It shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone that women exert a lot of influence over the course of human evolution, both biologically AND socially. As sexual gatekeepers, women basically control the process of natural selection, even if their personal samples of male genetic material are both participation and selection biased, and their social influence, especially when acting in large, coordinated numbers, cannot be denied.

Not only that, but the nature of Western society, at least traditionally, as in, the social conditions that predicated this current generation of adults, is that women raised the children while men worked to pay for everything. This applies to both stay at home moms and the predominantly female teacher roster in the public school system. As Tyler Durden famously stated in an admittedly homoerotic novel (not that there’s anything wrong with that): “We are a generation of men raised by women. Maybe another woman isn’t what we need.”

What most men, in their young adulthood and midlife, are just now figuring out, is that the education they received, about sex, romance, and women especially, had an extreme feminist bias, and was basically designed to ensure that the men of the next generation would be subservient to females and at a severe social disadvantage, until not just one, but every man woke up from this spell. Revisionist, censorship-crazy feminists are now hard at work trying to delete anything or anyone that might let this cat out of the bag, and internet social commentary regarding current events are dripping with female insecurities. They project privilege onto males, despite the fact that females enjoy a far higher standard of living in Western society, due to disproportionately high social capital, even if investing said capital poorly often leaves them feeling unsatisfied. And often on the internet, the crowd who shrieks the most shrilly is thought to be right, no matter how unreasonable.

But let’s not get ahead of ourselves. Plenty of articles already exist which discuss the current conflict between masculism, feminism, and gender egalitarianism. What this article is meant to address, is the past. All the things that men are taught in their formative years, and how this differs from what women are taught, in order to create a systemic, instructional advantage for women, in addition to their intrinsic social advantages.

1. ‘There are no such things as whores.’

The ‘no such thing as whores’ mythology, pushed by feminists onto an entire generation of males, is one that is extremely harmful to men, as it makes them naive, idealistic, and easily exploited by materialistic, disloyal, promiscuous women. It denies men the fair warning they should have that some women are not very well-intentioned when it comes to sex and romance, and that men should guard themselves against unscrupulous females who might waste their time, ruin their lives, cause them emotional distress, or get them into trouble by being socially irresponsible, and flippant. Not that all women are like that, but many are, and they will drag you down, distract and divert you from the good girls who might actually do right by you. Not all women were conceived or raised equally, so hold out for a good one, or one that matches your background, values, and priorities, at least.

The great hypocrisy of this teaching is that girls are taught, by the same women who teach men that there are no such thing as whores, that most men are lecherous perverts who can’t be trusted. Fair warning delivered to one party of a venture and not the other creates an obvious advantage for women, and a disadvantage for males.

What obscures the matter even more, is the fact that whores, in the internet age, are not as obvious as in previous generations. Innocent girls are often idealistically in denial of the existence of whores, so bringing it up is likely to offend their naive sensibilities.

What most people don’t realize, is that hos don’t necessarily confine themselves to urban street corners, strip clubs, or even Craig’s List anymore, although you can still find the more brazen ones there. The majority of hos are in denial of the fact that they are hos, because they don’t explicitly turn tricks like that… Instead, they work jobs, which they often use as bases of social, sexual, and economic power, and are constantly out to exploit men. If she lead you on, fucked you and left when you ran out of money, and you paid for everything the whole time (or maybe even someone else paid without your knowledge), I hate to be the one to tell you this, but, SHE A HO!

And that’s an extremely common story, which is very often denied. Less common but still unfortunately true is the underground network of prostitutes linked to escort services, pimps, and madames. These are the kinds of organized crime prostitutes who do not purvey themselves to the general public, but only to those referred via private social networks. In other words, to procure their services, you have to ‘know somebody’, and as independent operators fully in charge of their own business, they reserve the right to refuse service for whatever reason. I became aware of these organizations through my work in the music business, where certain business concerns, known as ‘fixers’ are often charged with procuring drugs and female company for traveling musicians.

