2,412 books
Kay S. Hymowitz
Manning Up: How the Rise of Women Has Turned Men into Boys
New York: Basic Books, 2011
I expected this book to be a diatribe against the often-discussed “loser” men—those who, not having any marketable skill, are still living off their parents into mid-life. Manning Up actually is about a new demographic, the SYM (single young male), its female counterpart, and what factors led to the decline in marriage and number of children in the Western world. Simply having a job is not enough to be a man in the author’s view; true adulthood means being married and having children. Most young men and women are what she calls “preadults.”
Kay S. Hymowitz, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, has written extensively on issues of marriage, the sexes, class, and race, and she appears to be genuinely concerned about the declining rates in marriage childbirth. Her stance is slanted in favor of women, but she is sympathetic to the plight of men today. She mentions that boys are often discriminated against and ignored in favor of women. While funds pour in to increase girls’ math and science scores, boys are not given special treatment to improve their reading scores. She cites a BusinessWeek story that explains today’s young men as a “payback generation” intended to “compensate for the advantages given to males in the past.”
The Shift to the Feminine, Knowledge Economy
Scholars attribute women’s entry into the workforce largely to innovations in science and technology in the twentieth century. With no need to can food, make bread, weave, or sew, women were not “needed” at home the way they were in every generation past. They were having fewer children, too, due to birth control: In the early 1800s, white women had an average of seven children. By 1900, it was 3.56. When the birth control pill was introduced in the 1960s, state laws “kept the drug away from unmarried women.” Economist Martha Baily showed that when a state changed its law, there was a decline in the percentage of young women who gave birth by age 22, and an increase in the number of young women in the labor force and the hours they worked.
The number of working women (ages 33 to 45) went from 25 percent in 1950, to 46 percent in 1970, to about 60 percent since 1995. But in the 1950s to ’70s, women tended to work to help pay the bills, often as secretaries, waitresses, nurses, teachers, and librarians. Today’s young women set out in the world to find their “passion” not in a husband, but in a career.
The shift from secretary to major player in corporate America, Hymowitz explains, was largely due to a shift from an industrial economy to a knowledge economy. By the 1980s, the economy was booming as manufacturing jobs decreased and millions of positions opened in fields like public relations, health, and law. Women, too weak physically to participate much in the industrial economy, could do almost any job in the knowledge economy.
One example given is design. As technology advanced, designers transitioned from working with their hands (and making lasting work as is found in Bauhaus and Art Nouveau) to being hands-off fashion designers, who no longer needed to learn drafting, typesetting, drawing, or how to use heavy equipment. Using cheap labor overseas meant many more products, and thus a greater need for marketing and advertising. Women now make up 60 percent of design students, once a male-dominated field.
New industries sprouted up, too, as increased wealth and leisure time demanded workers at yoga centers, spas, travel companies, and more marketing and ad agencies for these specialty industries—all areas in which women participate as easily as men. Working women had new needs and money to spend, so more industries sprouted up to create feminine business suits, trendy lunch spots, meal “helpers,” stylish computer bags, $400 work pumps, $5 lattes, spa treatments and scented candles to help women unwind, houses with bathrooms the size of our grandparents’ bedrooms, a variety of products in the color pink, and right-hand rings for women who want to buy themselves a diamond. Other women entered the design arena through boutique companies: making jewelry, crafts, or custom stationary.
Nation-building and culture-building thus fell out of the workforce, replaced by sales, marketing, and fashion.
Today, men outnumber women in fields like construction (88 percent), while women make up 51 percent of management and professionals, particularly in fields like Human Resources, Public Relations, and finance. Women make up 77 percent of workers in education and health services. Women are more likely to work at the numerous new nonprofits, and make up 78 percent of psychology majors, 61 percent of humanities majors, and 60 percent of social and behavioral science doctorates. Publishing has long had high numbers of women workers, but now women have moved from what Hymowitz calls the “ladies’ magazines ghettos” to political commentary.
While women moved into the knowledge economy, men remained in behind-the-scenes fields that required more technical skill: jobs like writing code and IT. Some men flocked to jobs at ESPN, Cartoon Network, microbreweries, and video game design firms. Other men knew that even in the midst of feminism, their wives would still want the option to stay home and raise children (so long as men didn’t tell them they had to), and concentrated on high-paying jobs rather than following their bliss.
