Cant Believe Youre Doing This Once Again
——————————————————-
21 December 2006
Swedish women to overtake stupid men
"In twenty years men's dominance will be broken and women will have more power in society. There will be more female CEO's and the wage gap will favour women," researcher Ingemar Gens told magazine Att:ention.
Oh boo-hoo, us poor men. Like we give a fuck!
If women want to take up stressful careers whilst us men sit back, grow fat and play video games or go fishing, then be our guests you stupid twats. Welcome to the world of wage-slavery.
There's nothing in this article we haven't really seen before. This paragraph did stand out though.
"There will soon be a large collective of uneducated, low-paid men who don't have any friends, and are unmarried and alone – as well as uninteresting for women looking for a relationship."
Hmmm. Let me put this through my Fembot-to-MGTOW translation computer…
"One moment Dave. I mean Duncan…"
"There will soon be a large and happy collective of men who ditched the useless feminized education system, who do not work themselves into an early grave but take it easy, who actually do have friends – as opposed to mere "work friends" or "the wife's friend's equally miserable husbands", which is what many married men end up with – and who are free of the chains of marriage and content to be away from women – as well as uninteresting (read: not rich enough) for gold-digging women sick of their careers who are looking for a meal-ticket."
Straight up shaming language. They know, deep down, that they'll be fucked if men all just become slackers who don't care one whit for getting married and supporting aging spinsters sick of their miserable lives, and are trying to shame us into becoming rich and successful to create a big pool of Mr Right-Suckers for them. Sod that. Most of us men can't be shamed by women anymore. Their blithering, whining and put-downs are completely irrelevant.
Seriously though, why should us men be upset that women aren't "interested" in us for a relationship? The fact that they brazenly admit that men are not worthy of Almighty Women's attention if we're low-paid makes it obvious that, despite their (supposed) rise in the world of work, women still want a guy to provide for them, a work-horse to leach off.
I'm sure Scandinavian men are quite happy at the idea of not being a wage-slave for a wife.
posted by Duncan Idaho @ 8:04 PM
——————————————————-
At 8:49 PM, dimestein said…
What a total load of shit that article is.
The author equates the dumbing down of schools to pander to female idiosyncrasies as meaning that men have somehow become genetically stupid all of a sudden. Feminizing the system so boys are pushed out of college and university places will only harm the whole of society in the long run, just wait.
But then again, not having degrees didn't hurt any of these guys did it?
Lack of formal qualifications also didn't hurt this amateur inventor as well. I find this article particularly interesting and at the end of the page you find this:
"the audit showed that the most scientifically qualified of its research chemists had contributed to the least number of patents, and the fewer scientific qualifications the staff possessed, the greater the number of patents they had contributed to. In the most striking case of all, the person who had contributed to most ICI's patents had no scientific qualifications at all."
——————————————————-
At 9:08 PM, Anonymous said…
"Other things play a bigger role, such as short-cuts and networks for example," said Malena Rydell, managing editor of feminist magazine Bang.
odd how these two things seem to be more important with women than with men. where I work now, what's important is getting shit done. not standing around "networking" with your fellow employees. OTOH when I worked in an office, the women there spent most of the day "networking" and nothing ever got done.
——————————————————-
At 9:39 PM, Anonymous said…
If women want to take up stressful careers whilst us men sit back, grow fat and play video games or go fishing, then be our guests you stupid twats. Welcome to the world of wage-slavery.
That's really the point.
Men, when they apply their unlimited intellects, don't have to play the mindless corporate drone.
Let women do that. They are an EXCELLENT fit.
Corporate work is rapidly becoming the high-tech equivalent of plantation or menial labor anyways. Men can become entrepreneurs, day trade/invest, etc… Since we're more likely than not gripped with shopping compulsions it's far easier for us to become financially independent.
Maybe the next wave, after driving men away from institutions of lower learning, will be driving men out of the corporate world.
