Petty Squabbling in the Manosphere

I came across the following post over at ROK yesterday which highlights some important issues facing then men’s movement at large…..

The author of the piece, Samson Lamont, mentions three basic problems a lot of guys commenting on men’s rights blog have. For the point of summary, those points are….

a) Arguing (or better yet, petty squabbling)

b) Making ad hominem attacks on each other

c) Being overly concerned about our credibility in the eyes of the mainstream

As SL points out, these are problems that plague the manosphere that seem to be largely absent on the feminist front……

At the time of this article, Jizzabel’s Fakebook page has 488,316 likes. Femifisting has 124,976. ROK has 9,111. That should put into perspective where we stand. I check out these sites periodically because I like to know my enemy, and the one thing that stands out in stark contrast to our site is this: unity. Their comments section is virtually devoid of the petty squabbling that you see here. While their thought processes are clearly out of touch with reality, at least they are in agreement within their delusion.”

Ironically, nothing screams nil credibility like being unable to hold a unified, cohesive front; something a lot of guys commenting on MR blogs do their damnest to fuck up. Keep in mind, we are fighting a battle whilst hugely outnumbered and this is just another kick in the nuts men don’t really need.

For all their delusional thinking, feminist blogs and sites are hugely unified in their stance. Look at any feminist blog and pretty much all the comments are in the same vein. True enough, feminist blogs – like all left wing sites – tend to practice heavy censorship of discerning opinions but nonetheless, their cohesive front gives them a huge step up in the eyes of the mainstream. The petty squabbling and bitching that goes on in the manosphere does little but make MRA’s look like a bunch of rambling loonies (which is how we tend to be portrayed in the wider media).

I, for one, do not comment on many others blogs unless I feel I have something worthwhile to add. I also never comment purely for the sake of belittling the opinion of another commenter. Whilst we all believe the same basic ideas, there will always be subtle variations and tangents to those belief. If MRA’s spent more time discussing the major issues and agreeing to disagree on the minor details, the MR movement would take huge steps forward.

A Blatant Example of Trying to Justify Cuckoldry

Most women – and their mangina sycophants – seem incapable of understanding the value of paternity and fatherhood to men. More specifically, to a woman, the notion of deceiving a man into raising a child she knows is not his is morally quite acceptable. Apparently, researchers are now trying to convince the masses that “parents” shouldn’t be told whether in fact children they are raising are actually theirs. Reasons cited included such things as possible embryo switching in IVF or accidental baby switching in maternity wards. Whilst these are issues that should not happen – and if “professionals” in these fields were more responsible, it wouldn’t – the one issue that the researchers don’t really address which IS a major problem is false paternity. Effectively, we – men of the masses – are being spoon fed a load a shite that claims we have no right to actually know if children we are devoting our time and financial resources to are actually ours. No doubt women will cheer this but let’s think about men for a change. Part of the reason a man has children in the first place is to ensure his genetic legacy lives on. It is for this reason – among others – that most men are highly protective of their own biological children whilst not really caring much for anyone else’s children. The other reason false paternity is so repugnant to men is that it is proof their wife has been unfaithful. Women are great at blaming men for straying but who is keeping an eye on the women? Part of marital vows have to do with fidelity to one’s spouse. It is not unreasonable – in the eyes of men, at least – to expect their wife not to have sex with other men. However, given that false paternity runs at about 10% (which is believed to be a conservative estimate), obviously there are huge numbers of wives fucking other men, subsequently becoming pregnant and committing their husbands to devote the next eighteen years of his life towards raising a child (or children) that are not his. If that is not a definition of fraud, then I don’t know what is. Having said that, best of luck getting any court in the land to award damages against your wife for fooling you into raising the mailman’s bastard.

The proposal to keep parents (read men) in the dark regarding their genetic link (or lack thereof) to their children seems to have a degree of support amongst the medical fraternity. So much for the hippocratic oath to do no harm. How does not telling a man that he is being abused by a woman who fucked around behind his back and is immorally draining him of resources he could be using to raise children that are genetically his?

