Clock Ticks Regardless
I found myself despising all men.
In the pages of the Guardian, a dissatisfied feminist howls at the Moon:
Life isn’t going how we thought it would. We’re being left behind and without the financial ability (or housing) to freeze eggs or go it alone, or adopt… The idea that single people in their 30s are all having fun is a lie. We are the have-nots and we are sad. What now?
In response to this mournful noise, the Guardian’s resident agony aunt, Mariella Frostrup, informs us that “society has not yet shape-shifted enough to fully integrate us,” by which she means unhappy feminists, and that “the seismic changes needed to make the world more bearable… aren’t happening fast enough.” The possibility that feminist expectations may not be entirely realistic – and that “despising all men” isn’t necessarily a great way to attract a male partner and live a happy life – are oddly unexplored.
Instead, Ms Frostrup rambles about “social justice” and “universal childcare” as “issues that matter.” Because feminists are so thrusting and empowered that they expect the care of their own children to be organised and paid for by some other sucker.
Via Joan.
Cause, effect, Guardian.
Three non intersecting circles in a Venn diagram, but I do like the way Miss Frostrup, if that is her real name, managed to tie in Brexit in a logic leap that would clear the Grand Canyon.
Three non-intersecting circles in a Venn diagram
And note Ms Frostrup’s sly conflation of women and feminists, as if they were obviously the same thing. The women I know who are currently in their 30s don’t seem to be having the difficulties listed in the Guardian piece. But then, so far as I can tell, they don’t think of themselves as feminists. Or indeed Guardian readers. And they don’t expect the world to “shape-shift” dramatically and make “seismic changes” – specifically, showering them with someone else’s earnings – in order to accommodate their fantasies of a world without trade-offs and consequences.
resident agony aunt
[spits coffee]
Very good, sir. I see you haven’t lost your touch.
Normally any Guardian article on feminism is accompanied by tons of “moderated” comments, as anything which is in the least way critical of modern feminism is removed. We are often talking 25% to 50$ of the comments.
No such removed comments here. Either the comments were premoderated, or removed comments were not shown.
“Comments on this piece are premoderated to ensure the discussion remains on the topics raised by the author”
Natch.
Feminism is a women’s enemy. NO ONE like feminists, not even feminists. They are miserable spiteful women whose lives will continue to disappoint and will lead to depression or worse.
The upside is that feminists richly deserve the miserable lives they choose to lead and I enjoy their pain.
Real women who actually are attracted to real men are the only hope our world has. It takes two distinct genders to keep our civilization afloat. All the other gender stuff is just filler for empty heads.
In other words, these women changed their behaviors in ways that made them viable partners. Imagine my surprise.
I’m guessing they stopped being entitled *itches who demand the world (and any man who came within the reach of their voice) change to suit them on their terms.
(of course, then the author goes on to the usual litany of making that the poor plight of child-bearing women won’t be improved until “society” gives them stuff)
I once had a female acquaintance tell me, in utter seriousness, that, and I quote, “your [sic] problem is you think cause and effect are related“.
The most telling aspect of this was that her clique of girlfriends (about 8-10 or them) were in 100% agreement. And these were women in their late twenties to early thirties at the time.
The one thing my friends and I all noted was that all of these women were (a) pretty much universally unhappy and frustrated, despite having no issues with respect to looks, economic freedom, or health, and (b) they were all looking for/expecting someone to take care of them, and relieving them of the burden of responsibility for their own lives.
Most of my male friends, of course, saw the red flags and tiptoed away quietly. It was my female friends who were the most annoyed by this stupidity, as it made it more difficult for them to be taken seriously, since “these twits just reinforce the idea that women are flakes”.
Of course, each of the women in the logic-challenged group self-identified as proud womyn, and feminists, while my happy and well-adjusted female friends just rolled their eyes and took responsibility for their own lives.
That was twenty five or so years back. Things haven’t change much.
the usual litany of making that the poor plight of child-bearing women won’t be improved until “society” gives them stuff
If their own existence had depended on “universal childcare” (as opposed to, say, reliance on friends and family members) and other such conditions and indulgences, I suspect few of them would be here to bitch in the Guardian.
as opposed to, say, reliance on friends and family members
But arranging that will take effort and planning and, ::::gasp:::: choices that may involve trade-offs.