The prostitution business thrives on social misdirection, misinformation, the exploitation of the male sex drive, and artificial, socially-created desperation. Despite what the ‘whores as indentured servants/hapless victims’ mythologies might suggest, these women are not necessarily coerced into their careers. Most whores are independently-operating social and financial exploiters by trade, who target wealthy men, cock-blocking them from legitimate opportunities, ruining their reputations with the classy girls, and trying to drive men into phony, unhealthy relationships with ‘ladies of the evening’, who have purely selfish intentions. Sometimes they even have sham marriages, solely for the purpose of taking half!

These are all the kinds of harsh truths that don’t jibe with feminist indoctrination of males, because they are politically incorrect.

2. ‘Western women generally are under-privileged’ (relative to men)

No they aren’t. And there’s a lot of evidence to suggest that they aren’t. Maybe in Saudi Arabia, but not in Europe and America. And are those supposedly hardcore feminists storming places like Darfur, in order to fight on the battlefield for women’s rights in an environment where women are ACTUALLY oppressed? Of course not! They are sitting their happy asses in the end zone, and the most effective thing they can think of to do about the oppression of females in third world countries is ‘raise awareness’ on Tumblr, or perhaps send checks that end up misappropriated by some African warlord and used for contrary purposes than those for which they were intended.

This is all about laying the guilt trip and playing the victim card. Over the past 60 years, the liberal special interest schtick has barely changed at all. If anything, it has gotten even more aggressively vitriolic, often discrediting its own validity with hysterical melodrama. Things like ‘white man’s burden’ and ‘patriarchy’ seem less relevant the further, chronologically and historically, the present moment moves from when slavery and patriarchy WERE a reality, and yet social liberals are still pressing these same buttons, more and more now that they are less effective. If your father was a slave and my father was a slave owner, I agree that I probably owe you some reparations. But if your great grandfather was a slave, and my great grandfather was a peasant in some shitty Eastern European country at the time, I don’t feel like I owe you dick, and implications to the contrary are only going to piss me off and make me lose respect for you. My great fear is actually that sexism and racism have come full circle in the modern age, and the slayers have become the very demons they originally sought to slay, thus perpetuating a cycle of grievance and vendetta.

Now, I’m not at all trying to suggest the idea that an individual woman can’t be under-privileged, relative to a certain male, or the average male. But the same can apply vice versa. Privilege is relative and individually variable, and we shouldn’t fall victim to misleading statistics which imply things about the individual from the group. Liberals use statistics to imply that white Christian males are over-privileged, in the exact same way that Neo Nazis used statistics to imply that all Black men are criminals. But you can’t let a stereotypical understanding of the group cause you to misapply stereotypes to the individual. There could be mitigating circumstances. In the case of the supposedly over-privileged white male, that circumstance might be high capability, in the same way that in the case of the supposedly criminal black man that circumstance might be a biased legal system, systemic poverty, or historical racism.

3. ‘Don’t be superficial’, or ‘don’t have unrealistic beauty standards’



This is what women teach boys in order to ‘give the ugly girls a chance’. It leads to successful, better-than-average-looking men getting screwed around by the kind of mediocre women who are beneath them, physically, ethically, and mentally. Once again, when you teach women in middle school to have high standards and hold out for Mr. Right, then, at the same time, teach men to ‘not be superficial’, ‘be open-minded’, or even ‘take what you can get’, the ultimate effect is to make men more exploitable by women.

Most women perceive men in general as having inflated egos that need to be cut down to size. But sometimes they do too good a job, or the particular guy in question had low self-esteem in the first place. So it’s a self-defeating attitude to say, ‘I can’t get that model-hot cheerleader that everyone wants’. I was conditioned to believe such women were out of my league, and ended up giving myself away to a short string of B-grade women in my young adulthood, because I had been made to feel as though that caliber of woman was all I could get.

Most men aren’t vain or narcissistic like women, and often don’t know how attractive they really are. And this causes them to cheat themselves. My advice to men is to realistically assess your own level of handsomeness, and pursue women on the same level of beauty. Because any inequity in a relationship is going to eventually ruin it.

