Response to “Time to do away with Manhood”

A still from "The Obsolete Man"
Article by Daniel McCormick; read the original article at The Guardian

A tenet of Christian faith is the idiotic concept of original sin, whereby it is understood we are all born with sin and must be faithful servants as punishment, in order to then be made well. This is a core belief of potentially billions of credulous people all over the world who claim fellowship with Christian death cults. These untold billions demonstrate the power of an illusion, and specifically the ability of a carefully crafted lie to take root and flourish through disinformation, misrepresentation, and argumentum ad passiones. In like manner, the modern feminist recognizes the power of a seductive lie and has taken this titillating concept of original sin and hammer forged their own bastard child. Original victimhood they bemoan, whereby it is observed that man is created sick and must faithfully serve woman in order to be made well. A predictable move for a supremacist, politico-pseudo-religious, ideology, as the claim carries with it the corollary that unless prostrating in servitude man won’t merely become but literally is a nemesis and bane to social order and progress. What is worrisome then, is in considering the absolutist, fatalistic, authoritarian will from which they seek privilege, and the credulous nature of the majority they which to use to attain this privilege.
For a considerable length of time feminism has been generally obsolete in the US, functional but directionless. To keep the menstrual machine relevant over the last few decades, during the modern dearth of social injustice, seeds of its ideological untruths have been sown in the popular consciousness by exploiting politeness. An obvious avenue because intelligent humans tolerate free speech regardless of how it makes them feel, and this tolerance comes at a price. For behind these soft campaigns of Stalinist censorship lay a many headed beast of manufactured victimhood gnashing its teeth in hunger for the credulous. As awareness raising becomes pleas for special privilege, as misrepresented social problems become calls for political action, the beast becomes less obscured behind the crumbling facade of benevolence. Because they are not vying to improve society, nor are they battling institutional injustice. No, today they are pushing for the legislation of morality and opinion and seek to censor, slander, and demonize all that would disagree. Because what Caucasian, alpha, manly men like myself are alleged to be guilty of is not actually anything we’ve done but, as we are told, we are guilty of thought crimes, of language crimes, and guilty of simply being the gender and skin tone we happened to be. This is part of a perverted guilt complex feminists have incorporated from the religious by which feminism proclaims to be able to reeducate and save males through their revealed wisdom (e.g. Catholic flimflam). From which I can only conclude that when a person’s standard for evidence is tantamount to Inquisition grade hearsay there is little to differentiate fanatical absolutists from each other.

I realize the female gender still has some legitimate first world grievances even today: women aren’t funny, cosmetics are expensive, beauty is temporary, but these problems are not institutional. Likewise whatever problem feminism has with masculinity is also not covered by government statutes. That’s because the problems as perceived by feminist theory have become so irrational and illusory and based on perpetuated biases that they shovel their own graves. I’m reminded of an old Twilight Zone episode (06/02/1961 – “The Obsolete Man”), which is a philosophical dialogue on absolutist fanaticism, and authoritarian ruthlessness. This episode ends with the antagonist facing the same sentence he’d inflicted on others, and closing with Rod Serling addressing the viewer.
“Any state, any entity, any ideology that fails to recognize the worth, the dignity, the rights of man, that state is obsolete.”
Thus, I maintain feminism is obsolete.

Tags: , , , , , ,

27 thoughts on “Response to “Time to do away with Manhood””

  1. vOddy says:

    Feminism is obsolete in western Europe and north America. Women have the same legal rights and financial and educational opportunities as men in those regions. Only focusing on the problems of one gender makes no sense – now it is time to focus on the problems of the people in general. It has played its part in bringing women up to the level of men. Let us now bring up the level for every one equally.

    But, feminism is not obsolete in Arabia. There, sexual slavery still exists in the form of arranged marriage. Rape is still easy to get away with, because of the need for three male witnesses. Women aren’t allowed to drive cars, or to dwell in public areas without hijab.

  2. vOddy says:

    But really, a garbage article like this one does not warrant a response from an intellectual website like

    1. Nuclear Whore says:

      +1 for your comment.

      Tss, what an article, the author… How prideful he is.