That's really true about the "alone" nonsense. The fembots define not being alone as having one of them rule your life and boss you around. As usual women are full of shit. I merely associate with people of the same interests. That has always been done in the past with guilds, country clubs, cigar clubs, etc… It's not rocket science.
——————————————————-
At 10:16 PM, Bruce Wayne said…
That article cracked me up. The indictment that men will "end up alone and unmarried" as a bad thing is hilarious given that 99% of all married men out there hate what they have become (unappreciated wage slaves under the ever increasing demands of their wives).
Then there's the self-righteous narcissistic tone in the article of how things revolve solely around women. Is it any wonder why we men could care less in the face of this attitude?
Thanks Duncan for posting this and bringing some humor into my day.
——————————————————-
At 10:59 PM, Anonymous said…
I don't think there are many successful men lining up to lose half their money to an ungrateful fem-bitch. You don't become successful by being stupid with your time and money. These constant divorce judgments are definitely being noticed by successful men, and by and large intelligent men become "toxic bachelors." If this wasn't true, some dumb hag wouldn't have to write an article trying to shame successful men into marrying whores.
——————————————————-
At 11:14 PM, Anonymous said…
Actually, what will happen in twenty years is that the geographic area today called Scandinavia will become the Islamic Republic of Scandinavia. When the balance of "structural" power tilts female (the balance of "dyadic" power is ALWAYS in their favor), they won't find sufficient numbers of higher-status men with whom to mate. This process is well under way in most western nations, with abysmal birth rates the result. Muslims are not so burdened, and just keep breeding away, so it won't be long before sharia is imposed in the West. Girls, you'd better get fitted for your burquas now.
——————————————————-
At 11:49 PM, Black Misogynist said…
If men can't attract women with high paying jobs and money due to being forced out of the corporate life and college. Well, Then they will just attract women the other way.
With power.
More men will just turn to the criminal underground to get the jobs they can't get normally and to secure that power to attract women.
So the next question is. Who wants to live in a country where most men sorta just sit around and join gang lords to survive.
——————————————————-
At 6:02 AM, loki on the run said…
Any men with balls in Scandinavia have left and gone to other countries.
——————————————————-
At 1:41 PM, Schpengle Carrot-Tripe said…
oh absouloute class……..
what a chortle!
cheers for that mate, I cant actually believe that some myopic moron in any country got such unbalanced, trite, misguided, non-realistic, out of touch with mens reality…….
trite, shite
published!
as I laughed away and the copy and paste faeries danced around my keyboard, I then read the rest of what you had posted and as usual, you more or less said everything I and all the other blokes said here-
basically…….
"WHATS THE FUCKING PROBLEM WITH THAT?!"
HAHAH
like, I aint going to be attractive to some high power executive bitch…..
oh, excuse me, do you mean that I wont be attractice to, or get any attention from……..
THE SORT OF WOMEN I HAVE DEVOTED MY LIFE TO AVOIDING???
hahahh. oh dear, oh pooooor me.
*farts*…..could you pass me another beer pal?
*PFSt!*……ah thats better!
well ladies, tough titty, you wanna piece of my high class manly arse, your gonna have to slum it and crawl on your knees, oh and get chomping while your down, there and
as for trust and safe sex
your so dodgy and such a health risk in this moden " liberated age" that I wont go near you in anything less than an NBC grade suit with , suitably strenghthened peep holes!
now fuck off you silly swedish tarts all become lesbos and hump each other as you await your IVF, until our baby glue runs put.
ha!
me and the boys are off to the pub, which is what most of us want to do most of the time but
"WE CANT FUCKING AFFORD IT BECAUSE WE HAVE BEEN SUBBING YOU FOR YEARS!!!
………AH
"Last orders, Swedish skanks……"
oh and your men are down the pub
with the mates you cant see…….
a bit like the opportunities youve lost.
ah!