In the early nineteenth century, most men worked for themselves, as farmers, small merchants, or tradesmen. But by the end of the nineteenth century, two-thirds were working for “the man.” Some experts believe that it’s women who will soon be “running the place,” since the knowledge economy workplace “requires a more feminine style of leadership.” Employers will increasingly placate women, who are not solely concerned with the bottom line as a measure of their career success, but also want a job where they “help others,” enjoy relationships with colleagues, get recognition, have flexibility, and are in an environment of “collaboration and teamwork.” More women in the workplace means that it is more genteel and less of a man’s club: Swearing and spitting are forbidden, and men are now in a domesticated atmosphere both at home and at work. The popularity of psychoanalysis means that men and women alike are trained to listen sympathetically, be sensitive to emotions, and control their anger.
To explain the dynamics of the knowledge economy, Hymowitz references a 2002 paper by Harvard economist Brian Jacob called “Where the Boys Aren’t.” He found that girls are better at noncognitive tasks, such as keeping track of homework, working well with others, and organization, and suggests that such skills may explain the gender gap in high school grades and college admissions (women have higher GPAs and are 58 percent of college graduates, but they lag behind men in math SAT scores). These cognitive skills also are important for success in today’s feminized workplace.
Though not mentioned in Manning Up, these skills are also ones for which men have traditionally relied on women: organizing the home, keeping track of appointments, and being the family PR rep and social coordinator. Today’s women benefit in the career-world, as more jobs require good communication skills and “EQ” (emotional intelligence), while men are left with lower paying jobs and the added disadvantage of no wife at home.
SYMs: The New Demographic
In 1970, 80 percent of men aged 25–29 were married, compared to 40 percent in 2007. In 1970, 85 percent of men aged 30–34 were married, compared to 60 percent in 2007.
This new single-young-male demographic used to be called “elusive,” since it was a difficult advertising target. Then Maxim arrived in America in 1997, and seemed to have the answers to what SYMs wanted. Its readership reached 2.5 million in 2009, more than the combined circulation of GQ, Men’s Journal, and Esquire. Hymowitz says other magazines, like Playboy and Esquire, tried to project the “image of an intelligent, cultured, and au courant sort of man.” Even though Playboy promoted the image of the eternal bachelor, he was at least an intelligent and sophisticated bachelor. (Hugh Hefner wrote that his readers enjoyed “inviting a female acquaintance in for a quiet discussion of Picasso, Nietzsche, jazz, sex.”) Maxim, however, catered to the man who didn’t want to grow up.
Hymowitz doesn’t buy into the idea that the masses of men are moved by the media (or an inner party seeking to destroy them, let alone any subversive forces dominant in the Kali Yuga). She instead posits that products like Maxim were developed for an existing market.
Regardless of the reason, a number of TV shows were created with the SYM in mind, starting with The Simpsons. Comedy Central brought out South Park and The Man Show, while the Cartoon Network promoted cartoons for grown men. More films featured SYM stars like Will Ferrell, Ben Stiller, Jim Carrey, and Jack Black, and movies like 2003’s Old School (30-somethings who start a fraternity) were popular. American men ages 18–34 are now the biggest users of video games, with 48.2 percent owning a console and playing an average of 2 hours and 43 minutes per day. That doesn’t include online games like World of Warcraft.
Hymowitz recounts the numerous silly Adam Sandler movies, in which he plays a stereotypical young adult, male loser. Meanwhile, the media’s counter-image for women is the well-heeled, single young female:
If she is ambitious, he is a slacker. If she is hyper-organized and self-directed, he tends toward passivity and vagueness. If she is preternaturally mature, he is happily not. Their opposition is stylistic as well: she drinks sophisticated cocktails in mirrored bars, he burps up beer on ratty sofas. She spends her hard-earned money on mani-pedi outings, his goes toward World of Warcraft and gadgets.
It’s in this chapter that Hymowitz’s double-standard for men and women is most apparent, and annoying. She seems to think that when single women spend money for clothes and pedicures, it’s women’s empowerment, but single men who spend money on guy-flicks and video games are childish. Both cases seem to me examples of adults who, instead of having children, make themselves into the child: men by continuing all the games and comic books of their youth, and women by playing Barbie doll with themselves.
So if simply cutting the financial apron strings doesn’t make one a man, what does? Hymowitz answers by looking to masculine virtues throughout all cultures: “strength, courage, resolve, and sexual potency,” but that one line is about the extent of the analysis. She is careful to distinguish between having sex (which single men do a lot these days) and “manning up” by being married and becoming the head of a family.
But even when men do settle down, the roles they play as fathers have changed. Rather than being a strong father figure, today’s father often relates to his children by “accentuating his own immaturity,” according to Gary Cross, author of Men to Boys: The Making of Modern Immaturity
With high divorce rates, many young men today were raised in matriarchal family environments, which may be one contributing factor to the “unmanliness” of some of today’s men. Instead of having their own families, some men instead play the role of the “fun uncle,” like men in matriarchal, non-white societies.