Looking at the comments to the article, it would seem most of the readers have seen straight through this load of horseshit as quickly as I have. And women wonder why men aren’t signing up for parenthood anymore.

The Kind of Woman Other Women Should Be Complaining About

Incidents of female initiated shit such as false paternity, false rape allegations and parental entrapment really give me the shits. For an example of parental entrapment, have a look at the following post from reddit……

Basically, because she can, this devious bitch got pregnant to a guy by lying about herself being on the pill. Apparently she did this because “she just wanted a baby so she would never have to work.” Truly a charming woman – not. The writer of the reddit post is a woman who has an amazing degree of insight for a woman when it comes to issues pertaining to men……

I have always felt it was unfair that women could trap men into a new human’s existence and then cry ‘poor me’ and play the victim when he ‘runs out’ on something he never agreed to. I get very exhausted by these tales from fellow women and having to feign sympathy.”

Like I said, such introspection from a woman is amazing as most women – as the above quote suggests – will always tend to blame the man in these situations when in fact, they should be condemning the woman for her deviousness and deceit. The female author of the post has definitely gone up a few notches in my estimation as a woman for her unbiased and fair reflection on the situation. What most women don’t realise is that by automatically defending other women who are dishonest and deceitful towards men, they are lowering men’s view of women as a collective. For a woman to defend another woman of deceitful behaviour towards men would be like a man defending another man for raping a woman and when was the last time you heard of that happening. The answer is probably never because if a man did that, he would be socially ostracised in quick order. Women – on the other hand – always get the golden pussy pass on this one.

I asked my girlfriends for this advice and they looked at me like I’m a fucking alien, and he deserves to be trapped.”

The quote above captures the whole concept I am trying to impart here in one nice simple sentence. We men know this is how many (if not most or all) women think on issues between men and women; as far as most women are concerned, whilst it is wrong for a man to abuse a woman in any way, men are fair game. Apart from the raging hypocrisy of this attitude by women, these are the exact kind of women who do the women’s movement a huge disservice. What do women think men think when we read things like the quote above? Do women actually think this fills us will feelings of warmth and caring towards the opposite gender (hint – it doesn’t)? On the other hand, it is women like to one who wrote the post that give me hope for the female gender. Imagine if rather than act like the man in the account deserved to be abused, the woman’s friends pointed out that the man deserved a basic level of human consideration. How much better an example would that set for us as men? Like it or not, neither the women’s movement or the men’s movement are going to get very far if member’s of each group actively promote abuse of the other.

The next time you hear a woman defend the abhorrent actions of another woman against men, remind her she is in fact hurting the female cause. Like most men, I have no problem with women calling out bad behaviour in men just so long as they can be fair and call out equally bad behaviour in women.

All Girls Garage Anyone?

I just saw a rather interesting post over at Patriactionary…….

Apparently, some genius in Paris has decided to open up a female’s only garage (staffed by female mechanics) to cater for women who feel ripped off when taking their cars to traditional male-operated garages.

Personally, when it comes to women having women-only places whilst denying men male-only places, I have stopped giving a shit. The only exception to this is when the female-only places cause actual disadvantage to men and boys. In the case of the abovementioned female-only garage, this obviously does not apply as most men would prefer their cars to be serviced and repaired by male mechanics. The other issue is the continual hypocrisy by women by which feminism ultimately shoots itself in the foot. Do you think a man would be able to open a male-only garage so that mechanics would not have to spend half their time explaining mechanical affairs to women who wouldn’t have a fucking clue? Not bloody likely he would. One of my mates is a mechanic and according to him the bane of any mechanics life is having to deal with female customers who don’t know the first fucking thing about cars and then complain that repair costs are excessive. Apparently this is the rationale behind the opening of the female-only garage; to ensure that women are not “exploited” by greedy and unscrupulous male mechanics. This I do have a problem with for a number of reasons…….

