Incels and the N-Word

The term incel has a lot in common with the N-word, because while it has seemingly benign definition (a black person), it also has a purpose--to humiliate, degrade, and other a group of people. The term incel is now also being used with the same purpose--to humiliate, degrade, and other a group of people.

GamerGate was the first major loss for feminism and SJWs in the culture wars. Who did feminist believe was behind GamerGate and handed them this loss? They stereotyped them as: nerds, men who lived in their mom's basement, neck-beards, failures to launch, game-boys, or just plain old losers. This stereotype was far from true (for one, many GamerGate supporters were female), but it is the stereotype feminist had of their enemy.

And, make no mistake, feminist did consider this group of men enemies. Their defeat at the hands of these men has stuck in their craw ever since. The have never let go of it, and still want revenge. In the word incel they think they have a vehicle.

The definition of incel seems benign (involuntary celibate), but the word has a sinister purpose: to humiliate, degrade, and other a group of people. With othering being the most sinister purpose of all--to separate these men from society and make them untouchables. Consider former Reddit CEO Ellen K. Pao's tweet:

CEOs of big tech companies: You almost certainly have incels as employees. What are you going to do about it?

It is a not so thinly veiled attempt to have these men fired from their jobs and make them outcasts--to other them.

Like the N-word, the word incel has no place in society. Rather than argue over its definition's  accuracy, we should reject it outright, because its purpose is evil.

Who is Discouraging Women From STEM Careers? Part 2 - Stay at Homes

In my previous post on this subject⁴, I showed that if you went by personality type, STEM jobs would be: 70% male and 30% female. That's if all other things were equal, but they aren't equal.

Adult Women Have the Physical Strength of a 13 Year Old Boy

Today, soon to be ex-President Obama, in an effort to promote women on the front lines in the military, stated that women are just as strong as men. And, people are publicly agreeing with him. Are they stuck in political correctness or have they never actually thought about it?

Let's think about it. An apples-to-apples comparison would be track and field events. Same playing field, same events, same equipment (for the most  part*).

MGTOW vs The Dones

American Christianity has its own “going their own way” movement: The Dones. They aren't done with Christianity, but they are done with the institutional church, or what is commonly known as “churchianity.”

John is every pastor’s dream member. He’s a life-long believer, well-studied in the Bible, gives generously, and leads others passionately.

But last year he dropped out of church. He didn’t switch to the other church down the road. He dropped out completely. His departure wasn’t the result of an ugly encounter with a staff person or another member. It wasn’t triggered by any single event.

John had come to a long-considered, thoughtful decision. He said, “I’m just done. I’m done with church.”¹

Another White Knight/Useful Idiot Learns a Lesson

Vivek Wadhwa, author of the book Innovating Women, has given up. He is no longer going to be an advocate for women in engineering.

Marie Harf, ISIS, and Alpha Bad-Boys

Marie Harf is the US State Department spokeswoman who has come under criticism for her statements that the way to defeat ISIS isn't with force, but rather social change—specifically to improve their economic prospects and give them good jobs. Even Chris Matthews, who normally throws softballs at the Obama administration, was flabbergasted.

Explanations for Harf's statement have ranged from her living in a bubble (and thus she naively thinks the whole world is similar to the the bubble she lives in) to a lack of core religious beliefs (and thus is unable to comprehend how powerful a force religion can be in someone's life). I'd like to approach this from a different angle: women's attraction to alpha bad-boys.

Women's "I Wish He Were Dead" Fantasy

This is another concept from Warren Farrell's Why Men Are They Way They Are. Farrell noticed a theme running through a number of romance novels. One where the heroine is flashdanced to success, and then the husband dies. Thus, leaving the widow financially independent and free to pursue her dreams and desires without the encumbrance of a husband.

Flashdancing Women

Warren Farrell in his book Why Men Are The Way They Are spends an entire chapter on what he calls “The Flashdance Phenomenon.” The analogy is based on the move Flashdance.

The movie is about a twentyish woman who works as a welder by day and an exotic dancer by night in a seedy club that is one-half step above a strip club. Her dream is to join the ballet. The only thing holding her back is lack of opportunity and money...plus the lifetime of ballet lessons and hard work she skipped.

The Football Player's Dilemma

In his book Why Men Are The Way They Are, Warren Farrell doesn't use this exact bit of jargon, but the example he uses is so clear that this phrase jumps to mind.

When a football player loses his position on the team, he seldom sees a cheerleader run off the field saying “Wait, I'm still cheering for you—I love your openness and vulnerability.” He notices, instead that she cheers for his replaceable part. He learns, on some level, that all heroes are replaceable parts.

...He is learning, subconsciously, that female support, nurturing, is conditional—it goes to the men on the playing field. Therefore her support is really pressure to keep performing.

Why Men Are The Way They Are

I have recently finished Warren Farrell's 1986¹ book Why Men Are The Way They Are. While Farrell's later books (particularly The Myth of Male Power) are more widely read, I found his this book to have some fascinating insights.

Written 30 years ago, Farrell had not yet (to use a modern analogy) “swallowed the red pill.” He was still trying to reconcile his lifelong feminist beliefs (he literally served on the board of the NYC chapter of NOW—The National Organization for Women) with what his research was revealing—and failing miserably.

So What If He Lives In His Mom's Basement?

I don't buy into the stereotype of young men being lazy and refusing to grow up; choosing instead to live in their mom's basement and play video games all day. The stereotype is not as common as the detractors make it out to be, and reality is much more complicated. But, for argument's sake, let's grant for the moment that the stereotype is true. In which case, I would like to ask these men's detractors a question: so what?