A Different Dating World
After college, all of these single young people embark on a journey more confusing than if they started a family: modern dating, now with websites that describe the etiquette for one-night stands (it’s “leave quickly”).
Men and women are both confused by the new rituals, and the lack thereof. A man who inadvertently insults a girl by not opening her car door may have been chastised by his last girlfriend for doing just that. Women sometimes “pick up” guys (whether at bars, or actually driving to pick them up for dates), and there is ambiguity about who pays for dates when SYFs outearn SYMs in the majority of large cities. Men experience the nice-guy conundrum when they see girls dating jerks. Meanwhile, women practice a Zen-like nonattachment when dating, since bringing up marriage before a year of sex seems to turn men off.
Hymowitz recounts a number of events from the childhood of young women that play into their behavior as adults: Today’s SYFs were often told by their mothers that they shouldn’t need a man to be happy. They were likely raised in the 1990s, in the midst of a tween-based advertising frenzy that marketed make-up, thong underwear, and high-heeled clogs to preteens, while at the same time trying to “save the self-esteem” of young girls. Popular TV shows for girls were based on the female warrior type: The Powerpuff Girls, Xena: Warrior Princess, and Buffy the Vampire Slayer. These women try to convince themselves for years that they shouldn’t “need” a child or husband, then end up debating whether to become a “choice mother” (the new term for a woman who uses sperm bank).
* * *
Manning Up might be a good “beach book” for women readers of Counter-Currents, but I have trouble imagining men enjoying it, though they would find some insights into the mind of the typical woman. I found it interesting for its wealth of statistics about marriage rates and ages, men and women in the workplace and universities, and summaries of various causes that contributed to the (mostly white) single and childless young men and women today.
There have been numerous debates on Counter-Currents and other websites about what exactly has caused the decline in marriage and childbirth. Manning Up does a good job of touching on some of the contributing forces, but never addresses any of the larger forces.
The good news from Manning Up is that the majority of young men and women still want to get married and have children. In addition, while women in their early 20s are “hot commodities,” by the time they reach 30, they are beginning to get desperate and may “settle for Mr. Good Enough” as the subtitle of the book Marry Him
40 comments
Excellent review. This is a topic that desperately needs to be addressed. It is one that I’ve noticed seems to attract the most debate in online White Nationalist and conservative fora.
A few weeks back I tried to participate in an online real-time dialogue with Hymowitz hosted by the Wall Street Journal (WSJ), but she (or the moderator) ignored every single one of my admittedly softball questions. Her responses to other readers’ questions, however, indicated to me that this is just another female author that blames men. An anti-male screed. I’m going to avoid the book.
Despite being attractive, educated, and successful (and modest), I remain single and childless and for this I largely blame women and authors like Hymowitz. Specifically, I blame white American women. I attract plenty of attention from Asian and Latin women, but I’m holding out for a white girl. But American women simply aren’t good enough. They have been ruined. There’s something about the socialization and/or education of white American girls that renders them unacceptable gf/wife material. They’re rotten inside.
If Whites are to survive, white women are going to have to surrender much of what they now consider their “freedom”. And white men are going to have to stand up for themselves, not just to the Judeo-African power structure, but to women as well. It’s time to man up.
As a South Asian Hindu man in the USA I can say this regarding American women:
WOW!
I hear a lot of White American men like WG complain about the women here but that’s because I they are meeting the wrong women – and they patronize the places where these women are, such as bars and nightclubs.
I think because American men place a lot of emphasis on looks. Those looks being “hot” instead of just “pleasant”.
I’ve never had a problem with American women because I’m not meeting the hot ones or patronizing the places they hang out. I go for the geeky plain Janes and have found a number of quality, nice girls amongst them who are definetly wife material.
In fact a number of my buddies have married such women and a few of those couples are even currently living in South Asia (India and Sri Lanka to be exact).
It seems those types of women find us South Asian guys to be what they call “refreshing”. They probably notice that we are not as caught up in the “hot or not” mania as mainstream American men are.
Sure, nobody wants to marry a fugly, but an ok plain Jane with solid education and values will do.
Desi here (above) seems to prove my point.
If there are indeed some White American women who are willing to date and marry Subcons and even live in South Asia with them (a trend about which I’m highly sceptical, BTW), then these are precisely the women that White men should avoid.
That’s the problem right there.
I mean honestly, who wants to marry a woman who is so utterly confused, that she would settle for a Subcon and live in South Asia? Certainly not a normal White man with any self-respect.