a) If one has next to no knowledge of how cars work – and I have never met a woman who does – how can one expect to be able to criticise repair costs? Expecting to be able to criticise something without first developing an appreciation for it is pretty much the definition of an idiot. Seeing that nearly all women do this when they take a car in for repair, I am not surprised that a lot of women don’t have great experiences with mechanics.

b) Part of understanding car servicing and repairs is having an appreciation of the personnel involved. The man who fixes one’s car is a qualified mechanic and no, mechanic qualifications do not come out of a Weeties packet. Automotive mechanics is a four-year apprenticeship as a minimum and most mechanics do further training beyond that. In the modern era of computerised management systems, mechanics are constantly undergoing additional training to keep up with the latest developments in automotive technology. All the above costs money. If some chick doesn’t like that, she should get her car fixed by her dipshit boyfriend in exchange for a blow-job.

c) Another part of the car servicing and repair industry that needs to be appreciated is the costs involved. If one’s car requires a new set of front brake pads, where does one think they come from? Hint – they don’t grow on fucking trees. Brake pads (like all automotive parts) come from suppliers who charge money for them; this is built into the cost of repairs.

d) Most mechanics charge on an hourly basis for labour. One of the biggest problems with a lot of modern cars is they are assholes to work on. One chick I knew was unfortunate enough to blow a clutch in her manual transmission. She was unhappy she was quoted in the order of $1800 for it to be replaced. What this dippy chick didn’t realise was that in her front-wheel-drive car, just about half of the front end had to be dismantled just to get at the blow clutch. After the clutch had been replaced, the who front end of the car had to be reassembled; thus the huge repair bill. Was this a case of a mechanic ripping of a female motorist? No – it was a case of a poorly designed car. This dumb should have been complaining to the pack of retards who built the car, not the mechanic who did the job.

e) Like all businesses, an automotive workshop costs money just to keep the doors open. The lights and power tools run on electricity. The company has to pay payroll tax and employee superannuation. Local governments demand payment of land rates. The federal government demands payment of company tax and so on. Like it or not, like all businesses, an automotive workshop builds this into the cost.

f) Speaking as a former apprentice automotive mechanic, I can tell you that women were the worst people to have to deal with. When a man brought his car in for work, a quote was explained and discussed man to man and we either got the job or not. If a man wasn’t happy with our quote, he thanked us for our time and went somewhere else with no fuss. With a man, the whole process was based on mutual respect. With a woman customer, I never once dealt with someone who treated me as an expert in my field. Quite the opposite, women always had the notion that mechanics were just “car fixers” who were too stupid to get a better job. Pretty much every other mechanic I have spoken to over the years has said much the same. If there is one thing I have learned over the years, it is that the best way to get someone to do wrong by you is to disrespect them. However, best of luck telling a woman that.

On the other hand, female mechanics probably do charge less than male mechanics for the same reason women in general get paid less: if they are no good at their job they shouldn’t expect to be paid the same as people who are. Personally, I wouldn’t like my car to be fixed by a woman any more than I would like to be in a plane flown by a woman. There are some things that meant to be done by men. If it makes women happy to get their cars fixed by other women who still have no fucking idea what they are doing, good for them.

Oh, and what about the owner of the female-only garage? That would have to be a woman, right? Wrong – the owner of the female-only garage is a man called Hdachi. Sounds to me like some clever guy has worked out a way to use women’s paranoia and stupidity against them.

Realities Of Working with Women

I saw a post over at reddit which describes an all to familiar situation for any man working in an environment with women…….

Reading the description, I cannot see anything that could lead a rational human being to feel “fearful for their personal safety“. But then, apparently the complainant was a woman and whom said women were rational? I have had some experience with this scenario over my career in various workplaces; women will use any excuse to stir up shit about men in the workplace for their own entertainment. Keep in mind that the female mind thrives on drama. What better way to whip up a little drama than to create a conflict in the workplace than could possibly get someone else fired? Women know that human resources departments are staffed by hard-line feminists whom are disposed to blame men for any issue (or more commonly, non-issue) that might arise. Essentially, by lodging bullshit claims with HR about men, women get their drama fix with no repercussions back on them. I have never had the need to complain to a HR department about anything. This is for the same reason pretty much no man has ever had the need to complain to a HR department about anything: as a man, I am expected to handle my own shit and not waste the time of others. If only the same expectation was placed on women in the workplace, HR would become irrelevant; think of the money that could be saved.