[F]ocus on shaping the world you want, Mariella Frostrup tells a woman whose biological clock is ticking
Because if the problem is that your biological clock is counting down and is now approaching zero, the solution is to try to remake the world to accommodate your choices before time runs out.
The folks at Big Vagina are starting to have doubts?
Funny that no matter how loudly these people preach things like “personal truth[s], social constructs, feminist empowerment, and so forth, the “old verities” always come back to bite them on the ass.
The gist of these complaints is usually some self-pitying variation of,
Or,
Given such criteria, happiness seems implausible.
The folks at Big Vagina
Band name.
Feminists = spinsters. They are so annoying like the yapping of a small dog.
Conan, what is best in life?
Conan: To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentations of their women!
Ahhhh, the lamentations of it all. Let us take a moment to meditate on them. To drink it all in.
David, at least in the U.S., all feminists confuse “female” with “feminist.” That’s why they were genuinely astounded when demi-goddess Hillary lost the election.
Also on the subject of social justice, we have this:
http://theothermccain.com/2018/09/16/amazons-digital-fahrenheit-451/
Hm. Well, Amazon is absolutely right. Roosh V is legally permitted to write and say whatever he likes, and Amazon, as a private business, is legally permitted to refuse to sell his products. But he has no way to sell his products except on Amazon. Well, er, um…
This is what you get when businessmen are allowed to become despots, something American conservatives favored up till about 5 minutes ago when they began to notice that there is nothing to prevent your favorite despot from taking a notion to cut off YOUR head. It’s the conservative equivalent of the SJWs suddenly turning on their white male enablers. Conservatives are in an insoluble quandary in the instance of Amazon v. Roosh V.
My own view is that the tech giants have become the modern equivalent of public utilities, in that it’s difficult to impossible to function without them in many fields and should be regulated accordingly—just as the water company can’t shut you off because they don’t like your views, so Amazon should not be permitted to shut off Roosh V because they don’t like his views. But then, I’m neither a conservative nor a SJW.
WTP: Quite. For all practical purposes, the feminists have had their way and we are still hearing the lamentations of the women.
I found myself despising all men.
In the pages of the Guardian
Same
Jen:
“Comments on this piece are premoderated to ensure the discussion remains on the topics raised by the author”
It should have read…
“Comments on this piece are premoderated to ensure the views are correct.”
The Guardian violating their own expressed moderation policy is the reason why I quit commenting there about a year ago.
This is the challenge that Dalrock calls “sticking the landing“.
And they don’t expect the world to “shape-shift” dramatically and make “seismic changes” – specifically, showering them with someone else’s earnings – in order to accommodate their fantasies of a world without trade-offs and consequences.
It’s always about making someone else pay for their bad decisions.
It’s always about making someone else pay for their bad decisions.
Well, we’ve seen quite a few attempts to rationalise fatherlessness and chronic welfare dependency as virtuous and desirable. Which strikes me as an odd thing to want. An odd thing to wish on people.
Er, “…and THEY should be regulated accordingly.” Sorry.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/16/entertainment/michael-moore-fahrenheit-11-9-donald-trump/index.html
I too believe Trump will win a 2nd term, if he wants it. American voters know that we should never underestimate the ability of Democrats to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. In 2016 THEIR OWN FOCUS GROUPS told them Bernie Sanders could have beat Trump handily whereas with the demi-goddess it would have been quite close even if her campaign had done everything, or anything, right. *So what are they doing now? Shopping around for a new demi-goddess.
*Sanders is an Independent, but usually caucuses with Democrats and was willing to run as one on the presidential ticket.
But he has no way to sell his products except on Amazon.
Except for the twenty or thirty-odd other digital book stores out there. And self-publishing. And renting a server and setting up his own digital storefront. And simply accepting postal orders by mail and emailing copies of his books to people. And, and, and…
My own view is that the tech giants have become the modern equivalent of public utilities
No, they haven’t, because they aren’t monopolies. That’s what keeps getting lost in the “Big Tech is a public utility” fallacy – public utilities are regulated the way they are because they’re government-enforced monopolies. The big social media companies are not monopolies; there are ample competitors to every one of them. By and large they aren’t free, which is really what’s at the root of most of this complaining by conservatives – they’re angry that their free
Obamaphonespublishing and marketing platforms are being taken away.…a dissatisfied feminist…
Isn’t that redundant? Just as “a satisfied feminist” would be an oxymoron.
Unhappiness and dissatisfaction are features of feminism not bugs.
It’s odd that while studying a Marxist based worldview these people can’t come to the conclusion that a political order based on a constant struggle would preclude achieving happiness and satisfaction.
What other digital bookstores are there.? I’d be interested.
Well, there is feminist John Scalzi, who seems pretty satisfied with life, but he’s the only one I can think of offhand.
The folks at Big Vagina
Band name.
I was thinking more Feminist Western.
Meanwhile, back at the Big Vagina …
*spoken in best Bonanza narrator voice*
Right, keep up all this mocking and I’ll be force to alert the…
The Vaginal Industrial Complex
More of an orchestra in vein of ELO, but with a huge string section.
Oh look, another couple of studies that back up Jordan Peterson
Band name.
How about album name? The Band did “Music From Big Pink.” But it was 1968. “Music From Big Vagina” wouldn’t have sold.
Meanwhile, back at the Big Vagina…
…Hop Sing do! Hop Sing do!
The Vaginal Industrial Complex
Eisenhower warned against it, but it was the only thing to prevent Soviet expansionist policy in order to breed more prodigiously than we do, thus, knocking us out in superior numbers. As at the time General Turgidson warned, “Mr. President, we must not allow…a vaginal gap !”
What are the hench-lesbians up to in the corner over there?
By and large they aren’t free, which is really what’s at the root of most of this complaining by conservatives – they’re angry that their publishing and marketing platforms are being taken away.
I agree with that portion of the analysis. Public utilities are not the proper analogy. Rather, the inquiry should be whether these companies are “platforms” versus “publishers.” Big Tech wants the liability protections of the former while exercising the editorial control of the latter. They shouldn’t have it both ways.
Here is where I think the confusion comes from. Back when M$ had a virtual monopoly on the desktop, the leftist Mac heads all screamed about it and pitched a fit when M$ was giving away its browser “as a part of the operating system”. Regulators in the US and especially Europe came down hard on them. I’ve lost track of the tech world drama but as I recall that crap dragged on for years. I don’t recall when it ended. But by the same warped logic that said it was “bad for business” for M$ to do that, one could make a similar bad argument for regulating Google and possibly Amazon. I think FB would be a bit much, but Google and to a lesser extent Amazon, have much more of a strangle hold, effectively.
Funny that no matter how loudly these people preach things like “personal truth[s], social constructs, feminist empowerment, and so forth, the “old verities” always come back to bite them on the ass.
Never trust a junky. That goes double when they are giving life advice.
These are women on ideological drugs, and anything goes if they think saying it will keep them supplied with their feel-better fix.
R. Sherman, your phrasing’s better than mine. Thanks!
Steve, the henchlesbians are just conducting one of their frequent disaster drills.
Muldoon:
Please, please, please tell me that “Unacceptable Behaviour Team” is just a band name, and not a real thing.
Please.
Please, please, please tell me that “Unacceptable Behaviour Team” is just a band name, and not a real thing.
Beats me, though I should have thought this chap would have been better suited for The Troubles.
Then there is this guy who apparently works for Cthulhu on the R’lyeh CIty Police.
… the Guardian’s resident agony aunt, Mariella Frostrup,
Uhhm, David, isn’t that term a little, well, gendered?
I mean, for the Guardian, I assumed the current term would be sob sibling.
Before and after…
“Then there is this guy who apparently works for Cthulhu on the R’lyeh CIty Police.”
Oooooh, I would soooo watch that on Netflix!
a logic leap that would clear the Grand Canyon.
Feminist: Being a 30-something single feminist is a bit shit, really.
Mariella: *demands total reinvention of society, blames Brexit*
Depending on how perverse your sense of humour is, there are one or two nuggets in the comments section too. One Guardian reader explains, rather impatiently, “The problem is men.” Another adds, “Are you aware that climate change is a thing?”
Depending on how perverse your sense of humour is, there are one or two nuggets in the comments section too.
Darleen (and certainly other blogladies) have probably made this point before:
No one perpetuates the stereotype of the dingbat woman the way a feminist does. No one.
No one perpetuates the stereotype of the dingbat woman the way a feminist does. No one.
Taken as a group, they do seem quite determined to give the impression that women shouldn’t be allowed near children, or be allowed to attend university, or be permitted to wander the streets without an adult care-giver.