Years of indoctrination and media training have instilled in White American women a disregard and vile contempt for White men.
As I said, there’s something wrong with white American women.
They’re rotten inside.
But we’re getting the “good” women with family values that you are bemoaning the lack of. In fact, our innocent ways (nerds) and family values is why they say they like us.
But fear not. We are by no means “taking all your women”. The percentage of White American women who marry us are small, and we are not marrying the hot babe 10’s.
Quite the contrary. That shy, geeky girl in the back of your Physics class who goes unnoticed by 99.9% of White guys is the type we go for.
We also don’t mind “chubbies”. In our culture they are called “healthy”.
They need love too and we are here to give it to them.
With White American men being so picky about looks and image, you are not missing out on anything.
Actually, the White woman who marries an indian man is missing out on something, and this something also explains why indians struggle just to get our fat nerdy chicks. For more info, read here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/6161691.stm
Those tiny dinks sure haven’t stopped the south Asians from reproducing themselves. 1 billion and counting. I guess all those condoms falling off (from being too large) would explain it.
Also, desperate white men should think twice before resorting to far Eastern women. They have their own agenda, which you will discover after marrying them, and your life will be hell on wheels. So I am told by a person who knows.
If you would really love and respect your people, if you would respect yourself and your tradition you wouldn’t chase foreign women. You would get one of your own. Inter-ethnic or inter-racial families are not the most durable anyway. Don’t you want your kids to be like you?
Traditionally it is considered that the people not finding mates in their own country might have some psychical issues, if not physical ones.
What you’re doing is a cheap Don Juan game. You try to bed weak and insecure women. You try to exploit their perceived (justified or not) low self esteem. How manly or even gentle is doing it?
Maybe you live in an old Aryan tradition. But in the European tradition women are not to be exploited this shameless way.
It is true that that the mating game has become shameless and men and women are deceiving themselves and each other. This is a God-less, shameless and foreign behavior. It is not European.
But this doesn’t justify your position of a hunter when the pray is utterly disoriented by the cacophonous sound of the modern culture. Duplicity makes gains – but short term.
You are still weak, your white spouse would be weak too, your kids will be weaker than that and surely more duplicitous than you.
Razvan, I’m not “chasing women” or “hunting the weak down to bed them”. I’m quite a chaste guy due to my strict Hindu upbringing. However, I am open to making friends and in the course of that have dated some White women as well as some women from my own ethnic background, even though there are very few of them in my current area.
Will I eventually marry another South Asian? Perhaps.
I’m looking for quality more than anything else.
“though there are very few of them in my current area.”
And why is that? I stick with my own people. Why don’t you?
In fact you didn’t read my post carefully, you only say that you have a strict upbringing. I say you are pretty much liberal and focused on women.
Your family or government sent you abroad to study, not meet women, isn’t it? You should get a degree and get back to your fatherland and do your best for your people and yourself.
So, once again, you are not a nationalist, nor racialist. You are just a liberal.
If your culture is superior and you feel that we would need your advice, why you came in America or Europe to study? Isn’t your own culture and women enough?
We don’t need you, while your people and country may need you dearly. What do you think about it?
Drop your liberal attitude, be a nationalist and I’ll respect you. Otherwise don’t expect anything good. People have to stay separated not to prevent “love” but to prevent war, from too much love of course.
No, Desi, they do not like you. They laugh at you. The world laughs at Subcon men. Stop kidding yourself.
Any White woman who would even consider hooking up with a Subcon is precisely the kind of White woman we do NOT want.
Indian men are world-renowned as lousy lovers and non-romantics, so the kind of White women who would be attracted to such beings (as if! LOL) is unlikely to be good wife material for a self-respecting European-American man.
“Indian men are world-renowned as lousy lovers and non-romantics, so the kind of White women who would be attracted to such beings (as if! LOL) is unlikely to be good wife material for a self-respecting European-American man.”
You may be right there. In Hindu Aryan culture, marriages are based on duty, not fleeting and temporary sexual attraction and “romance”.
Perhaps that’s why our marriages last.
I know its something that this beautiful blue eyed lady said attracted her to her husband and to India, enough to move there and marry him:
http://www.whiteindianhousewife.com
I agree that such women would not make suitable wives for you and men like you. They are way too stuffy and serious, not prioritizing size, technique and moves and all.
That’s OK. We welcome them into our arms and homes to be respectable wives and mothers.
When there’s one White man left in the world, I’m sure you’ll locate him and find a way to cheer him up. Thanks, Desi.
Like I said, you may be focusing your attention on the “babes”. We focus our attention on the geeky girls who don’t attract alot of men. Next time you see a geeky, chubby plain Jane, try approaching her. Chances are she might be girlfriend or wife material if you give her the chance to prove herself. These women rarely get given that chance though coz most guys like WG who consider themselves “attractive, educated, and successful” (and that’s a qoute!) are eyeing women who are equally attractive, educated and successful.
I consider myself a good-looking guy as well but I don’t focus my attention on women who I consider equal or better than me in looks.
There’s a “quality” I’m looking for and it is more often than not found in the plainer women than the hot ones.
So then guys like you and WG complain about women dating outside of the White race – but the women who do so are most likely women you would not be attracted to anyway because they lack a certain “look”.
I’m not saying you should bottomfeed in the looks department, but you should consider that the women who share your values may not be the women that make you sexually hot and bothered at first.
Everyone has to compromise on something.
Thanks to WG for keeping the comments on point.
This is “Counter- Currents,” the only site dealing with the metapolitical project with the widest of scope, and the broadest of terms.
Most of this thread comes from people who have missed reading the excellent comments over at the foremost Men’s Rights website, http://www.the-spearhead.com.
As a courtesy, we of the Durden School of Interpersonal Relations would like to address certain issues, and the return to the metapolitical project with all haste.
Many seem to think The Answer to the current impasse of Man-Wonan relations is to look overseas. This topic has been dealt with at length on the spearhead website, as well as the comments of many on http://markymarksthoughts.blogspot.com. The last features the useful comments of “Christopher in Oregon,” which are well worth your time.
Most of the time, the myth of the “better” overseas woman – or man – is simply that, a hollow myth. To every rule there is an exception, but I see too many on our side who choose the Illusion over the Reality.
The Reality is this; when she gets to America, all of the Judeo-Feminist social system is hers to command, particularly the VAWA system, formed by the Violence Against Women Act.
They know this much better than you do.
The very few women I have seen “go native” are either helplessly romantic, in an immature way, or hate the Western male like nothing you have seen.
We now return to your regular program, already in progress.
WG wrote:
In reply:
Over at the spearhead website, we have her pegged as a saleswoman, selling a book to women who will buy it because it blames men. She is silent on how this pulls directly off of the Frankfurt School theorists, and who they were, and why they were the way they were.
She’s just being toll bait, and a lot of guys have surprised her.
About a year or so back, a guy on the forbes.com did a piece on why we should not marry career women. Forbes expected the handful of women who objected; Forbes was blown away by the wall of men – intelligent, well-educated, economically powerful men – who wrote in to blast the women out of the water with well-crafted arguments, foremost of which is there is nothing in marriage for us.
Let me repeat – the Forbes.com reader, well-educated, Alpha males to a man, took apart the destruction of the social contract, particularly with the commentary on how, when you get married, you are forming a corporation with the State, your silent partner, having all the power – and gues who the State favors when it comes time to dissolve the corporate union? (Note – see that marriage “license,” that comes from the Secretary of State with the little raised seal, just like when you file articles of incorporation? Didn’t notice that, did you?)
Forbes.com was so stunned by the wall of intelligent, vigorous commentary, they retreated, TOOK THE ARTICLE DOWN, and placed it back up with equal space given to a woman’s commentary on …men.
A critical mass of men who realize they are not alone in thinking Something, SOMETHING, is totally, profoundly, wrong.
Welcome to the metapolitical project. Mr. Durden will be your host tonight. Remember, the First Rule of Fight Club IS?
THAT is what we have in common; the deep sense that things are profoundly wrong, at a vey fundamental level, and, thanks to the efforts of people like Greg Johnson and Mike O’Meara, we realize (1) this is not by accident, (2) we let this happen to us, and (3) this was done by an organized Race that lives to serve The Destroyer.
First, we get mad – the cleansing anger that burns away the Illusions we have become addicted to. This is our equivalent of getting ready to take the Red Pill.
Second, we use our anger to focus our efforts on making ourselves better Men, as the living foundation of a New Nation. Doing that IS the Red Pill, the mechanism of the shift of Consciousness, as the duty of transformation continues for this lifetime, and far beyond. A Positive Theory of Race, fostered by Bob Whitaker’s Mantra, which is the seed that falls to the ground, and is only heard bythose who are ready. Fighting the genocide of White Children is a good focus for your efforts.
Third, we stop being victims, and being played for fools. Tom Leykis had the mindset we needed, and listening to him talk to helplessly confused young men, who often called him “Father,” was a singularly moving experience. He reminded them that what Horus The Avenger called The Consensus Trance was designed to drain us of the substance of our lives.