I currently have a HR issue with one of my receptionists. This woman chose to throw a temper-tantrum and storm out of the office for the day. Not only that, she did not come back for two days. Had I – as a man – been the one to demonstrate such unprofessional behaviour, I have no doubt I would have gotten a phone call from up top advising me my employment had been terminated. And rightly so – there is a right way and a wrong way to handle workplace issues and the example set by my receptionist was certainly the wrong way.

At any rate, I wound up discussing the issue with the company HR person – a feminist psycho bitch with absolutely no ability to communicate effectively with other humans. As I predicted, the HR bitch was hell-bent on pinning the while issue on me. She described the receptionists behaviour as being “caused” by myself and that the receptionist “had to escape” the situation. back in my blue-pill days I probably would have meekly agreed and taken the blame for the good of my office. However, the red-pill Evil Weasel is a whole new animal. I pointed out to the HR bitch that the receptionist alone is responsible for her behaviour and that she did not have to escape the situation as there was no situation. She could have stated what the issue was and we could have resolved it. I resolutely pointed out that the receptionist’s reactions and actions were her responsibility and hers alone. As one might expect, the HR bitch did not like this one bit and continued to imply – by choice of words – that I was the cause of the whole issue. I continued to correct her at every turn until she finally gave up. That’s one for me. I haven’t heard any more about the whole mess, so I presume that will be the end of it.

Like all women, my receptionist probably knew that in any HR issue, she would be seen as the aggrieved party whilst I would be seen as the villain. This kind of bullshit is where the red-pill can really help. The RP teaches men to be men and stand up for themselves. More importantly, the RP teaches men to see the world as it really is. I have any number of issues with women since I took the RP and in just about every one, I have come out on top. Quite simply, I simply don’t take shit from idiot bitches who think the world revolves around them. More importantly, I am prepared to back my beliefs with actions. Should I hear any more about the idiocy my receptionist started, I will likely tell my current employer where they can stick their job. I am highly qualified in a high demand field. Should I leave my current company, I will find a new position a lot sooner than they will find someone to replace me.

To get back to the point, working with women is a minefield. The poor dears have such thin skins and delicate sensibilities that even the slightest issue will set them off. Of course, being utterly solipsistic, a woman would never consider her reactions to an everyday issue to be out of place – it must be someone else’s fault. If she can somehow blame a man for her inability to cope in a normal workplace, all the better.

The reality of the modern workplace is that most men will have to work alongside women. The secret is to keep them at arm’s length; don’t talk to them unless absolutely necessary, don’t help them and if possible, have as little to do with them as you can manage. Remember – women are never the most productive or important members of a workforce. Most of them are only their due to affirmative action requirements that force employers to pay women the same as men for doing half as much work – if that. Whilst you probably won’t respect any woman you work with (and fair enough, why would you?), you must nonetheless be civil and polite to them. Know in the back of you mind that as a man, you are part of the gender that keep the world functioning. Women only exist to spend our money.

One Reason Why Feminism Has No Credibility

False rape accusations happen; if you don’t believe they do, you are wrong and need to get over it. Exactly how frequently FRA’s occur is another matter which I am not going to discuss in this post but rather I am going to look at the typical feminist response to FRA’s. Have a look at the following link…….

Essentially, after being found guilty of making a FRA, a woman is sentenced to three and a half years imprisonment. Given all things, the woman will be lucky to serve eighteen months. Keeping in mind, this all stemmed from an accusation that could have landed her former boyfriend in jail for most of the rest of his life, three and a half years is still highly lenient. In a sensible world, that would be the end of the matter; but of course, we don’t live in a sensible world. Feminists seem to think that women should be able to lodge FRA’s at a whim and never have to face censure for trying to get innocent men imprisoned for the rest of their lives.