In the article, I see the pull quote is “You’d be astounded at what you can achieve before you are 40”.
I agree: I’d have some professional success, got married, bought a house or two and had two kids. I started working towards that at 18, when I met my wife. There was a whole bunch of dicking around that I didn’t do, so I could be happy, healthy and settled at the age of 42.
I have friends (of both genders) who skipped the first twenty odd years of that process. These folks now feel their lives are lacking some of the things I have, and whenever we have a beer together (or a glass of white), they say things like “Well, it’s OK for you! You are married/have kids/have a home” like I woke up one day and it was all there, having been delivered by the unfuckyourlife fairy overnight.
My wife (who is still in her 30’s) regards herself as a feminist. On occasion, I show her what feminsim actually entails these days, often through snippets from here, or by emailing her the link to everyday feminism. To say she is surprised is an understatement.
Instead, Ms Frostrup rambles about “social justice” and “universal childcare” as “issues that matter.”
How about *you* look after your own kids?
I really think that the only mentally challenging thing to be found anywhere in the Guardian is their Monday to Friday cryptic crosswords. And they give those away free on their web site. Says it all really.
I come for the social critique, but being newly single after the end of a 12 year marriage, I am going to start getting my dating advice here too!
[writes down “avoid the angry feminists”]
[underlines twice]
I am going to start getting my dating advice here too!
No refunds. Credit note only.
Speaking of howling at the moon, today’s exciting installment of “Everything is Racist, Xenophobic, and Misogynistic”…
the unfuckyourlife fairy
*Checks Disney catalog. Notes remarkable resemblance to Angela Lansbury.*
I have friends (of both genders)…
Both? Don’t you mean all tovarisch ?
@Muldoon
Oooh. Crap…
*Coughs*
I mean all my friends are all genders, but because I only have two friends, the grammar sometimes escapes me, and it makes it sound like I accidentally thoughtcrimed.
Can I go now?
Also:
Ref The Atlantic tweet-
All white men look the same? Really? Isn’t that just an invesion of a racist trope?
All people of [insert race here] look the same?
“Well, it’s OK for you! You are married/have kids/have a home” like I woke up one day and it was all there…
This brings us back to an observation which pops up on these pages regularly: Some people are incapable of understanding the relationship between “cause” and “effect.” Certainly, Everyday Feminism has provided numerous examples, but the problem isn’t limited to the chubby distaff members of our society. I’ve noticed over the years the same disability among most of the petty criminals I’ve represented. That inability combined with poor impulse control usually doesn’t bode well for one’s prospects in life.
…it makes it sound like I accidentally thoughtcrimed.
Thinking you could have an accidental wrongthought is a wrongthought thoughtcrime in of itself.
Report to Sector 9 for re-grooving.
“…Life isn’t going how we thought it would. We’re being left behind…”
I felt this way in my late 30s. I got a dog and things started to change for the better after that.
Nothing too large or rambunctious. I got a Westie. He liked classical music.
Awwww. 🐶
OT but,
“The Campaign Against Sex Robots, led by U.K.-based robotic ethics professor Kathleen Richardson, is sympathetic to an outright ban,”
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/technology/calls-mount-for-regulation-of-sex-robots?_amp=true&__twitter_impression=true
The Campaign Against Sex Robots…
I’ll just leave that there, I think.
You’d think feminists, of all people, would be in favor of sex robots—they mean no one ever has to touch one of those icky men again.
“Fifth Circuit judges later overturned Texas’ sex toy ban, rejecting then-state Solicitor General Ted Cruz’s 2008 contention that “there is no substantive-due-process right to stimulate one’s genitals” for non-medical reasons outside of a relationship.”
Land of the free, home of the brave.
You’d think feminists, of all people, would be in favor of sex robots—they mean no one ever has to touch one of those icky men again.
Oh, no, no, no. The advent of the sex robot, as opposed to the wholly non-threatening blow-up doll, could give a not-insignificant group of men the means of a bit of sexual release so as to detach themselves from otherwise unattainable societal expectations, and thus potentially making themselves immune from the constant harping and demands by (and the concomitant paying attention to) the feminists. And that, my dear, simply will not do.