We can Do Something about this.
WG wrote:
In reply:
For every rule, there is an exception.
That having been said, we at the spearhead website have a lot of useful commentary that will help you to get the mindset neded to succeed. mind you, this is not “Game,” in and of itself. Rather, it is the belief that we must test them as much as they test us, with very open eyes, seeking the power of Tyler Durden to be able to deal with their misrepresentations – which they may believe themselves are TRUE.
That’s RIGHT – test them. You want an exciting time? If it looks like things are getting serious, tell her you want to share credit reports with her; you get to look at hers, and she gets to look at yours. All three credit agencies will give you your report free, once a year, at – I think – the annualcreditreport.com website.
WTF? How unromantic is THAT?
Yes, but you ARE forming a corporation, there is a merger of corporate interests, and you do want to do due diligence before you make this very expensive to correct decision, don’t you?
Besides, if she does not trust you with as much truth as you are trusting with her, is she REALLY worthwhile?
Yes, a little learning from “Father” Tom Leykis goes a LOOONNNNGGG way to getting the right Mindset.
Did you know that, in some states, the moment you marry, YOU are responsible for her student loans – which, as a rule, are NOT dischargeable in bankruptcy?
Kay wants us to Man Up, with the usual crazymaking proviso attached.
She wants us to “Man Up,” but she does not want us to be MEN.
Particularly Men Against Time.
WG wrote:
In reply:
Not surprisingly, we all know of several women who see what they were told was “freedom” as simply a soft trap, that led them to indentured servitude, and a very sad state of loneliness.
Having been told that “jobs” were “careers,” they were exposed to a 24/7 diet of material that made “Sex In The City” their handbook for “relationships.”
I can see the sorrow in their eyes as they discuss their lives, particularly their futures.
They are at church on Sunday, as it is the only place they do not feel reduced to the status of Losers in a Game that was designed to reduce them to economic serfs.
Incidentally, for those of us seeking adivcie and good counsel on the whole relationship thing, over on VNN 1.0, “Elizabeth Bennett” wote a series of articles on “How To Marry A High Quality Woman.”
Before you develop such concerns, check out the excellent advice from Tom Leykis, writers at the Spearhead, and the advice of a radio guy named “Doc Love.” Don’t laugh at his name; he has a philosophy, an Analytical Framework, and useful materials to help you develop techniques to which you can add your own style…
Mr. Durden.
We can learn from this.
Sounds like woman doing what woman do best, blaming men. Your review never defines exactly what manning up means. It sounds as though the author is suggesting that men are supposed to maintain their traditional roles, somehow, regardless of the changes in society. What changes? Woman do not want children, they want careers. How many books and magazine articles must we need to endure to get around that reality?
I’m not the only one then, who’s noticed how immature young males are today. Our enemies have deliberately created cartoon garbage in the guise of so – called adult entertainment. They have produced films with childlike actors who insult your intelligence. The Male is under attack from Freud’s disciples in the mass media and music industry. It now makes sense why music for the young is geared towards feminine ideals of “sugar baby love.”It also makes sense why bands with infantile names are so prominent today. Our enemies set the format back in the 1950’ and 60’s music are. The silly goyim then copy the format. It also makes sense why all the “Superheroes” were created by Jews (now turned into adult films). Once again, Freudian Psychoanalysis (pleasure principle) is being used here. Obviously, Miss Kay S. Hymowitz won’t be mentioning this, will she?
The false charts our enemies laid many decades ago are now beginning to take their toll! When men are immature they won’t be making adult decisions, will they (like having children)? No, they’d rather watch the Simpsons and play the latest playstation game.
Mark my words: Once we run the zoo again, after the coming end of the world as we know it, we will reverse feminism back to Victorian and pre-Victorian ages. See this video, a selection of scenes of Pride and Prejudice.
Once we grow a pair again, the reversal will be brutal and swift, like Harold Covington’s The Hill of the Ravens, a novel of an ethno-state where people adopted 19th century fashions.
Anything short of forbidding women in the working arena and having them profusely breeding like our grandmothers is just queer behavior, queer mores, queer axiological standards and outright betrayal to our race.
The foundation of civilization is heterosexual marriage. In Austen’s England, to force women into traditional roles they didn’t even have the right to inherit the estate from their late fathers. Only males could (yes: men had their civic duties too; the promiscuous Don Juanes lost their right to inheritance).