‘The support and campaign group Women Against Rape (WAR) was among more than a dozen organisations and lawyers who wrote to the judge arguing that a harsh sentence would put women off coming forward to report rapes for fear they would not be believed.

They wrote: “The prosecution was not in the public interest. A prison sentence will put even more women off reporting, enabling even more attacks from violent men. The resources spent on prosecuting Ms Brooker should have been put into prosecuting rapists and other violent men.”’

Women Against Rape (WAR) has feminazi written all over it. Trust a bunch of loony feminists to write to a convicting judge that a sentence against a woman was “harsh”. Are you fucking kidding? The convicted women should have gotten twenty-five years to life for her accusation. After all, as I have already pointed out, she could have easily landed an innocent man in jail for a similar term. WAR (and apparently others interested parties) claim the “prosecution was not in the public interest”. Can someone explain to me how not prosecuting people who commit felonies is not in the public interest? I mean, isn’t that why we have a judicial system in the first place? I had to wait for it but eventually, the tired feminist argument against prosecuting FRA’s was brought out: “a harsh sentence would put women off coming forward to report rapes for fear they would not be believed.” What a load of horseshit; prosecuting FRA’s has never been shown to reduce women’s reporting of genuine rape incidents. However, prosecuting FRA’s has been shown to reduce women making FRA’s in the first place. Just to set the record straight, there is a big difference between a legitimate rape allegation and a FRA. A legitimate rape allegation is one in which the alleged victim (male or female) honestly believes they have engaged in sexual intercourse against their will. A FRA occurs when, regardless of intercourse occurring, the complainant alleges they have been raped when they know full well non-consensual sexual intercourse did NOT occur. With this in mind, it is fairly obvious that discouraging complainants (in this case, women) from making FRA’s has no actual bearing on women making legitimate rape allegations.

WAR and the other complaining parties also allege that….

The resources spent on prosecuting Ms Brooker should have been put into prosecuting rapists and other violent men.”

I agree, the whole incident was a colossal waste of police and judicial resources. That is largely why FRA’s must be discouraged via prosecution. How many other crimes could the police has investigated if they had not had their time wasted chasing Ms Brooker’s FRA? How many police man hours per year are wasted in any major city by women making FRA’s? At the end of the day, police are public servants and their time is paid for by the taxpayer. I don’t know about you, but I’d be a lot fucking happier if the police spent the time I paid for doing things that actually matter. If we are going to pay police to investigate FRA’s we might as well pay them to sit around coffee shops and eat doughnuts all day.

Yet, none of the above will matter to feminazis and their idiot supporters. To them, a woman has been punished and that is not acceptable. If feminists had their way, there would be no women’s prisons and women would be held to an even lower level of accountability than they are now. So long as the feminist movement refuses to accept that women need to be held as accountable for their actions as men are for theirs, no one is ever going to take them seriously. In this sense, feminists are women’s worst enemy.

Another Factor in the Gender Wage Gap

Whilst it true that men generally out earn women in the workplace, this can be easily explained as a function of educational and career choices, hours worked per week, general productivity and a host of other factors. In short, men do not out earn women because of sexism; men out earn women as they are worth more to their respective employers. The old hypothetical still stands: if an employer could pay a women 70% of the wage they would pay a man to do the exact same job, why would the employer be paying the man? Obviously there must be something in it for the employer.

One of the greatest factors is future earnings is education. For example, someone with a degree in medicine is almost certainly going to out earn someone whom is a high-school drop out. Although women now earn more degrees than men – in America at least. I am not sure how this plays out in Australia – it has to be asked, are women choosing to earn degrees in fields that don’t pay as well as traditionally male fields and if so, then why? I copied the graphic below from link on reddit which sheds light on the subject……..