I needed that!
oh and those dimestein links are really good too.
a hairdresser……..
cant cook and egg>?
think Ill research that
…….so why the hell dont they paint the space shuttle with it then, instead of all that foam bollux?
still probably easier to see some missing foam than some micro scratched paint…… oh there I go being all manly and practical again.
I really should stop that, what with me being all think and unnatractive to rugrat sponsors and all… whatever was I thinking?
k, tootle pip
——————————————————-
At 1:49 PM, Bryce said…
My thoughts:
One: There is a HUGE difference between being "alone" and being "lonely" that I didn't really get until very recently, when I experienced being surrounded by other people yet had no connection to them and didn't want much to do with them other than "strictly business."
A bad marriage is the loneliest place you'll ever be, because you can't do anything about it without paying some major costs.
So, never assume that a bachelor is "lonely" because he is simply "alone."
Two: Women are attracted to the APPEARANCE of wealth, power, and success; not necessarily the real thing. They'll chase after the lawyer who drives a Mercedes and wears Armani suits, not knowing that this guy may be neck-deep in debt and only a paycheck away from bankruptcy, and turn their nose up at the plumber who drives a Chevy van and wears overalls, not knowing that this guy may actually have a million-dollar asset base. But these same women will divorce their lawyer husbands over something as superficial as not making partner.
Three: The only way for men to win in a fight with feminism is to refuse to fight. A corollary to this is that men can refuse to fight by making themselves useless to women as meal tickets and cash steers.
Four: We men have taken a lot of flak for only going after young, hot, nubile women. We're not supposed to be so superficial, and truthfully, we'd rather have a plain woman who is loyal, caring, and level-headed instead of a flighty, insecure, but gorgeous one. Yet we're supposed to just stand there when women shun decent men for rich jerks and thugs, but when these women find out that these guys really aren't all they're cracked up to be and make a beeline for the divorce court, we're supposed to clam up. Once again, there's that appearance thing coming up. Plus, Miss Thing is in for a big surprise when Mr. Bad Boy can't keep her in Manolo Blahniks and Coach, let alone allow her to be a pampered housewife. Because, you know, bad boys don't typically hold steady jobs or have any assets.
——————————————————-
At 3:50 PM, Davout said…
The funniest thing about feminism is that it REQUIRES men to work in order to fuel it.
As we see more and more men cast off their shackles and opt out of sperm donor/walking wallet roles, the nanny states will be forced to expose more of their underlying fascism.
——————————————————-
At 4:19 PM, Cowhead said…
In the story, a five-year old was accused of sexual harassment after he pinched another girl's buttocks. Unbelievable how fucked up America is becoming. There is also a recent story of a 17 year old boy getting jailed for ten years and placed on the sex offender list for receiving a blowjob from his 15 year old girlfriend. Women get less for killing! Seriously, you can't make this stuff up. America is becoming more pathetic by the day.
——————————————————-
At 5:44 PM, Anonymous said…
Don't you just love how women are always projecting their worst fears on men?
You will die ALONE and UMARRIED!(no you will) You have no FRIENDS! (ok, you think one of your chick friends is going to bail you out of jail in the middle of night?) You are a LOSER!(Then you should be happy I am single)
Ha, I just love it.
——————————————————-
At 11:53 PM, khankrumthebulgar said…
I am laughing my ass off at this nonsense. Yes we will have tons of Women's Studies Grads. Who took Degrees in such studies as "The Feminist Study of Films", I shit you not. This according to Christina Hoff Sommers. Instead of Engineering, Math, Science, and IT still Male dominated subjects.
Men still work the higher paying Death Trades. Where hazardous working conditions drive Females away. Fuck the FemNags who think they can replace men in the Lumber, Mining, Fishing, and Chemical Industries. What a joke that is. Good luck with that crap.
Like the Female Lesbian Fire Chief who has been sexually harassing attractive Women. She was in a relationship and still trying to score. She used her position for Sexual favors. And has been fired.