And don’t buy into the ‘unattractive women necessarily have good personalities’ mythology. This hasn’t been my experience. I no longer consider such women ‘safe bets’, because I’ve just been screwed around by too many of them. The sad fact is, beauty privilege is something so commonly relied upon by females, it spoils the women who have it, but it also embitters the women who DON’T have it! The beautiful woman and the less conventionally attractive woman are just as likely to be over-entitled, promiscuous, or malicious… or not! There are beautiful women who aren’t dragon ladies, too! Just as beautiful women are often spoiled by social privilege, unattractive women are often psychologically disturbed by their inability to live up to gender roles of being physically attractive.

But beware, because when you are approaching those models and beauty queens, they have learned to use the line, ‘You have unrealistic beauty standards’, just to pop the man’s balloon and send him flying away… Even if he’s perfectly handsome, but simply not her type, or maybe she doesn’t like his job, bank balance, or romantic history… Or maybe, someone else already talked to her about you, and filled her head with lies about what a terrible person you are, which she might not have questioned, as most non-judgmental people often aren’t great at critically analyzing the validity of subjective opinions and outright lies.

Most women have unique types they find attractive, unlike most males, who typically tend to agree on what an attractive woman looks like. So that’s definitely something men need to be taught, otherwise rejection will take the wind out of their sails, which is something most women, who are used to being pursued, having their egos constantly stroked, and fending off unwanted advances, simply don’t understand.

Don’t have a self-defeating attitude, like Kurt Cobain! He made like a hundred million dollars, was the most popular artist on the planet, and yet his happiness was dependent upon the whim of a used-up fuckpig, who abused and exploited him. All because he didn’t want people to think he was ‘superficial’ or ‘not a feminist’. If the cost of being perceived as an unsuperficial feminist is being in an unsatisfying relationship with a woman whom you don’t find attractive, then I guess I’d rather be Ron Jeremy combined with the Marlboro Man and Clint Eastwood.

And remember, never make the mistake of thinking that just because a woman doesn’t ‘like’ your photo on Facebook, doesn’t mean they don’t actually like your photo. If you press a woman about it, she will say that she just doesn’t want to come off as needy or thirsty, but in reality, this is a tactic much like a worker’s union strike. By making female affection artificially scarce, women have increased its value, in what is probably a very deliberate, coordinated effort. If a woman were to break rank, she would be chastised by the other women as a ‘scab’.

Finally, I will add, if you do marry, and the marriage is successful, you will both grow old together, and that’s when this lesson actually applies: If you are to truly be a man of honor, you should tolerate your lady’s aging just as she tolerates yours, even while admitting that no one looks their best when they are elderly. Long-term relationships may require compromise to succeed, but that doesn’t mean you should, out of desperation, compromise your standards in the name of getting into a relationship.

4. ‘Women are powerless, and require more assistance than men’

This is the assumption, which is highly sexist by the way, that ruins women early on in life, via an education system that weakens them by making them systemically dependent, even if their social or financial privilege, later on in life, gives them the delusions of independence. This gets into gender roles. Women generally want to abolish the gender roles they don’t like, but have no problem upholding the gender roles which benefit them. This is sexist hypocrisy.

Just remember that privilege and capability tend to have an inversely proportional relationship. The person who always has things done for them will probably not be very adept at doing things for themselves.

5. ‘There is a double standard regarding promiscuity’

Being a promiscuous male will certainly disqualify you from many romantic opportunities. One of the great fears of the prized, hard-to-get marriage material female is sleeping with a smooth-talking man-whore who ultimately won’t take her seriously, and this is the primary reason many women are so reserved, picky, and quick to flee once they perceive a red flag. They see promiscuous men as unlikely to be able to abide by commitment, in the same way that men see promiscuous females as similarly unreliable. There is just as much slut-shaming of man whores as there is of promiscuous females, and to believe otherwise is to fall victim to feminist mythology.

Just ask the guy who doesn’t sleep around and gets teased for it, both by alpha male douchebags and female chauvinists alike! And when you are done talking to him, go talk to the guy who is known for sleeping around, and ask him what his prospects are like: he may do well with the sluts, but the virgins and marriage material women of moral class won’t give him the time of day, probably rightfully so.

