Anti-feminist and former man, Suzanne Venker, just recently wrote an article for FoxNews.com, which is called "The war on men."
What is this "war on men" the ex hairy-chested gentlewoman is talking about? It revolves around one Pew Research Center poll, which claims that while more women are wanting to get married, more men are not (37% of women, up from 28% in 1997 and 29% of men, down from 35% that same year).
What is this femi-man's reason for this change among the two sexes regarding marriage? I'll let her explain it to you herself:
"Women aren't women anymore."
I honestly wasn't aware of a sex-change epidemic that was running rampant in this country until reading those four words. Is the woman I'm dating now a former man, like Ms./Mr. Venker? I may have to ask for her medical records in light of this breaking news story!
Venker continued with this:
"In a nutshell, women are angry. They're also defensive, though often unknowingly. That's because they've been raised to think of men as the enemy. Armed with this new attitude, women pushed men off their pedestal (women had their own pedestal, but feminists convinced them otherwise) and climbed up to take what they were taught to believe was rightfully theirs."
She then contends, "Now the men have nowhere to go."
That wasn't all the woman with a pair of testicles had to say. Oh no. She then wrote this:
"It is precisely this dynamic - women good/men bad - that has destroyed the relationship between the sexes. Yet somehow, men are still to blame when love goes awry. Heck, men have been to blame since feminists first took to the streets in the 1970s."
She then gets to the core of her overly-masculine being and writes:
"...the so-called rise of women has not threatened men. It has pissed them off. It has also undermined their ability to become self-sufficient in the hopes of someday supporting a family. Men want to love women, not compete with them. They want to provide for and protect their families - it's in their DNA. But modern women won't let them."
The pro-nazi anti-feminazi (thanks, Mr. Limbaugh) decided to bash feminism yet again, stating, "It's all unfortunate - for women, not men. Feminism serves men very well: they can have sex at hello and even live with their girlfriends with no responsibilities whatsoever."
Toward the tail-end of the piece (of crap), Venker writes:
"It's the women who lose. Not only are they saddled with the consequences of sex, by dismissing male nature they're forever seeking a balanced life. The fact is, women need men's linear career goals - they need men to pick up the slack at the office - in order to live the balanced life they seek."
At the very end, the woman with a deeper voice than Barry White wrote:
"Fortunately, there is good news: women have the power to turn everything around. All they have to do is surrender to their nature - their femininity - and let men surrender to theirs."
That's right, ladies! According to the Venker (not sure how to address him/her anymore), you need to raise your middle finger(s) to feminism! You need to get a petition signed to take away your voting rights, your rights to have an abortion! You need to stop fighting for equal pay as men! You really need to give this whole equality thing a rest. Just be real women for crying out loud, get into the kitchen, feed us, make love to us, do housework, take care of the kids, run errands, and worship men as gods, for that's what we obviously are.
The Venker's article is ridiculous. Relationships involve teamwork. They involve compromise. There isn't one correct way to have a successful relationship. Some women make more money than the men they're with and will wind up being the sole breadwinners, while the guy stays home and takes care of the kids and other household responsibilities. Sometimes it's the other way around. In most scenarios, both the man and woman contribute both financially and in other manners. Where are the statistics to back up your claims, Venker? I'd think if there was any credible evidence, you would have included it in your article. Since there wasn't, I have to assume you're full of crap.
Define "woman" for me, Venker, since you believe that "women aren't women anymore." Is it wrong for a woman to not think it's fair for her to be paid $0.75-$0.80 to the $1.00 that a man does for performing the same job with an equal level of efficiency? Is it wrong for her to think independently - to get a college degree, get a job, do something she enjoys, and support herself/helping support a family?
There were a number of quotes from the article which struck me as, how do I put it? Mentally handicapped.
When Venker said, "...That's because they've been raised to think of men as the enemy..." I really had to scratch my head (only the one above my neck). Did I miss this class in college? Do all my female friends and family members, and even my girlfriend, secretly despise me? When I'm told by one of them that they love me, are those actually secret code words for, "I want to do to you what Loren Bobbitt did to her husband"? Please enlighten me, oh wise Venker.