What this graph plots is the percentage of women majoring in certain fields as opposed to the average IQ of people studying that field. Confirming what we already know, professions like social work, education and psychology are dominated by women whilst professions such as physics, engineering and mathematics are dominated by men. It would make sense that if women want to be paid the same as men then they would opt for the traditionally male fields of study and over time, pay differences between the sexes would even out. However, we need to look at the vertical axis of the graph which depicts the IQ of people in various fields of study. It would seem that the traditionally male areas of study tend to appeal to people of higher intelligence whilst the traditionally female areas of study tend to appeal to people of less intelligence. Irrespective of gender, I would agree with the vertical axis of the graph. When I was in high school, I majored in pure and applied mathematics and physics and even as someone with a high IQ, I found these subjects extremely challenging. On the other hand, I have a degree in education and I barely had to break a sweat to get that. I have met various psychologists and health professions over the years and none of them had impressed me as being overly bright. Factoring in gender, it would seem that men go for the more academically challenging subjects whist women take the easier options, but – and this is a big but – is this apparent disparity in educational options between the genders wholly due to voluntary choice? I would guess not or more women would in fact be doing the degrees that lead to higher salaries and that would be that. Looking at the vertical axis of the graph in isolation, it would appear that women choose easier degrees as they cannot intellectually cope with the harder, more advanced degrees done by men. Put simply, looking at the graph, one could reasonably conclude that men choose harder fields of study as they are – by and large – more intelligent than women. That is not to say that all men are automatically smarter than all women – far from it. However, when it comes to the best of the best, it would see that men outperform women significantly. Given that employers tend to pay the brightest people more, this goes a long way to contributing to women getting paid significantly less than men.

Questions Regarding Violence by Women

JudgyBitch (aka Janet Bloomfield) has put up a good post over at Thought Catalogue……

The post discusses the experiences of 13 women who openly (at probably gleefully) discuss incidents where they physically assaulted their male domestic partners. Reading the accounts, it is clear none of the female assailants sees female on male domestic violence as the wrong thing to do. If anything, pretty much all the females recalling their experiences seem to think hitting men is empowering and puts men in their places. I think the reality is closer to feminist women choosing men who are spineless and don’t have enough sense to know that retaliating against a woman attacking you is perfectly justified. The fact that none of these silly bitches ended up in hospital has a lot more to do with large numbers of men still believing there is no excuse for a man hitting a woman than the said silly bitches being empowered. Put simply, if these abusive chicks want to use violence against men as a tool for their own empowerment, let them try assaulting a man who has no compunctions whatsoever about hitting women in self defence and see how that work out for them. I think we all know that would never happen as abusive women only hit men they know won’t retaliate. If that isn’t the very definition of cowardice then I don’t know what is.

The above aside, the whole notion of women assaulting men raises some serious question which I will list below. I don’t intend to answer the questions as these are better left for general discussion but these are certainly questions/considerations that need to be discussed…..

a) We teach males that assaulting women is unacceptable. Why don’t we teach women that assaulting men is equally unacceptable?

b) In an era where women’s violence against men seems to be ever-increasing, why do we insist on teaching men that there is no circumstances in which it is acceptable to hit a woman – even in self defence?

c) How much of reported male on female domestic violence is actually the end result of men retaliating after being assaulted by their female partners? In other words, how much male on female domestic violence could be avoided if women kept their hands to themselves in the first place?

d) Whilst all the women mentioned in the link seem to think it is acceptable for them to hit men, I am sure they would consider it completely unacceptable for a man to hit them or any other woman. Why do women fail to grasp that hypocrisy is the main reason most men don’t take feminism seriously?

I could probably get a few more philosophical standpoints out of this but you see what I am getting at. There needs to be some serious discussion about the use of violence by women against men and more so in the domestic scene. Until this happens, men will continue to ignore violence as it happens to women.

A Good Example of Why Men Think Women are Idiots

There has been somewhat of an epidemic of women getting their pussies wet after seeing a convicted felon’s mugshot on the internet. See the following links for details…..