But beware the short sell down slut creek from the female community! The most desirable females have a feminist community that guards them: if such an alpha female has a crush on a man (or perhaps the desire is his, or even mutual) that can’t be quashed with the usual behind the back character assassination, sabotage, introducing her to a ‘better man’, or telling her she needs to experiment with women first, they will then conspire to ‘hook up’ her crush with an inferior female specimen, or a whole train of them, both as a means of diverting him, and making him less attractive to the enpedastalled female. Then, they can say they have protected an innocent woman’s purity, not emasculated the male, and aren’t slut shamers!

In fact, among extreme feminists, there is actually a similar double standard, one which they insecurely project onto men in general:

Scenario 1: You are a swinger. You have many simultaneous sexual relationships with women, with no expectation of commitment on either end.

The feminist reaction: Your sexual conquest is exploitative, manipulative, and patriarchal. You have a sense of entitlement that entails sexual access to multiple women at once.

Scenario 2: You are a (serial) monogamist. You value relationships for emotional intimacy, and expect the same monogamous commitment from your partner as you are able to give them.

The feminist reaction: You are possessive of women, seek to control their sexuality, and are driven by jealousy. You have a sense of entitlement that entails exclusivity in all of your relationships.

See how this lose-lose scenario is what allows individual women to set (or change, whimsically) the standard for each romantic relationship, exclusively on their terms. Rather than respect the fact that there are people of both types, and the only real social crime is to mix types under false pretenses, women will instead judge a man for being who he is, and living the attachment style that is right for his personal psychology. This is the kind of lose-lose scenario that takes social/relationship power out of men’s hands, and puts it into the hands of women. And since power corrupts, they will almost certainly wield this power hypocritically and inconsistently, depending upon what suits them best at the current moment, from their current partner(s).

A relationship should be based in mutually amicable terms, not the terms of one side over another.

This is in addition to several other lose-lose scenarios that women construct for men, most notably the ‘never having the perfect amount of money’ scenario: “You are either a broke scrub or an over-privileged rich guy,” and the ‘passive-aggressive’ scenario: “You are either a passive beta creep for not making enough moves and never getting laid, or an aggressive macho alpha for being too aggressive, and fucking too many women.”

6. ‘Women are generally socially honest and forthright’

Uh-uh! Women talk. Constantly. To eachother. About you. Secretly. Manipulatively. Maliciously. For all the bitching they do about marriage being ownership and jealous boyfriends trying to control their lives (and these can be legitimate concerns in some cases), they sure do exert a lot of effort to control the social lives of the men in their community, mostly via gossip and deliberately propagated misinformation. You thought you only had one mother? Silly rabbit, you have a whole community full of manipulative, controlling females who think they know what’s best for you and everyone else, and aren’t afraid to secretly pull strings, often in violation of basic social ethics, in order to keep you under their thumbs.

In fact, most of the facts and opinions expressed in this article are common knowledge among women, but not only will they never bring it up of their own volition, they will vehemently deny it, and attack the character of anyone who brings this kind of stuff up. By withholding information privilege from you, they are attempting to keep you in the dark and manipulate your life in any way they deem fit. Women, being the better communicators, are far more likely to act as ‘man in the middle’, exploiting the lines of communication in order to manipulate the course of human events in their favor.

They are also just as likely as a man to misrepresent themselves romantically, and try to appear as something they are not, in order to have relationships on false pretenses.

7. ‘Being a doormat/male feminist will make women respect you’

Once again, I bring up Kurt Cobain, the archetypical male feminist of Generation X, and one of my personal heroes. Unfortunately, he was cut down in his prime, by his own hand. But what drove him to it? Sadly, I think suicidal depression was the inevitable result of his misguided personal philosophy.