So much for the Superiority of Women.
——————————————————-
At 9:01 AM, Paul Parmenter said…
There is much to say in response to this Swedish drivel, much of which has been ably said already.
But just one underlying point that I come back to time and again when reading the latest garbage about how women are going to overtake men and run the whole show at some time in the future (funny how that time keeps on getting pushed further and further back, isn't it? I see it's now another 20 years).
This is the fact that women seriously do not seem to understand how the world of business and commerce works. They really don't seem to have a clue. It must be because they only play a role in a part of it, and don't see the whole picture.
Everything is built on the primary industries. It's like an inverted pyramid, with key industries at the bottom – farming, fishing, mining, quarrying, forestry, producing the raw materials from which everything else is sourced – and then the secondary industries built on them – transport, manufacturing, construction etc – followed by wholesaling and retailing, with the service industries at the top of the pile. But just as the pyramid depends wholly on the strength of its base, so our society depends wholly on the strength of our primary industries. If the electricity suddenly stops flowing, everything falls to pieces. If there is no food or clean water, ditto. No oil or gas, ditto.
Now who keeps the wheels turning? Who sustains the primary industries, without which everything else fails? You won't see many women down there; indeed in some primary industries there are no women at all. It's men who hold the whole ship together.
I heartily recommend a study of what looks like the most boring piece of information in the world, but which tells a story we should all understand. It's called the Standard Industrial Classification. There are different versions of it, a Google search will probably throw up several; but they are all similar in that they seek to classify every activity in the industrialised world in a hierarchy of importance and dependency. It rewards study because it will tell you exactly which jobs are the most vital, and which are not; and which depend on which others. It is also a great tool for MRAs, because you only have to ask "which gender does these jobs?" and you have a perfect picture of just how crucially important the work of men is, and how they permeate the whole structure; and how superficial the contribution of women is.
Women congregate almost exclusively at the top of the pyramid, where the hard work is already done for them; where they can avoid manual labour, spend most of the day on their backsides, safely indoors in the warm and dry, never getting dirty, and usually surrounded by other females with whom they can yap endlessly until clocking off time.
But to these privileged feminazi ranters sitting in their comfortable air-conditioned offices surrounded by the latest whizzbang technology, always doing jobs at the top of the pyramid, never the bottom, the real work of men is invisible. And because it is invisible, these women think it just doesn't exist. They don't notice that when their car, or computer, or toilet, or TV, or phone breaks down, it's always a man that fixes it. They don't notice that it is always men that put these things there in the first place. They don't know or care where they come from; all they understand is that they are always there, therefore they assume they are always going to be there. And it is therefore easy to assume that all they have to do is to take over the reins, and everything will continue exactly as before, but just with them in charge. Except of course, it won't.
Men work hard because they see the prospect of reward, of getting to the top of their professions, and of enjoying the fruits of their labour. But take that away, and present men with the prospect of working their butts off only to see some sneering female, who has never broken sweat or done a proper day's work in her life, slide into the boss's seat and help herself to the rewards that should be theirs, and the picture will change. How can it be otherwise? Why should men ever tolerate idle women skimming the cream off the top just because they have a fancy piece of paper from Fembot University saying that they are ten times cleverer than any man?
The world of work, real work, belongs to men, and it always will. Feminist dreams of turning it upside down are just that: dreams, as empty as the heads that dream them.
——————————————————-
At 3:49 PM, Mamonaku187 said…
Articles like these smack of insecurity.
"See how powerful we are! Really!!"
People with power don't go around bragging about it, they get things done.
We all know that feminism is doomed, and eventually, the womenfolk will learn it the hard way.
Let them eat cake!
——————————————————-
At 1:36 AM, Muerte said…
I explain to the woman on my first date, that I have "money problems" and a virtually no cash. I let her pay the bill and wait to see if I get to the second date.
I'm still single.
I rest my case.