It’s not that feminists particularly want to touch teh icky menz, but they do absolutely insist on those men’s attention. “You WILL, you MUST listen to me while I berate you and all like you who refuse to worship me as feminism dictates I must be worshipped!”
the unfuckyourlife fairy
*Checks Disney catalog. Notes remarkable resemblance to Angela Lansbury.*
Here y’are.
https://genius.com/Stephen-sondheim-a-little-priest-lyrics
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d4z9i3R7UAQ
What?
Angus,
You may wish to add “avoid bitter divorcees with school-age children”
Trust me on this.
You may wish to add “avoid bitter divorcees with school-age children”
At the risk of being accused of bitterness myself, for all practical purposes if you live in a Western nation you’re probably just screwed.
Or, er, not. You know what I mean.
What does that mean “24 people have been to the moon”?
Six missions landed men on the Moon, so six times two is twelve that actually walked on the surface. There were nine manned missions that went around the moon and returned safely to the Earth, so nine times three is 27. Am I missing something?
No, you’re not missing anything, but you ARE guilty of using patriarchal math, insisting that one + one = 2 (or 3 x 9 = 27). You are also committing the equally patriarchal offense of assuming words mean things. Knock it off.
Knock it off.
Violent imagery!
[Unless you’re advocating a gender change, that is, in which case it’s post-modern wisdom]
“You WILL, you MUST listen to me while I berate you and all like you who refuse to worship me as feminism dictates I must be worshipped!”
Imagine the scene from 1984 wherein Winston was being lectured and questioned while his face was strapped to a rat cage, minus Winston. How big a man could O’Brien appear to be sans someone trapped there with him?
And, of course, unfollow all the smug marrieds on Insta who, behind the scenes, are probably ruing the day they shacked up as often as you wish you could join them!
Sure, that’s it — just pretend that all the pictures of happy families and successful children are nothing but lies, and your so-called happy friends are really every bit as miserable as you.
I’ll admit that nobody is as happy and successful as they make themselves appear on Instagram, but that doesn’t mean they’re all miserable wretches who regret the day they took their vows.
Am I missing something? Some of the astronauts flew more than one mission.
Unfit for a real relationship
Pearl of wisdom: Life is not as perfect as it appears on Facebook (or Instagram), nor as wretched as it appears on Tumblr.
nor as wretched as it appears on Tumblr.
Heh.
Am I missing something? Some of the astronauts flew more than one mission.
None flew more than one moon landing, so 12 total, unless zem identify as binary then 24, unless zer have multiple personalties, then countless people of any gender, race, or species, may have walked on the moon.
Quillette sides with me on Big Tech, and for the same readons:
https://quillette.com/2018/09/13/is-it-time-to-regulate-social-media/
Very intelligent, the people at Quillette.
Am I missing something? Some of the astronauts flew more than one mission.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Apollo_astronauts
Thirty-two astronauts were assigned to fly in the Apollo manned lunar landing program. Twenty-four of them left Earth’s orbit and flew around the Moon on nine missions.
Jim Lovell, John Young, and Eugene Cernan flew more than on mission, so Apollo 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, and 17 = 9 missions that got to the moon, so 9*3 – 3 = 24 people who were on missions that got to the moon. Twelve people landed on the moon, but a total of 24 flew around the moon.
Some of the astronauts flew more than one mission.
Ah. Did not remember that, though I should have known as close as I followed it back then. I even worked STS. My bad.
Well looks like it’s a Japanese guy. Thank God for that, amirite?
https://www.thesun.co.uk/tech/7283062/elon-musk-spacex-yusaku-maezawa/
Well looks like it’s a Japanese guy.
He is going to die.
The possibility that feminist expectations may not be entirely realistic – and that “despising all men” isn’t necessarily a great way to attract a male partner and live a happy life – are oddly unexplored.
This reminds me of something in a recent posting by Sarah Hoyt. In a podcast that she watched, “The Lie Behind Getting A ‘Career'”, Jordan Peterson asserted that being forty and not having a social network or a family or a spouse and children means being a lost soul. There were thousands of vitriolic comments in response from single women who insisted they were happily “married to their careers” (which is why they are so enraged at Peterson…)
In short, another case of “modern” women defecating on traditional ways and somehow are still miserable.
He is going to die.
I believe the criterion is “been to the moon”, so the question is whether a splat on the bottom of a man-made crater counts. Of course “been to” implies came and went, so unplanned permanent residence, wouldn’t count. Does he get partial credit for a near miss ?