While I agree with Kurt’s sentiment (even if it appears that he too has bought into the female victim complex and obsolete rape statistics), as well as the idea that women should learn self-defense (though most don’t want to because of the self-discipline that martial arts necessarily entails), I think the less obvious subtextual point here is that women do a terrible job of supporting male feminists, and Kurt Cobain was a classic example of their neglect and outright exploitation of their male allies. No one appreciated the fact that he was a feminist, and the world was content to let him wallow in an unhealthy, co-dependent relationship with a psycho hose beast, and that ended up being a big part of the reason why he killed himself, even while he was sitting on top of the world, and could have had anything or anyone he wanted…

So, he makes a really poor apologist for feminism considering the fact that he was a battered male and a cuckold. So anything he says about feminism carries the subtext: “If you think like this, you’re going to end up getting manipulated, abused, and exploited by women who are beneath you, just like I did.”

Or worse yet, you’ll end up totally neglected by women altogether, and dying alone, because no one gives a shit about how altruistic and egalitarian you are, unless you also happen to have something they want. I know that guy well, because I used to be that guy. I take responsibility for my own bad past relationships, but it’s tempting to say that I was badly influenced by a whole generation of liberal idealist celebrities filling my head full of inapplicable, pie-in-the-sky bullshit.

What other bad relationship guy can we take a feminist blurb from? Ooh, I know! How about:

“You can totally trust your wife not to shoot you while you sleep! I do it all the time.” – Phil Hartman

For all the shit women talk behind backs and social manipulations they pull collectively, how come they can’t ever seem to coordinate getting good men healthy relationships, and quarantining all the skanks and douchebags together? What are women doing to support the men who AREN’T aggressive? It’s more likely they will socially maneuver you into a bad or unfair relationship that benefits their homegirl disproportionately, at your expense, and then blame you when the whole thing inevitably falls in on you.

Also, I think that Dave Grohl (Or maybe it was the bass player Krist, I know one of them hooked them up and the other didn’t like her, but then they both ended up not liking her), as the new drummer in the band, and the newcomer to the community built up around the band, made a lot of of these same points in real time, during Kurt and Courtney’s relationship, and everyone just thought he was kind of a d-bag to even say anything about it. Because everyone had become comfortable with the elephant in the room, and Grohl, as a bit of an outsider, was very struck by it, and wanted to solve a problem that everyone was in denial of. But after Kurt’s suicide, Kurt and Courtney’s relationship became a rock and roll parable that the rock community, which has never fully embraced extreme feminism, ended up taking to heart.

See, the thing is, men like Kurt have no ‘game’. For those not up on their street talk, ‘game’=lying. And because we aren’t willing to be romantically deceptive, we often end up alone, because we get ‘out-gamed’ by men (and women) who are willing to be more ruthless than us. But in the case of a high status male like Kurt, the community thought that him being alone while all the lying d-bags got their fill at the skank buffet, it just made them look bad. So they stuck him with leftovers. The kind of woman no one else wanted or had already had, a girl with an obvious groupie complex. Don’t let that be you! We can’t all bang supermodels, and someone has to scrub the proverbial floors, but if you are world-famous, a genuinely good person, and wealthy beyond the wildest dreams of most, for the love of God, don’t marry a Courtney Love! You deserve so much better!

8. ‘Women are more emotional and idealistic than men’

Not necessarily. There are plenty of female pragmatists, atheists, nihilists, psychopaths, and women who think hopeless romanticism and idealistic sacrifice are silly and impractical. Also, contrary to commonly accepted dogma, men have feelings too, and those feelings are valid. To be pushed into an insensitive male gender role that doesn’t really fit is to be cheated of one’s own emotional well-being, and doing that for petty material concerns is rarely healthy.

Also, women are now just as likely or more likely to cheat than men. Cheating, once assumed to be a function of male psychology, has actually been found to be a function of social power. As the balance of social power has shifted more towards women, we have observed their capacity to cheat increase significantly. Don’t assume a woman is innocent just because she is a woman. She’s a human animal who wants to be better off than the Jones’s, maybe even moreso than you, and she might be willing to stoop to even more devious means than you are to do it! They say a woman has never started a war. Of course, not, they had men do it for them! Behind every exploitative tyrant there is almost always demanding women with a ridiculous standard of living.