If it is too harsh to revert to the late 18th or 19th century, the sexual mores must be reverted at the very least to the beginning of the 20th century in America. At any event, if we are to survive mores must and will be forcefully reverted back to the times when women were kept in their place. Only the feminized western males cannot get something so obvious that only the Muslims in Europe seem to get it: Women belong to us; not to themselves. They’re Nature’s most precious gift.
I can fully appreciate your concern with low White birth rates, women becoming slaves in the workplace, and the excesses of feminism, but come on…our women are NOT mere baby machines. Some women (and men) may not be cut out for raising children. Do they then possess no purpose or value?
This kind of talk is probably why most intelligent white women run away in fear from sites like this, and the movement in general. We must approach this issue differently if we are to attract more women…which is crucial.
I am not talking to women. Only to revolutionary males.
Oh, I see. I hope that your domineering tough guy approach works out for you. Obviously, White woman love it!
Missing the point. And you didn’t see the video I linked above, right? But those points are not to be discussed here, but in one of my blog’s entries (and BTW I look forward to meet that Mormon gal even if I’m not religious).
Please accept my apology. I misunderstood.
The status of women in NS Germany is the best one for white women not the miserable conditions of Victorian England. In NS Germany, the majority of women chose to be wives and mothers. If they were cut out for something else, the choice was there. Leni Riefenstahl, Hanna Reitsch and others, are examples of this.
Meh, I don’t think modern men are so worse than their fathers’ generations. Remember most men from prior epochs were bar flies and wife beaters who neglected their families to spend time at the local saloon to play cards with the guys, the crux of the entire prohibition movement. How exactly is World of Warcraft worse than poker or rummy? The immaturity is the same as it ever was; it has simply taken on more visible and honest(and perhaps less pernicious) manifestations. The falling birthrates are a problem, but then again, some genes may need to be scuttled.
I am a SYM and I would like to get married. My problem is finding a white woman who does not despise me for my beliefs and who hasn’t been ruined by feminism. I also insist on a woman who has moral values. I’m an atheist so finding a Christian woman isn’t really an option. Most of them cannot accept that I have no desire to worship a Jewish god.
I don’t watch tv or go to the movies. I have very little in common with the vast majority of women (or men). The things that interest me are things most people have never heard of. I have serious doubt about weather I will ever be able to find an acceptable white woman to marry.
I am sure no one here wants to hear this but, given present realities my options seem to be either I can remain single for the rest of my life or I can date and ultimately marry an east asian woman. I have found east asian women are much more polite on average and considerate than white women, they are also more tolerant of my views. If I do marry an east asian woman I won’t be having any children.
It is easy to blame SYM for not marrying or not having children, but for many of us finding a white woman isn’t possible. They are either repulsive liberals or damaged goods.
Erik, only a couple comments away from yours is a comment from a 20-something white college-educated woman who is complaining that she cannot find a man with convictions like yours. So don’t give up.
My advice to lonely people who are considering interracial dating or adoption is: Consider adopting a dog or cat.
I was in your same position, although not seriously considering dating an east-Asian…(which I can’t blame you for, though I would highly advise against). Then I found an amazing white girl, who was family-oriented, has morals, and despises Judeo-Chrislamic faiths to boot! Don’t give up man!
This situation has resulted from the assault upon traditional values and religious belief. It used to be scandalous to get a divorce. Today people don’t even bother to get married.
We may conclude that the values and morals of the jew are bad for the Anglo Saxon and Aryan and Christian people. What a shock.
This article makes me feel just as isolated as ever (well, most of the stuff here at CC tends to do that). I am a female, approaching 30, unmarried, with no children. Even though I went to college and got a degree, it has been absolutely useless to me and I have no desire to “climb the corporate ladder,” become a lawyer, doctor, etc. I have been told all my life that I don’t need a man, that I can make it on my own, that I can make myself happy. I’ve never felt that way and now that time is running out to get married and have children, that feeling is more intense than ever (please don’t be mistaken – it was never my desire to have to wait).
Many of the men here complain about the vapid nature of American women but I’d argue that American men are just as guilty. Outside of college, which was filled to the brim with leftist idiots anyway, the only options I now have left for socializing with men are bars and nightclubs where the prime directive is to seek a sexual partner(s) for the night (and oh so many women are happy to oblige). The last resort is online dating where each and every man needs to point out that he’s “left-leaning” and works for a progressive think tank in the nearest metropolitan city (and that he also worked with the Peace Corps for 3 years feeding starving AIDS orphans in Africa). I can’t decide what’s more unnerving to me at this point: marrying and settling down with someone whose viewpoints are so diametrically opposed to my own (and therein pretending to be something I’m not) or becoming an old spinster.
Take heart Isola.