The author then continued with this theme and wrote, "It is precisely this dynamic - women good/men bad - that has destroyed the relationship between the sexes. Yet somehow, men are still to blame when love goes awry..." I'm going to need to see some sources. Oh, sorry - you don't have any, do you? I didn't think so. Yes, Venker is spot on - in 100% of relationships that don't work out, the man is to blame. When a woman cheats on her husband, it's the man's fault. When a woman verbally abuses her husband, that's the man's fault as well. When a woman loses a great deal of money through drugs and/or gambling, that's got to be the guy's fault also. That and more can be found in a feminist bible I've yet to get my hands on, but will be looking for very shortly. Why does it have to solely be anybody's fault? I've found that most times when things don't work for a couple, both contributed to its demise. This isn't always the case, of course, but is much more accurate than making the general claim that one gender (men in this case) is always to blame when things go wrong.
In some following paragraphs, Venker gets very twisted in her words. She writes, "...the so-called rise of woman has not threatened men. It has pissed them off. ...Men want to love women, not compete with them..." Not long after, she wrote, "...Feminism serves men very well: they can have sex at hello and even live with their girlfriends with no responsibilities whatsoever."
So, let me get this straight - feminism "pisses" men off, yet it serves us well? Huh. That's interesting. I can just imagine many men saying the following words - "This is really serving me and my life well. It's great! I can't believe how lucky I've gotten! I really feel like the luckiest, happiest man in the world! Yet, it pisses me off to no end!" Unless the guy has often times been called Mr. Sybil, I'm not thinking that's likely to occur.
I also don't know of too many women whom have sex at hello. When I was single, it's not like I'd walk into a bar, say hello to a woman, and she'd start ripping her clothes off and provide me with a condom. No, that usually happened after I followed the hello with, "How you doin'?" Alright, so perhaps that's not true either.
According to Venker, men don't like competition from women, yet love to have no responsibilities while living with their girlfriends. Again, Venker's words appear to be more contradictory than a Mitt Romney edition of The Bible.
So, there we have it. Ladies - it's time to act like women did several decades ago and give back all power to guys. Fellas - it's time to pull off our best Chuck Norris or Arnold Schwarzenegger, make grunting noises every half-hour, pound our chests and instead of getting "pissed off" at women trying to attain equal rights, joining forces with other men and pissing on their rights. It's what Jesus would have wanted. It's what the Venker would want. It's what women all over the country really want. Venker knows. She used to be one. In the meantime, I'm going to be fully supportive of my girlfriend's aspiration of going back to school, getting a degree, and working in the field she so desires, because I care about her and want her to be happy. If that doesn't make me a "real man," then so be it - I don't want to be one.
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/11/24/war-on-men/
What is this "war on men" the ex hairy-chested gentlewoman is talking about? It revolves around one Pew Research Center poll, which claims that while more women are wanting to get married, more men are not (37% of women, up from 28% in 1997 and 29% of men, down from 35% that same year).
What is this femi-man's reason for this change among the two sexes regarding marriage? I'll let her explain it to you herself:
"Women aren't women anymore."
I honestly wasn't aware of a sex-change epidemic that was running rampant in this country until reading those four words. Is the woman I'm dating now a former man, like Ms./Mr. Venker? I may have to ask for her medical records in light of this breaking news story!
Venker continued with this:
"In a nutshell, women are angry. They're also defensive, though often unknowingly. That's because they've been raised to think of men as the enemy. Armed with this new attitude, women pushed men off their pedestal (women had their own pedestal, but feminists convinced them otherwise) and climbed up to take what they were taught to believe was rightfully theirs."
She then contends, "Now the men have nowhere to go."
That wasn't all the woman with a pair of testicles had to say. Oh no. She then wrote this:
"It is precisely this dynamic - women good/men bad - that has destroyed the relationship between the sexes. Yet somehow, men are still to blame when love goes awry. Heck, men have been to blame since feminists first took to the streets in the 1970s."
She then gets to the core of her overly-masculine being and writes:
"...the so-called rise of women has not threatened men. It has pissed them off. It has also undermined their ability to become self-sufficient in the hopes of someday supporting a family. Men want to love women, not compete with them. They want to provide for and protect their families - it's in their DNA. But modern women won't let them."
The pro-nazi anti-feminazi (thanks, Mr. Limbaugh) decided to bash feminism yet again, stating, "It's all unfortunate - for women, not men. Feminism serves men very well: they can have sex at hello and even live with their girlfriends with no responsibilities whatsoever."
Toward the tail-end of the piece (of crap), Venker writes:
"It's the women who lose. Not only are they saddled with the consequences of sex, by dismissing male nature they're forever seeking a balanced life. The fact is, women need men's linear career goals - they need men to pick up the slack at the office - in order to live the balanced life they seek."
At the very end, the woman with a deeper voice than Barry White wrote:
"Fortunately, there is good news: women have the power to turn everything around. All they have to do is surrender to their nature - their femininity - and let men surrender to theirs."