Also, don’t deny the existence of male intuition, or say that a male with intuition is less masculine. Many men think intuitively, including Einstein and a lot of musicians, and yet still are manly men, whose virility and heterosexuality are well-established.

9. ‘Men rule the world and always have’ (Patriarchy)

The XY chromosome, in terms of evolution, is a recent development. Before that, there were only female organisms, who can reproduce asexually via combining two X chromosomes, usually conceiving another female. The XY chromosome is a mutation that found a foothold in nature because it was and is advantageous to the organism’s survival and reproduction. Also, there have been many matriarchal societies amongst the pre-historic civilizations as well. So this whole idea of ‘Women deserve an exclusive turn at the wheel, because they have never had one’, is simply bullshit. Another case of revisionism controlling the population via mass delusion.

The truth is that the system, in its current form, cannot properly be called ‘Patriarchy’, because there are so many women on top, who have sold out to it, and so many men on bottom, who have refused to comply. Most humans are oppressed, men and women are simply oppressed in different ways, because they have different strengths, vulnerabilities, and priorities which can be exploited. The best example is Hillary Clinton, who briefly oversaw a war effort while Secretary of State. She signed orders for men to kill other men! Similarly, there are many other female authority figures, business leaders, institutional figureheads, etc…

I’ve worked for men and women in professional, salaried contexts, and they can both be good bosses, or bad bosses. It’s not the gender of my boss that makes me think s/he is a good or bad boss, it’s the way they treat me, the reasonability of their expectations, their effectiveness as administrators, their support of my career, or lack thereof.

10. ‘Women have a unified sisterhood’

Although women can exhibit typical behaviors if mutually beneficial, they are also willing to sell eachother out for personal gain. Again, let’s use the union analogy. Just because a union is unified for the purposes of a strike doesn’t mean they are all best friends or aren’t willing to betray eachother in other ways. Women exploit, oppress, and manipulate eachother, and tell the men who care about women, ‘It’s none of your business.’

11. ‘The system is biased against women’

No, it isn’t The system is biased against YOU. YOU, as a man, are so much more likely to go to prison, even if you committed the EXACT SAME CRIME as a random woman. When a woman plays the victim card in court, we say, “Oh, don’t blame the victim”. When a man does the same, he has a ‘victim complex’ and ‘shouldn’t be enabled’. Women get more money/material support from their parents, suitors, and the government than you ever have or will. Finally, women may not be strong enough to kick your ass, but there are plenty of men they can easily manipulate into doing it for them, and these men usually work in law enforcement or organized crime, which are sometimes hard to distinguish. They can use their social influence to ruin your career, love life, legal status, financial status… like THAT, if they don’t have the scruples to tell themselves that doing so is just as ethically wrong as if they pulled the trigger themselves.

12. ‘Men can’t be victims, and women can’t be victim-blamers’

See above. Women can be violent, lie, cheat, steal, and if they do so, they will most likely employ some kind of victim-blaming rationalization to make it your fault in their little minds, and since they tend to have big mouths and a hive-mind, their lies and misconceptions can be extremely contagious. If a woman fucks you over, rest assured, she’s already rationalized it to her friends somehow, and they all probably think it’s your own damn fault.

13. ‘Feminism is all about equality’

Wrong. ‘Gender Egalitarianism’ is the term for advocating the equality of the sexes and the abolishment of gender roles, goals which actually conflict with many extreme feminist ideologies. ‘Feminism’ carries a connotation of female chauvinism, female bias, matriarchy, liberal special interest, and exploitation, both materially and sexually, of males.

14. ‘There are certain duties and tasks that women simply can’t or shouldn’t be expected to perform’



Not true. Women can be soldiers, cops, bodybuilders, computer programmers, car mechanics, etc… Women can ask men out, and pay for dinner! So make them fix their own damn computer! It’s the only way they will ever learn to stop installing spyware.

15. ‘Women should be held to different or more lenient standards than men’

No they shouldn’t! Any standard that can be applied to a man, can be applied to a woman as well! Down with gender roles!