——————————————————-
At 3:04 AM, Anonymous said…
"toxic bachelors."
I never heard of that term before. Had to Google it. Found a definition at UrbanDictionary.com:
1. toxic bachelor
Worst men around. They are liars, cheats, users and abusers. Toxic bachelors are expert players and will always lie to women and to whom ever to get what they want. They will often use the same pick up lines and rely heavily on their looks and fake charm to attract women. Extremely shallow and only care about physical appearances. Toxic bachelors are typically good looking, well dressed and are usually salesmen. They usually travel in pairs and refer to each other as dude.
When I read this definition I was astonished. Talk about projecting. Guess who this definition accurately describes? To wit:
1. Western Woman
Worst woman around. They are liars, cheats, users and abusers. Western women are expert players and will always lie to men and to whom ever to get what they want. They will often rely heavily on their looks and fake charm to attract men. Extremely shallow and only care about physical appearances. Western women are typically good looking, well dressed and are usually service industry workers. They usually travel in packs and refer to each other as bitch.
——————————————————-
At 9:25 AM, Anonymous said…
In refute to your argument, Paul Parmenter:
While the primary industries sustain our economies, those working on them have little to no power. That is, political power. Spending power. They are the workers and that's it. If they don't like it, tough shit, there's little to nothing they can do to change it. This has always been the way from the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, and it will always be this way. Just because they have the ability, in theory, to "shut down the world" if they all decided to stop working does not mean that they have any power.
And it is all about power. Power does not lie in the primary industries; they lie in the highly paid professions, politics and business; all areas which women are entering in at a blistering pace. In fairness, women will rule the world, no doubt about it, if that blistering pace continues. You won't "see" it, but they will be the ones deciding who works, what their lifestyles are, etc. Because they will be the ones with the bulk of the money and therefore political status. All one needs to do is look at the distribution of sexes at the universities to see how the power structure will look tomorrow. Fembot Universities?? Don't be silly. Higher education in universities has always been the mainstay of the upper classes, their little "mechanism" to decide who is wealthy. Whoever thought you that the working class who keep the whole show on the road were "empowered" is wrong. It's not sheer numbers or sheer productivity that determines the power class, it's the type of work being done.
Don't forget either that there are a lot of idiots out there. There are an abundance of men who will have no problem acting as drones for women at the top. No problem at all. Adjust the education system if you must, the laws if you must; it will be no problem getting them to comply. They will not even notice the fundamental changes in power structures,
"But take that away, and present men with the prospect of working their butts off only to see some sneering female, who has never broken sweat or done a proper day's work in her life, slide into the boss's seat and help herself to the rewards that should be theirs, and the picture will change."
Wrong again. That, my friend, is called the Capitalist system, and people have gotten quite accustomed and comfortable with it. It has always been the way that you are working for fat cats at the top who in reality don't care much about you. This element of Capitalism irks some people so, among them Marx who devised Communism to address this "boergois" phenomenon. But in reality it works pretty well – if you don't work for her, you won't survive – and the ordinary workers go along with it. So you have a different gender as boss calling the shots; the fundamentals are the same and people will accept it hands down.
"Women congregate almost exclusively at the top." Of course they do. They're not stupid. That's where the wealth and power is.
——————————————————-
At 3:17 AM, Mamonaku187 said…
Anon 9:25am,
I'm afraid it is you who are in error. Women are not going to live to see the day when they hold men as slaves.
I don't know where you live, but around my way, we have young guys with guns who rob, steal and kill daily. These young toughs, who I label the "warrior class" will only grow as they are shut out of decent jobs and have no hope at achieving a middle class lifestyle.
You make your assumptions as if Men are living in a vacuum.
You seem to be well read, as you reference Marx and the bourgeois.
You may also know what happened to the Japanese royal family at the close of the Heian era? They were disposed by the poor young men they had hired as security guards and enforcers.
While the nobility engaged in a pleasure filled, female friendly, lifestyle, the people were starving.
Eventually, these young guys with swords became the Samurai class of myth and legend.
You see, if men have no stake in a society, they will not work to support it willingly. Over time, the government has to become more and more heavy handed, giving criminal and politically disenfranchised men all the excuses in the world to rebel.
Nay, women have bought their bus tickets, non stop to chattelville. It's all a matter of time now.
——————————————————-
At 3:48 AM, Panzer said…
To anon 9:25 am, good post. Search your history , look at the labor strikes in th U.S. in the 1930s. The factories,docks and industries all went on strike, and it brought this nation to its knees. Your correct in your comment about the common worker not having power, but only in todays sense.
All it takes is for these common workers to unite and organize, and no amount of wealthy, powerful people can stop them, just like in the past.
Panzer
——————————————————-
At 7:33 PM, Anonymous said…
Anon 9:25am,
When things get bad old orders break down (e.g., French Revolution).
Your excellent argument presumes economic and social stasis.
Would you describe the social forces in the US and UK today as static (i.e., everybody happy and getting along fine) or dynamic (i.e., people getting angry, sick-and-tired of getting screwed)?
Is the trend in the OECD countries towards economic and social harmony or disharmony?
——————————————————-
At 2:03 PM, anon 9.25 said…
Panzer, I suppose my best argument to this:
All it takes is for these common workers to unite and organize, and no amount of wealthy, powerful people can stop them, just like in the past.
.. is that there are a lot of idiots out there who are either (i) too busy wanking/working the system (ii) too brainwashed by the media or (iii) too stupid to care to stage a protest. The last major strikes in America were in the '30s, yes? They were in economically dire times I would imagine, after the Great Depression. We are not in an economic depression now. And we haven't seen a repeat in 70 years have we? The workers can and will be kept down; they always have been. As I say, the powers can make fine-tunings here and there to keep the masses under control; a little extra wages, etc.
Never forget that the majority of the populace are very passive and indifferent politically. That's why it's so important to have your representatives in the politically active wealthy, educated class; us men are getting pushed out of this area in droves and this is alarming. My main argument is because we are being pushed out of education and thus wealth and thus influence, our power to fight back is being reduced all the time.
And, after the workers brief agitation through strikes, the bourgeois, college-educated powers-that-be re-assume control again. So the "power" workers have to bring everything to its knees ends in very short time. At the end of the day, if they don't continue to work, they and their families will starve. So they go back to work and the system continues as normal.
Anon 7:33 AM, I would describe the social forces as by and large static. *Most* people are *pretty* have with their lot, and women are laughing all the way to the bank plundering all over our rights and social influences. Most men are idiots as far as the feminist invasion is concerned; they are static. This is not a good atmosphere for a political anti-feminist revolution.
——————————————————-
At 9:47 PM, Anonymous said…
The old order breaking down is really sad for women. Don't all of us remember older women and how happy they were? Why was that?
It was because stay-at-home wives had regular sex. The man worked, the wife kept the house and they had sex during the week.
After decades of this, the woman became very content and happy; as did the man. He was fulfilled by the endorphins of sex, and she was exposed to his semen regularly which acted as a steroid and an antidepressant. Physiologically, they gave each other everything needed for survival, happiness and the raising of children. The situation was so brilliant that it was almost as though it was invented by God.
Now, women are proud they can't even consider the old way?
Oh well, it's too bad. Men do pretty well alone. Women seem to go a little nuts. I guess we have to let them have what they want.
——————————————————-
At 12:18 AM, Panzer said…
Anon 9:25, I believe all three are reasons as to what is holding people back, very good point. Yes the 1930s were a desperate time, but with job outsourcing, lack of higher education, low wage jobs, economic downturn, and wars, we may very well have a repeat. Not a good atmosphere for a anti feminist revolution? Why not? If women think we are idiots then what do we have to lose?