Who is Discouraging Women From STEM Careers?

I was reading an article at Matt Walsh's blog¹ where he pointed out that women don't have it worse than men. One of the comments² caught my eye:

However, one thing about the .77 dollar argument that bears investigation is why women are underrepresented in the STEM professions, which tend to be the highest-paying professions. Studies have consistently revealed that girls are discouraged in math and science classrooms.

Having worked in a STEM field (computer programming) for over a quarter of a century, I found the idea that girls are discouraged from entering STEM fields to be curious. It certainly didn't line up with my experience in the industry. Schools have been pushing girls into math and science, not discouraging them. In my experience technology companies have been bending over backwards and jumping through hoops to get more women into IT (information technology). From programs aimed at getting high school students involved in technology to hiring decisions, there has always been a blunt, out-in-the-open emphasis on getting more women into IT.

So, if it's not “the patriarchy” pushing women down and denying them a chance to enter technology fields, what does account for women being underrepresented in technology fields? After a little research into personality types and career fields, I think I found the answer.

Overt Confidence is the Alpha Key

Which of the following people would you be most likely to follow:

1. An inept man who was outwardly overconfident in his abilities
2. A competent man who was humble about his abilities

I'm sure most people picked #2. We all like to think we would make the smart choice, but according to research done by Cameron Anderson² the choice most people make is #1. And it's not even close, the overwhelming majority of people prefered the inept overconfident guy.

Is the Cube Farm the Meaning of Life?

I read an article describing a woman who was raising her daughter to be a mother—to marry young to a good man, have children, and spend her life raising her children.¹ The criticism of her was blistering. One theme continually popped up in comments: how can you waste your daughter's potential?

Potential? Potential to be what, exactly? A doctor, lawyer, or CEO; one of life's movers and shakers. There are a couple of problems with that attitude. For one, those types of careers are few and far between. Secondly, for most people (man or woman) the meaning of life won't be found on the job—it will be found at home in their families and in God.

How a Woman Can “Have It All”

In an earlier post¹⁰, I noted the modern feminist meme of women having it all. Unfortunately, not only does the feminist plan ensure women don't “have it all,” it ensures what they do have will be royally screwed up. From a man's perspective, this means they are awful (inferior, substandard, flawed) wife material.

Here is a different plan. One that allows women to achieve life's major goals and still be good choices as wives.

PAC-Man: The Passive-Aggressive Christian Man

Dr. Paul Glover, in his 2003 book No More Mr. Nice Guy, says nice guys are dishonest, secretive, manipulative, controlling, attracted to people that need fixing, and full of rage; they have difficulty setting boundaries and problems with intimate relationships; they fear conflict, blame others for their problems, fail to live up to their potential, and give to get.

Dr. Scott Wetzler, in his 1992 book Living With the Passive-Aggressive Male, says passive-aggressive men are dishonest, secretive, manipulative, controlling, attracted to people that need fixing, and full of rage; they have difficulty setting boundaries and problems with intimate relationships; they fear conflict, blame others for their problems, fail to live up to their potential, and give to get.

Glover states “Nice guys are passive-aggressive.” Wetzler states “...passive-aggressive men negotiate the world as 'nice guys' denying even the slightest hint of hostility or conflict.”

This is not a coincidence. Being a nice guy and being a passive aggressive man go hand in hand. Glover's and Wetzler's books are eerily similar. Even though their subjects are different and the approach from opposite directions, you can't help but get the feeling that they are describing the same person—because they are.

It's no secret that the modern Christian church has become a nice guy factory. What people have failed to realize is that it has also become a factory for producing passive-aggressive men. The nice guy personality turned out by churches is the one described in the above books—the one that goes hand in hand with being passive-aggressive.

Courage vs Confidence

Courage is the opposite of cowardice; confidence is the opposite of uncertainty.

Courage and cowardice are antonyms—they mean the opposite of each other. They both deal with how you handle fear.

Confidence and uncertainty antonyms—they mean the opposite of each other. They both deal with how you handle doubt.

Presentation Matters

Recently, I've noticed another round in the debate between just-be-yourself and craft-your-image; between what is known as inner-game and outer-game. The inner-game argument is that you should not present yourself as something you are not. A reasonable argument, but it is then taken to the extreme. The argument is being made that you should only focus on your inner qualities. Don't worry about your outer qualities—your image, because your inner qualities will shine out and people will see you for your true self. It's a nice theory, but it doesn't work in the real world.

The Myth of the Egalitarian Marriage

My wife and I are equals. We share in all the decision making. Neither of us is the leader of the other.

The egalitarian view sounds so lovely. Two people living together in harmony. Neither having more authority in the relationship than the other and neither having more responsibility in the relationship than the other. Unfortunately, it's merely a utopian vision, because when a crisis occurs (when the metaphorical shit hits the fan) the egalitarian model breaks down.

Consider this scenario:

A married couple along with their two children are driving home from a weekend trip. As they round the corner their home comes into view. There are firetrucks and flashing lights. They simultaneously realize that their house has burned to the ground. One spouse emotionally melts down; turns to the other spouse; and with tears in their eyes and panic in their voice screams: “Oh my God! What are we going to do? Tell me, what are we going to do?”

Which spouse had the emotional meltdown?

Men, You Are the Prize

This is a letter I composed for a friend who's dealings with women over the years has caused him little but grief. The names have been changed to protect the innocent.

Luke,

I've heard once again hat you've had problems with a woman. I can relate to that. Recently, I've come to realize something:

In any relationship between a man and a woman, the woman is not the prize—the man is the prize.