In the links, Jason Meeks is described by his many female admirers as being “handsome” and apparently many wish to have Meek’s baby. Keep in mind that Meeks is a convicted felon who is currently being held in custody after not being able to come up with $900,000 bail. If it were the case that women were getting the ‘gina tingles because Meeks happened to be a male model, a sports star or a celebrity, the issue of his popularity would not be questioned. After all, since when haven’t women been gold diggers? However, in this case, women are literally getting moist at the picture of a man with a criminal record who is currently up on new charges. Who said women don’t like bad boys or think with their pussies? Apparently – at least in the eyes of his many admirers – despite all the evidence that suggests that Meeks is the kind of man women should avoid like the plague, huge numbers of women would overlook Meeks’ past as he is good looking. I don’t know who it was that told me that women are better judges of character than men but it was obviously someone who didn’t know the first thing about women.

Are women who admire Meeks online serious? Do they no realise that anyone who sees their name against some of the idiotic comments posted are going to have a hard time taking them or any other women seriously? The sad reality is that plenty of women are attracted to shitheads like Meeks and this plays out in a way that does little to help society. Do women actually think that fucktards like Meeks have anything worth passing genetically? Is Meeks likely to be a good father figure and role model for his offspring. Obviously the answer is a resounding no and if women had the slightest hint of intelligence, they’d realise this.

So basically, instead of doing the intelligent thing and condemning an idiot like Meeks for his decisions, women insist on going out of their way to say idiot things like how handsome he is and how they would like to have his baby. If these are the same people who by controlling access to sex are effectively controlling reproduction of the human race, God help us.

The Best Way to End Domestic Violence Against Women

Much has been said about domestic violence in any number of forums. Of course, the politically correct view is that DV is something that only happens to women at the hands of men. It is well-known that DV is perpetrated by both genders roughly equally and that the most violent domestic arrangements are those between lesbians. So much for political correctness.

However, seeing as DV against women by men is seen as the greater problem, there needs to be some serious investigation as to how to go about reducing it. As much as feminists and their mangina lackeys have demonised men as being the greatest threat to women on the face of the Earth, precious few of them have put forth any reasoned arguments as to how to go about reducing the problem of DV against the female gender. Yes, I have heard all the pseudo-suggestions that left-wingers come up with to end the DV against women problem but precious few of them are based on logic. It has been claimed that longer prison sentences for men convicted of DV is a solution. This rarely works as women tend to be attracted to men who knock them around; once a woman gets rid of one abusive man, her nature dictates she will look for another to replace him. Social shaming has been put forth as a deterrent to DV however this rarely works as mentioned before, women commit DV against men at roughly the same rate they receive it. Fairly obviously, if the feminist movement chooses to put zero thought into any “solution” they come up with, then that said solution is likely to be complete nonsense.

I came across the following article the other day on the very subject of reducing the incidence of domestic violence against women…….

Some other men are more likely to protect women, directly and indirectly, from the threat of male violence: married biological fathers. The bottom line is this: Married women are notably safer than their unmarried peers, and girls raised in a home with their married father are markedly less likely to be abused or assaulted than children living without their own father.”

Who’da thunk it? Contrary to the feminist narrative that women don’t need men and that fathers are useless, it appears that men whom are the biological fathers of the woman’s children are actually a major player in the said woman’s safety. If you have a think about it, it’s not a great stretch to see why; the man who places the most value on a specific family of children and the woman that birthed them is obviously going to be the father of the children. This tends to play out in the animal kingdom as well; males animals such as bears and felines are greatly protective of their own offspring at the expense of another male’s offspring. Commonly, when a male lion takes over as the alpha male of a pride, his first act is to kill all the offspring sired by the formed alpha. After all, the aim of mating is to ensure the survival of one’s own genetics, not someone else’s. If you think this doesn’t play out in the human species, you’d be dead wrong.

As the figure above indicates, children are more likely to be abused when they do not live in a home with their married father.”

In other words, a child’s biological father acts as a protector when living in the same household and thus, being able to fulfil this role. On the other hand…….

“What’s more: girls and boys are significantly more likely to be abused when they are living in a cohabiting household with an unrelated adult—usually their mother’s boyfriend“.