Panzer
——————————————————-
At 2:01 AM, Anonymous said…
I would describe the social forces as by and large static. *Most* people are *pretty* have with their lot, and women are laughing all the way to the bank plundering all over our rights and social influences. Most men are idiots as far as the feminist invasion is concerned; they are static. This is not a good atmosphere for a political anti-feminist revolution.
Those are valid observations (plunder, apathy), but are they symptoms of an ascendant or descendant culture?
A civilization tearing out it's underpinnings (e.g., family structure), celebrating promiscuity, mass murdering its own children (abortion), denigrating its most productive and innovative members (men) cannot last, can it?
How long can such a society continue eating its own seed corn?
What will women do when there is no more money in the bank left to plunder?
Or how about if the electricity goes out one day and never comes back on?
Is eating anything that day or not freezing to death a right, under those conditions? Who are the femnags going to complain to?
In my opinion, the short-sighted gratifications that modern Western Women currently enjoy have more in common with the late-degenerate Roman empire than the early American republic.
——————————————————-
At 10:22 AM, Paul Parmenter said…
Delighted to see my comments have provoked some responses. I understand the points made by Anonymous 9.25, but they don't invalidate my comments. Women will still remain dependent on men, even if those men are drones. And women will still fail to understand how dependent they are.
Now of course those at the top of the tree get the big rewards from the efforts of the drones, but those at the top are still predominantly men: at least the smart ones. And they will still be around for as far into the future as anyone can see. But my point is that this order can remain stable only as long as the drones recognise that they have the chance to rise to the top, even if most of them never do. Even drones, perhaps particularly drones, need their ambitions and their dreams. Block those ambitions and destroy those dreams, and the picture changes – as it has so often in history.
Now the future we are being asked to believe in is one where hordes of undereducated and underqualified males will knuckle down and do the donkey work in every industry, while females with fancy degrees and their heads full of arrogant notions about how superior they are, simply take over at the top knowing sweet FA about the business and never having done any of the hard work at the bottom. Do you believe this? Many men will work for a male boss who knows his onions and understands their lives and problems, especially if they have a fair idea that one day they will be sitting in his seat. But how many will want to work for a sexist feminazi whose major qualification is the belief that all men are shit, who is bound to treat them accordingly, and who will only relinquish her power to another of her kind?
Also don't make the mistake of thinking that being at the bottom of the SIC pyramid means you have no power or rewards; or that being at the top means you have all the power and money. The pyramid is simply the structure of dependency, not that of power or rewards. There is great power and wealth in industries at the bottom of the pyramid, just as there are crummy, low-paid jobs at the top of it. A skilled male craftsman at the bottom end of the pyramid can earn big money and live an independent life, just as surely as a female bank cashier at the top can slog all her life for a pittance and get nowhere. There are worker drones and fat cats bosses at every level of the pyramid.
What I was attacking were those females who keep telling us that they can become the bosses and everything will just go on as before, but they only consider being the bosses at the top end. They are the ones who have most to lose if the whole structure comes crashing down, and their taking over is more likely to precipitate precisely that event.
I might also add another important strand here, which also goes to the heart of the Men's Movement. This is that political power and wealth are not necessarily the be-all and end-all of life. Much of it is illusory. I would rather have true independence, going my own way with sufficient life resources under my own control to sustain me, than being a slave to my job or depending on others, however grand the trappings may be. If you are wealthy enough to be independent and to be able to tell anyone else to go to hell because you don't need them, you have all the wealth and power you really need. And nobody can shove you around. That is what many men have discovered, and what most infuriates both the politicians and women who want to wield power over us. They can rant all they want, but if you can shove two fingers at them and go on your own chosen way, their supposed superiority will count for nothing.
——————————————————-
Source: https://eternalbachelor.wordpress.com/2007/08/29/low-paid-then-youre-not-interesting/
0 Response to "Cant Believe Youre Doing This Once Again"
Post a Comment