If White American men don’t want you or are too liberal for you, there are good, conservative, family oriented South Asian men out here who are open.
Although we come from an arranged marriage culture, many of our parents are becoming acclimated to love marriages or marrying outside of our culture/caste as long as the spouses we choose are of high quality and able to assimilate into a tight-knit South Asian family structure in which elders are revered.
We make committed partners, good providers, and strict but loving parents.
You also get the added benefit of exposure to the dharma of the original Aryan culture without having to convert to Hinduism.
As long as you are respectful of our religion we do not require you to convert. You are free to continue worshipping in any way you choose, or not at all.
We may not be the sexiest beasts out here on the market, but we are good men.
Introducing racial mixing isn’t going to solve any problems. This is a white issue and needs to be solved by whites for themselves. You seem to be part of the demographic of east indian males who think that they somehow fit into a white society (of which you absolutely do not!). Why are you interested in white women anyway? Your women are still traditional! You need to go back to your own culture and stay out of ours!
Women with your youth, education, and aspirations are rare in our circles. There are quite a few eligible bachelors in our cause who are far from the kooks and losers that our enemies (and all too many of our friends) make us out to be. I have played matchmaker to more than a few people in our circles, and I have fostered many more friendships among people who share our interests and lived in the same area without even knowing one another. So if you are interested in meeting quality WNs in your area, let me know. If there are other people near you on our mailing list and they consent to being contacted, I can set something up.
Isola,
Relax. I know it’s hard to but do it. And follow Greg Johnson’s advice. You have it a LOT easier than the men in the corresponding position, at least in many respects. There are plenty of WN/Traditionalist/Real Men in our circles who would love to settle down with you, have kids, be a father, stick it out with you through thick and thin, and love you and your new family. The only problem is finding the right one for you. Part of the problem is you have to “know people” as we don’t advertise ourselves to the public for obvious reasons.
I met my fiancée in an online WN-ish skype call. The beauty of finding your “WN” wife/husband online is that you don’t need to attend the sad and degenerate WN gatherings (I have found that the best of us rarely like getting together with the trash that make up 95% of the events), which would likely only discourage you (hopefully this stereotype will change in the coming years). Anyway, C-C seems like it would be a good place to go fishing for a quality husband, especially when you have the well reputed editor offering to play match-maker for you. This is where I would look if I were you. Short of that, instead of looking for a guy on the online dating sites who is exposing the fact that he is a bigoted ____, ________, ________ (fill in with your choice of derogatory language), try making a profile suggesting the qualities YOU want in a man. Many of my friends try the strategy of down-playing their true qualities/characteristics initially, progressively showing more and more of their true selves. Honestly, it seems to be one of the best strategies I’ve seen so far, as it has worked with more than one of my friends (sad but true).
Well, good luck. I’m sure you’ll find a quality husband soon (so keep your spirits up!).
Ibid. Good luck, Isola. I’m sure you’ll find him.
Hey, guys, let me give you all some advice:
If you really want to meet moral, chaste, intelligent, family-oriented White women (who most often are raised to be race-conscious), look no further than the singles ward of the Mormon church. I can also tell you that these are some of the most beautiful women out there (anyone who has ever spent much time in Utah and Idaho knows this!).
Trust me, this is one of the LAST places in America where you will find the kind of women we need. All the values, lifestyle choices (i.e. no drinking, drugs, smoking) are in place. My fiancee is ex-Mormon, but still adheres to all of the important elements of the faith: family, traditional sex roles, patriotism/ethnic loyalty, education and the understanding that there must exist a goal/ideal beyond the egos of both husband and wife in order to have a deeply meaningful relationship.
If you disagree with the tenets of the church doctrine (like we do), simply use it as a stepping stone toward something higher. It’s quite easy, actually, given that most women will eventually follow the lead of a strong, respectful and well-meaning man.
I could not be happier!
I once saw a Mormon video, either on youtube or their web site. It showed a black man marrying a white woman. That was all I needed to see to form my opinion of their church. I don’t want any part of that, aside from the fact that I don’t believe in their god, their book or their prophets.
This Mormon couple were obviously lower class. This is not at all normal. Either way, it can happen anywhere.
Any discussion of marriage that doesn’t mention easy divorce is pointless. Easy divorce combined with access to promiscuous women who don’t demand marriage explain most of the decline of marriage.
The botton line is that we have a legal and cultural climate that makes it damn near impossible for quality White men and women to find each other. The Jews have gotten exactly what they wanted in this regard, and probably beyond their wildest dreams too.
Comments are closed.
If you have a Subscriber access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.