“[c]hildren residing in households with unrelated adults were nearly 50 times as likely to die of inflicted injuries than children residing with 2 biological parents.”

So basically, mommy divorcing daddy and kicking him out of the house and then shacking up with the first guy who makes her ‘gina tingle is actually doing her kids a huge disservice. Relating this back to the abovementioned example of males in the animal kingdom, why would anybody be surprised. One would think that this would prompt the powers that be to pass laws against mommy kicking daddy out of his children’s lives without very good reason. But then, since when have law-makers ever put the rights and well-being of children ahead of the frivolous wants of women?

Girls who are victimized are … more likely to have lived without their natural fathers,” and that the risk is especially high when a boyfriend or stepfather is in the picture.”

To some degree, that mothers don’t care much for the welfare of their sons is not surprising – after all, most women hate men deep down anyway – but you’d think that women would at least care about the well-being of their daughters (they, at least, being the same sex). It would appear, apparently not. What’s worse, is that the lecherous stepfather is not an urban legend, it is a well played out reality in the lives of children throughout history. This being the case, why would any mother put her daughter is such a predicament? Again, why are their no laws stopping this kind of situation occurring? Again, it gets back to law-makers putting the rights of women above the welfare of everyone else.

Women are also safer in married homes. As the figure above (derived from a recent Department of Justice study) indicates, married women are the least likely to be victimized by an intimate partner. They are also less likely to be the victims of violent crime in general. Overall, another U.S. Department of Justice study found that never-married women are nearly four times more likely to be victims of violent crime, compared to married women. The bottom line is that married women are less likely to be raped, assaulted, or robbed than their unmarried peers.”

If women ever wanted an argument in favour of keeping the biological father of their children around, the above would have to be it. Women are forever harping on about not being safe in the modern world, yet increasing numbers of them either refuse to get married or if they do get married, divorce the father of their children and move in another man who couldn’t care less for her children……..

For girls, the research tells us that marriage provides a measure of stability and commitment to the adults’ relationship, that married biological fathers are more likely to be attentive and engaged with their children because they expect the relationship to be enduring.

This might be another way of saying that if a girl grows up with her biological parents maintaining a stable marriage, then the girl will see this as normal and will want this for herself. On the other hand, the world is full of daughters of divorced women whom cannot hold a marriage together and thus, the cycle of single motherhood destroying children’s lives perpetuates.

One theory I have often had about marriage – without actually experiencing it myself – is that marriage moulds men into more nurturing and caring beings. This seems to be confirmed in the following quote…..

“[M]arriage also seems to cause men to behave better. That’s because men tend to settle down after they marry, to be more attentive to the expectations of friends and kin, to be more faithful, and to be more committed to their partners—factors that minimize the risk of violence.”

Generally I agree with that. I don’t mean that upon marriage, a man has to sacrifice his masculinity and become a blue-piller (although many do) but rather, marriage tends to make men think a little less of themselves and more of others. Ultimately, if a man is going to contribute to raising children, he basically needs to become less self-centred. The problem is, that I expect this only applies to men who are actually married to their female partners and have children with them. This again gets us back to the lecherous stepfather problem.

“[M]arried fathers are much less likely to resort to violence than men who are not tied by marriage or biology to a female.”


“[F]or the girls and women in their lives, married fathers provide direct protection by watching out for the physical welfare of their wives and daughters, and indirect protection by increasing the odds they live in safe homes and are not exposed to men likely to pose a threat.”

It pretty much all comes down to the above quotes; married dads are a good idea and non-biological stepfathers are a shitty idea. This is hardly new thinking but it’s always nice to see these ideas researched in proof. At the end of the day, being the controllers of sex and reproduction, women are effectively the gatekeepers to their and their children’s well-being. No doubt any feminist would try to punch holes in this argument but since when have women ever been required to take responsibility for their actions? I’ll leave you with a final quote from the article…..

So, women: if you’re the product of a good marriage, and feel safer as a consequence, lift a glass to dear old dad this Sunday.”