That's right, ladies! According to the Venker (not sure how to address him/her anymore), you need to raise your middle finger(s) to feminism! You need to get a petition signed to take away your voting rights, your rights to have an abortion! You need to stop fighting for equal pay as men! You really need to give this whole equality thing a rest. Just be real women for crying out loud, get into the kitchen, feed us, make love to us, do housework, take care of the kids, run errands, and worship men as gods, for that's what we obviously are.
The Venker's article is ridiculous. Relationships involve teamwork. They involve compromise. There isn't one correct way to have a successful relationship. Some women make more money than the men they're with and will wind up being the sole breadwinners, while the guy stays home and takes care of the kids and other household responsibilities. Sometimes it's the other way around. In most scenarios, both the man and woman contribute both financially and in other manners. Where are the statistics to back up your claims, Venker? I'd think if there was any credible evidence, you would have included it in your article. Since there wasn't, I have to assume you're full of crap.
Define "woman" for me, Venker, since you believe that "women aren't women anymore." Is it wrong for a woman to not think it's fair for her to be paid $0.75-$0.80 to the $1.00 that a man does for performing the same job with an equal level of efficiency? Is it wrong for her to think independently - to get a college degree, get a job, do something she enjoys, and support herself/helping support a family?
There were a number of quotes from the article which struck me as, how do I put it? Mentally handicapped.
When Venker said, "...That's because they've been raised to think of men as the enemy..." I really had to scratch my head (only the one above my neck). Did I miss this class in college? Do all my female friends and family members, and even my girlfriend, secretly despise me? When I'm told by one of them that they love me, are those actually secret code words for, "I want to do to you what Loren Bobbitt did to her husband"? Please enlighten me, oh wise Venker.
The author then continued with this theme and wrote, "It is precisely this dynamic - women good/men bad - that has destroyed the relationship between the sexes. Yet somehow, men are still to blame when love goes awry..." I'm going to need to see some sources. Oh, sorry - you don't have any, do you? I didn't think so. Yes, Venker is spot on - in 100% of relationships that don't work out, the man is to blame. When a woman cheats on her husband, it's the man's fault. When a woman verbally abuses her husband, that's the man's fault as well. When a woman loses a great deal of money through drugs and/or gambling, that's got to be the guy's fault also. That and more can be found in a feminist bible I've yet to get my hands on, but will be looking for very shortly. Why does it have to solely be anybody's fault? I've found that most times when things don't work for a couple, both contributed to its demise. This isn't always the case, of course, but is much more accurate than making the general claim that one gender (men in this case) is always to blame when things go wrong.
In some following paragraphs, Venker gets very twisted in her words. She writes, "...the so-called rise of woman has not threatened men. It has pissed them off. ...Men want to love women, not compete with them..." Not long after, she wrote, "...Feminism serves men very well: they can have sex at hello and even live with their girlfriends with no responsibilities whatsoever."
So, let me get this straight - feminism "pisses" men off, yet it serves us well? Huh. That's interesting. I can just imagine many men saying the following words - "This is really serving me and my life well. It's great! I can't believe how lucky I've gotten! I really feel like the luckiest, happiest man in the world! Yet, it pisses me off to no end!" Unless the guy has often times been called Mr. Sybil, I'm not thinking that's likely to occur.
I also don't know of too many women whom have sex at hello. When I was single, it's not like I'd walk into a bar, say hello to a woman, and she'd start ripping her clothes off and provide me with a condom. No, that usually happened after I followed the hello with, "How you doin'?" Alright, so perhaps that's not true either.
According to Venker, men don't like competition from women, yet love to have no responsibilities while living with their girlfriends. Again, Venker's words appear to be more contradictory than a Mitt Romney edition of The Bible.
So, there we have it. Ladies - it's time to act like women did several decades ago and give back all power to guys. Fellas - it's time to pull off our best Chuck Norris or Arnold Schwarzenegger, make grunting noises every half-hour, pound our chests and instead of getting "pissed off" at women trying to attain equal rights, joining forces with other men and pissing on their rights. It's what Jesus would have wanted. It's what the Venker would want. It's what women all over the country really want. Venker knows. She used to be one. In the meantime, I'm going to be fully supportive of my girlfriend's aspiration of going back to school, getting a degree, and working in the field she so desires, because I care about her and want her to be happy. If that doesn't make me a "real man," then so be it - I don't want to be one.
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/11/24/war-on-men/
Comments
Post a Comment