    2. drip says:

      A garbage article definitively warrants a reply from this hipster garbage website

      1. Sackramentum - Cum Shall Be Spilled says:

        Hi there!

        I miss the days when this site was a place where well-endowed hessians could find willing young uke boys to holster their manhood in.

        I can tell you feel the same way. Would you like to arrange a meeting?

  3. Dualist says:

    More victimhood:

    Everyone needs food too. Should the government give that out for free too, like these weirdos seem to want?


      1. vOddy says:

        “Question: how many metal bands featuring female members — besides Halestorm, shown above — can you name?”

        Rhetorical answer: How many legitimate reasons for why the lack of women is a problem can you name?

        When something is more popular with women than with men, no one claims that it is a problem.
        Poser idiots.
        Metalheads don’t care about the composer’s gender. If these writers were a part of the culture that they claim to be part of, and have infiltrated, they would know that.
        Often, people don’t even know what the composers look like, and don’t even look up their names. If they do, it is certainly after they were already impressed by the music itself.

        They are pushing shitty bands just because their members have vaginas
        Baby Metal is a fucking joke band. It is j pop mixed with generic thrash metal in a banal, lowest-common-denominator-of-synthesis way.
        As for Halestorm, I can tell that they suck ass just by looking at them
        I’ll listen to them for real to confirm this, and to give them a chance to prove me wrong, but trust me, I can tell.

        Ah, and of course. The lyrics depicting violence towards women.
        And no mention of lyrics from the same band which depicts violence towards men
        “I see the panic in his eyes…”

        As usual, SJWs don’t care about the culture that they have infiltrated. They only care about using it to further their stupid ideology of equal results no matter what. They want equal results even between individuals who aren’t equal in ability. Idiotic.
        If they cared about the culture, they would respect artistic freedom (and the art of the genre itself, obviously) and they wouldn’t try to shove mediocre at best and shitty at worst bands down our throats – just because they have female members or have preaching lyrics.

        1. vOddy says:

          Metal doesn’t have a problem with women. We don’t care about gender, we care only about the music itself – and that is what SJWs dislike. To them, if you set up an open and non discriminatory system, and more of one demographic than an other joins, that is in itself a problem. Even though there is no discrimination. Gender and race always matter to them, and that we don’t care about gender is in itself a “micro aggression”.

          What a bunch of tossers. Some things appeal to more men than women, and other things appeal to more women than men. That is a fact of the universe, and it’s not even a fact that we should be bothered about.

          But what about the few women who do like metal and who are part of bands? Have they ever been discriminated against for being women?
          Did people stop listening to Ensiferum because they got a new female keyboardist?
          And please, tell me how Nightwish is struggling with popularity because of their female vocals.

          1. vOddy says:

            I didn’t even know that Ensiferum’s keyboardist was female when I heard their music. Like most metalheads, I listened to the music without even knowing what the composers and performers were called.
            So the gender and race of the band members had no effect on my judgement of the music.

        2. Scotty 2 Hotty says:

          Often, people don’t even know what the composers look like, and don’t even look up their names. If they do, it is certainly after they were already impressed by the music itself.

          This is a good point. Due to the nature of “singing” in underground metal the sex of the vocalist is not immediately discernable in many cases. See Derketa or Funerus. Death growls are perhaps the only singing style in which this is the case. I guess you can find Eekwality in some of the most unexpected places.

  4. Belisario says:

    I don’t know what kind of feminism are you talking about, but as far as I know feminism is mainly about, for instance, equality of wages, which in many fields (I’m talking about Europe) are in average 20-30% lower for women, and that is to my mind an understandable concern.

    That Guardian article, however, is written by a visibly effeminate journalist who seems to have problems with anything that doesn’t match his own self-righteous worldview (SJW style). I wouldn’t pay much attention to it, and certainly would not take it as a basis to criticize feminism as a whole, or any possible idea of feminism.

    1. are in average 20-30% lower

      That needs a citation.

        1. None of these show what you purport them to show. More “disparate impact” style thinking.

    2. vOddy says:

      Have you been living under a rock?
      Feminism isn’t what it used to be. This is the third wave. It’s infested with social justice warriors and professional victims.