Most people don’t care about injustice until it happens to a woman. This is exactly why we should stop shielding women from all the injustices inherent in society. Only when a woman experiences a problem will that problem be prioritized to be solved by society. Otherwise, we let people suffer and assume it’s their own fault.

When the government comes for people’s sons, they will accept this. But I think it is harder for people accept when the government starts collecting their daughters and putting them in battle, poverty, prison, or other unsafe conditions. Leniency towards females is a political strategy that keeps unjust laws and bad business practices on the books.

I guess my point is simply this: there’s a sinkhole in the road. Every time a man wrecks out on it, everyone says he’s a bad driver. The first time a woman wrecks out, people say ‘we need to fix that road.’

But the big problem is that no woman will ever be subject to such a systemic problem when men are expected to drive women everywhere because ‘you know how dangerous those roads are’. In other words, ‘that should be a man’s problem to handle’, not, ‘we should fix the problem so it doesn’t happen to anyone.’

16. ‘Women are less rational than men’

I often like to tell the story of the woman who beat me and everyone else in neuroanatomy class, to prove that analytical thought is not solely the province of the male gender. Women can be just as rational as men. The problem is, they are often indulged, via social privilege, to be irrational, and maintain logically inconsistent attitudes. They become so devoted to their own personal mythologies and ideologies, they deliberately, hysterically ignore any evidence that might possibly contradict them.

See if you can get a woman to read this entire article. She will probably quit less than halfway through, because it assaults her emotionally. Much the way a delusional person will lash out when their delusions are challenged by rational discourse. I fear that the only way to combat such women is to ostracize them in the same way they will attempt to ostracize any man who speaks against them. In other words, stop indulging them in irrationality, no matter how attractive or desirable they may be! Social privilege is what keeps their nonsense afloat, in spite of better judgment.

17. ‘Offending women verbally or visually counts as “assault”‘

This definition of ‘assault’ is so ambiguous, it is an abuse in itself. When the word is cheapened like that, women create the impression that they are so over-privileged, unpleasant words or pictures on a screen are the closest thing to actual violence they have ever endured (or have committed against others). Most men are nowhere near that fortunate. Bottom line: this is yet another bad argumentative tactic they use to quash dissent, and the peaceful expression of valid male thoughts and emotions.

And I’m sorry, but when a woman blows up my Facebook feed with scantily clad photos of herself, should I really be sorry that she gets unsolicited dick pics? More hypocritical projection. How typical. The problem here is that women are always talking about how the Patriarchy is criminalizing the female body, how unjust it is that women have to wear tops, get judged for wearing slutty clothes, and like to flout society’s conventions with their dress in order to get attention, etc… But then if a man behaves similarly, he is labelled a violent sexual predator.

18. ‘Most men have a greater sense of sexual entitlement than females’

That’s strange, because, on average, women have sex more often, and with a greater number of partners over the course of a lifetime, than the average man. So if they like sex less, they certainly have a funny way of showing it.

19. ‘Women are more open-minded than men’

I suppose it depends upon your definition of the word ‘open-minded’. If you mean ‘more willing to entertain ridiculous notions and live in fantastical, persistent delusions’, then you might be right. If you mean ‘more likely to listen to your foreign perspective and give it due consideration’, you are probably wrong.

20. ‘Everyone is equal/sexual interchangeability’

Anyone who is going to sit there and say they would pay the same amount of money to fuck Barbara Walters as they would pay to fuck Faye Reagan is clearly letting their pipe dream ideology get in the way of accurately perceiving reality.

21. ‘1 in 5 women will be raped over the course of a lifetime’

This statistic is not only outdated, it was misleading in the first place. The actual rate is far lower, and getting lower all the time. You’d think that feminists would be happy about this, but it actually makes it harder to play the victim card.

22. ‘Women are paid less for the same work’

Another outdated and misleading statistic. Women take more time off, for things like child-rearing, and voluntarily choose, out of the same options a man has, to go into lower-paying fields than men do.

And keep in mind that, even as feminists teach men to be self-effacing, humble doormats, who rely on nothing but themselves and provide for everyone, this is what they are teaching little girls: