new relationships. It can be different in America, I won't argue that point since I don't live there."

    This one of the most bizarre things I've ever read! Are you really sure that you've never met a man who was destroyed by divorce?

    You don't know any man who was financially ruined by divorce?

    You don't know any man who was denied access to his children?

    You have never heard of a man being accused of abusing his own children so that the ex-wife could get sole custody?

    What type of men do you have there? Men who are unaffected by divorce seem like very strange men to me.

    Europe must be very very different if any of that is true!

    Mark Moncrieff
    Upon Hope Blog - A Traditional Conservative Future

  17. Mark, people here suffer from divorce in a general sense: betrayal by your spouse and the forced division of property, the destruction of family and the upheaval it brings are no small things.

    However, I don't know one man really ruined. Mostly they do quite well. I knew someone whose wife divorced him for cheating. They had a company together. After the divorce, it took him some years but he got back everything that was his, and more.

    That's just one example. We are talking middle class here. Upper class all marry with contracts nowadays, which include "zero contracts"" (which feminists unsuccessfully tried to abolish)which stipulate that in the event of divorce, the wife will get nothing. There are other ways to hide family money as well.

    By poor people, well I knew someone whose ex-husband was ordered to pay 60 euro a week child support for two children. It's just about enough to eat. The guy appealed, he wanted to pay 40 (the wife didn't work so no other source of income).

    The house often goes to the one who is the main breadwinner since he is the one able to pay it, though the wife will get compensation in this case.

    Of course, if they weren't officially married and had no living together contract, he just kicks her out of HIS house with HER children for which he doesn't have to pay a cent. Maybe, it biased my opinion on this topic a bit.

    Yes, and as for custody, it's usual 2 weekends and one day a week and half school vacations but I knew a man who went for equal custody and got it, (3 days a week, but had to work shorter hours, most men won't/ can't do it).

  18. P.S. Yes, I heard of someone falsely accusing her husband. His family payed a lawyer and he got back his house and normal custody arrangement.

  19. Housewife from FinlandJanuary 3, 2017 at 4:07 AM

    Mark: Here in Finland it is usually women who end up in poor financial situation after divorce. It is concidered very big problem in society's level.

    Of course father has to pay child support if mother is the primary caregiver. Usually custody is given to the mother, mostly because fathers usually want only "visitation rights". That is, they have kids like every other weekend. Often father also get equal custody if they just ask for it. I know several cases where kid(s) spent 1 week at mothers and 1 week at fathers. In Finland father can be violent criminal and still he has right to see his children. At least supervised.

    There are "zero contracts" and if not, when married couple divorces, everything is divided equally. Now of course men usually make more money than women so they kind of "loose" in this arrangement, but usually they still do much better after the divorce than women.

    I have herd that those "false alarms" do happen when it comes to abusing kids or rapes or such. But here in Finland case like that are always investigated by police (because abuse or rape is a crime, you know) so it really leads to nothind. Since finnish police is very good at its job and incorruptible.

    I think the biggest difference between northern Europe (or at least Finland) and America is that here law is the same for everybody. We do not have jury in the way you do, and the role of ones lawyer is not so big. Our case law is very just, judges are very well educated, the lawyers know the law and most importantly, our laws are very fair and reasonable. Those "divorce rape" -cases would propably be illegal in Finland!

    So yes, Europe IS very different.

  20. Housewife from FinlandJanuary 3, 2017 at 4:13 AM

    One more thing about child support: If father wants and gets the custody -I have seen cases like that, too- mother, of course, is supposed to pay to him. And the amount of child support is always dependent on the income of the payer. If he/she is unable to pay enough, social security pays the rest...

  21. Housewife from FinlandJanuary 3, 2017 at 4:29 AM

    And if childfree couple divorces, their property is divided equally (unless they have marriage settlement, which is practically "zero contract"), but nobody pays any "maintenance" or support after that. Here divorced father or mother, after the property is divided, never pays for the ex-spouse. He or she pays only to help provide his/hers children.

  22. Here we have alimony for wives if they didn't work (or worked very short hours). Friendly feminists did their best to abolish it 'cause all women should work. They didn't succeed but made it temporary, I think for 15 years (could be 10); and, of course, it stops when the woman remarries.

    Since there are few jobs and older women have little education and are pretty much unemployable, they often end up on welfare and in poverty.

  23. Yes, if a critical mass of men returned to traditional masculinity, women would fall in line, and make themselves traditionally feminine (or would try to, at least).

    In Canada as in America, divorce often ruins men's lives, more than it affects women, because of the difference in treatment of the parties under the law. I don't think that it's quite as bad as in America, but it's bad enough.

  24. I think in the USA it depends on what state you live in. In some states men do quite well after the divorce. It also often depends on how good your lawyer is.

  25. True; things vary quite a bit from state to state, and also, the more money you can spend, the more influential the lawyer you can hire...