      1. Belisario says:

        I am aware of that third wave you mention, but I think those SJWs are just a single small sector (quite noisy, though) whose hysterical stance does not summarize nor invalidate more rational, sociologically-based postures.

        Although I would never make it a fanatical crusade of my own out of it, I see some feminist concerns as genuine and defendable, belonging to what you would maybe label as first or second wave. I personally rather think of that as feminism that the article criticized above, but feel free to disagree.

    3. Scotty 2 Hotty says:

      A similar statistic is often repeated here in the US. Something like women earn 70 cents for every dollar men earn.

      This is a deceptive number though, because it is comparing raw earnings data without taking into account the many other variables, namely the fact that women choose different occupations than men.

      When that variable is accounted for, the wage gap is statistically insignificant. I suspect the same is true in the EU.

      1. hypocrite says:

        Feminists, when presented with this argument, will no doubt counter with something along the lines of: “Women don’t CHOOSE occupations that pay less, they are PREVENTED from getting higher paying jobs by men, etc etc…”.

        1. vOddy says:

          Citation needed

      2. Belisario says:

        Those many other variables you mention are usually taken into account. Have a look for instance at this study (pages 11 to 21):—dgreports/—dcomm/—publ/documents/publication/wcms_216695.pdf

        You may of course disagree if you rely on your own sources, but I think the wage gap is a reality in many countries, including mine, and although I am no woman nor SJW, I am aware my wife among other family members are affected by this, hence it’s importance.

        1. vOddy says:

          If companies can easily pay women to do the same job, then why do they hire men at all?
          If it was true, then they’d try to hire women over men so badly, taht they’d only hire a man if there was no woman available.

          1. vOddy says:

            If companies can easily pay women less to do the same job*

        2. vOddy says:

          I’m reading through what you sent me. I’m not done yet, but so far it hasn’t been about unequal pay for the same work – it has been about unequal pay for different work. They say that the work is of “equal value” and thus should have the same wage, but it’s not actually the same job. Right now, the free market determines the value of a job. If women want to make more money, they have to get the jobs that pay more – just like men do. Same for every one.

          Ensuring that the work done by women and men is valued fairly, and
          ending pay discrimination, is essential to achieving gender equality and
          a core component of decent work. The principle of equal remuneration
          for men and women for work of equal value, as set out in the Equal
          Remuneration Convention, 1951 (No. 100), needs to be implemented
          if equality is to be promoted and pay discrimination is to be addressed
          effectively, particularly since women and men often do different jobs”

          1. Belisario says:

            I guess in order to elaborate a macroeconomical study you need to address frames of work/wages that are similar or equivalent, not the actual same exact ones. Anyway, I see that the wage gap seems to be a controversial topic in the US, in Europe however it is rather perceived as an established fact and plays an important role in social politics and political agendas.

            1. vOddy says:

              Job A pays salary X
              Job B pays salary Z
              Job C pays salary Y

              To any one having that job, male or female.

              Even the article that you sent admits that.
              If you want to prove inequality, you have to prove that women are prevented from attaining the jobs that pay the most.
              And you can’t. They can choose any education that they want to.

  5. morbideathscream says:

    As I’ve stated before, you can be proud to be anything except a white heterosexual male in mainstream society.

    The guy who wrote the article on the guardian is jealous cause he’s an incompetent femme male that got bullied by alpha males back when he was in school. Isn’t that what sjw’s are? Incompetent? Why do you think they target white heterosexual alpha males?

    If a woman was doing the same job as a man and had proof that she didn’t have equal pay due to gender, she’d win a lawsuit in a heartbeat. Women actually have more opportunities than men. Shit, if a woman in the workplace says that a man even looked at her the wrong way and felt creeped out by him, he can lose his job.

    Sjw’s and other assorted leftist retards claim they’re against homophobia, sexism and animal cruelty defend muslims and call anyone who criticizes them islamophobic and racist. So I guess, they can stone gays and women to death and nothing is said. Not that I care what happens in other countries, but Europe is getting invaded by Syrian so-called refugees at an alarming rate. Anyone expressing opposition towards them is a racist and faces criminal charges in certain countries. Something tells me that sjw’s won’t say a word about how muslims treat their women worse than dogs. What do you think their ultimate goal is?

Comments are closed.

Classic reviews: