It would be easy to dismiss the ‘manosphere’ as a massively sexist adult nursery full of raging, paranoid misogynists, and leave it there. But maybe that’s a little too easy. I mean, all those angry guys, venting their spleens in range of a bite-sized, two-million-word discussions… It’s a lot of effort. A one-sentence response would hardly be worthy of contemplation after all that.
So in this post, I’m going to look at seven popular ‘manosphere’ opinions, which showcase the level of delusion within the environment. I’ve placed the opinions in quotes, but they’re really summaries, which may or may not also be specific statements, made by specific individuals…
“Women do not bring anything to the table in a relationship”
The ‘manosphere’ asserts that men contribute high value to a relationship, whilst women contribute little or no value at all. And yet the ‘manosphere’ is full of men who spend half their lives, and half their money, chasing women, whilst said women seemingly do everything they can to avoid being caught. Basic business theory tells us that the arrow of pursuit will always point to the greater value. In other words, if you’re doing the chasing, then you stand to get the best deal. The party you’re chasing offers the greater value.
The contradiction of relentlessly chasing the benefits provided by a woman, but saying they have no value, typifies ‘manosphere man’s deluded approach to life, and shows how easily he can be brainwashed into blindly repeating everything his sexist mentors say – however little sense it makes.
“Women always go for the alpha male”
You’re in a fairly sizeable working environment which has a male boss. By nature, a male boss is always going to be the dominant alpha male of the working environment. So, how many of the women in this environment are attracted to the boss? Conversely, how many of the women dislike the boss? I don’t need to lead you through any example stats. You already know that in real life, the great alpha male theory does not withstand scrutiny.
“Women are not capable of caring – they only use men as a convenient means of fulfilling their material and aspirational needs”
The ‘manosphere’ projects the typical behaviour of one particular type of female across the whole gender. Namely, a man-magnet. An unusually glamorous female who’s invested in her image and has become accustomed to controlling and rinsing creeps. Why does ‘manosphere man’ do this? Because that’s the only type of female he notices.
The fact that ‘manosphere man’ uses a man-magnet as a representative of ALL women shows how much he objectifies the gender. He literally doesn’t recognise a woman as a woman unless she looks like she’s dropped straight out of a lad mag. Of course a woman who is propositioned and worshipped on a minute to minute basis is going to become desensitised to the emotional side of connecting with random men, and just take any ‘gifts’ they offer. But the man-magnet does not even represent 1% of women.
And indeed, even a man-magnet will typically love and care about animals. Maybe that’s because animals are NOT continually trying to manipulate her. Whatever the reason, if you care about animals (and most women do), you’re naturally caring. If she can care about a carrot-addicted gerbil, but not about you, then dude, the problem is you, not her.
“Dating is easier for women than it is for men”
Here we have a statement that not only generalises, but once again reveals a blinkered focus on the man-magnet. The reality is that in dating, physically attractive people (male or female) get more attention than those of ‘plainer’ appearance. To suggest that dating would be easier for an unglamorous female than for a spectacularly handsome, fit and successful male, is crazy. But as we know, the ‘manosphere’ does not see unglamorous females. It only sees ‘hot girls’ – for whom, yes, attracting male attention is incredibly easy.
What men in the ‘manosphere’ are really doing, is comparing the amount of attention ‘hot girls’ get, with the amount of attention they, personally get, as visually unremarkable males with a sexist attitude. Clearly, in that particular comparison, attracting interest is going to be considerably easier for the ‘hot girls’.
But more attention doesn’t necessarily equate to an easier dating experience. The kind of attention ‘hot girls’ get from men is almost invariably shallow, selfish, disingenuous, highly predictable, and focused exclusively on the prospect of sex. A lot of it will also be disturbingly creepy. Online, the blokes are often playing a high numbers game and mailshotting as many bikini-clad beach babes as they can access. The woman might be snowed under with attention, but how much of it means anything to her? Probably none.
A woman is also expected to wait for men to approach her rather than proactively contacting them. That largely limits her to the players, because they’re the ones with the greatest drive to hit on physically dynamic women. The expectation that the male will make the first approach is often cited as a disadvantage for men, but it’s really an advantage, because the man gets to choose from ALL available women. The woman only gets to choose from the men who approach her.
“Women reject ‘supplicating’ men because they’re not alpha males”
False. The reason women reject ‘supplicating’ men is that they see through the act, realise the man is using a ploy to manipulate them, and therefore don’t trust him. They also equate ridiculous levels of compliance with objectification, because a man tolerating the unacceptable is completely dismissing the woman’s personality as a factor in his interest.
The woman will compare a man’s behaviour towards her, with his behaviour towards other people. If he’s playing the saint with her, whilst talking down to the bar assistant, then clearly, he’s fake, and the ‘nice guy’ act will end as soon as he no longer feels the need to use it. We see from social media that men often have no concept of women’s attention to this dynamic, and will fawn away to glam girls whilst behaving like absolute arseholes with other men. The girls look, and notice.
And the proof? Listen to women talking to each other. Have you EVER heard one woman say to another: “I blew him out because he wasn’t alpha enough”? I bet you haven’t. But I bet you have often heard: “I blew him out because he was a manipulative creep.” ‘Manosphere man’ is obsessed with alpha/beta. Women barely even think about it.
“Women are frightened of Men Going Their Own Way, because in the end there will be no one to do their shit for them”
Men Going Their Own Way (or MGTOW) is a component within the ‘manosphere’, that operates similarly to an industrial strike. Except only nought-point-something percent of males have joined the strike, and they’re the ones no women actually wanted anyway. It’s a bit like a group of people who’ve repeatedly failed their driving test announcing that they’re turning their backs on the motoring world, and expecting society to be upset.
MGTOW are so insecure in their argument, that men who disagree with the movement ethos on the MGTOW forum have their posts moved to a “Litter” section and are accused of being women. Actual women are not allowed to join the forum or post at all. But it’s not a sexist movement, you understand…
And Men Throwing Their Own Toys… Sorry, Men Going Their Own Way are blatantly NOT going their own way, because they can’t do a single thing without bleating about it for attention on the Internet. Just look at their Wiktionary page for an insight into their whining, paranoid, victim demeanour.
These are dudes who think that in withdrawing their interest in females (which they haven’t actually done because they talk about nothing but women 24/7, but let’s humour them), those females are going to lose all their “gynocentric privileges”, and someday come grovelling back in a fit of contrition. You can see in the Wiki page that the central theme of MGTOW is to imply that doom will befall anyone who doesn’t behave as they want. In other words, they’re control freaks. Just as, ahem… Wiki is going to go bust because men will no longer donate to its feminazi-infiltrated regime (LOL), women are going to fall apart because men will no longer shower them with free shit and labour.
Of course, the reality is that only a tiny fraction of women get free shit from men, and those women make sacrifices and investments to reach that position, so it’s not really free anyway. The vast majority of women simply pay the appropriate providers the going rate when they want or need something, from money they earned, working. So we’re back where we started, with that same focus on the man-magnet / rinser character, because MGTOW only notice physically-dynamic women, just like the rest of the ‘manosphere’.
Whatever MGTOW do, men will keep showering that small group of ‘hot women’ with gifts and free labour, because the group is so small that even if 98% of males joined MGTOW, the supply of man-magnets would STILL not meet demand.
MGTOW’s plot to ‘starve’ women of male support also completely overlooks much wider realms of male unavailability, such as marriage and commonlaw partnership. The notion that a woman would be sanguine about a vast group of hugely eligible men being committed to other females (and thus unavailable to ‘support’ her), and yet frightened about a much smaller group of sexist rejects ‘going their own way’, is so ridiculous that only severe delusion could prompt it.
“Women are not attracted to the heroic nice guy. They want someone who treats them mean.”
Women ARE attracted to the heroic nice guy. We know that from the relentless success of swashbuckling characters in movies, and the way women are prone to weeping when the hero dies. What they’re not attracted to is a fake attention-seeker who flings stones at the baddies from behind a rock, on the Internet, purely in a bid for a man-magnet’s approval, and logs off as soon as the baddies come to confront him.
Here’s the reality: WOMEN CAN TELL A GENUINE FORCE FOR GOOD FROM A FUCKBOY PLAYING THE HERO FOR TWO MINUTES IN ORDER TO GET LAID. It’s really not difficult. Us blokes can tell the difference. Why would a woman be fooled?
As for women wanting to be treated mean, how many women have EVER lobbied politically for less respect, lower pay and poorer treatment? The ‘manosphere’ never stops blubbing about women’s efforts to get a better deal out of life, and yet it also thinks they want to be treated mean. More contradiction. More delusion.
Yep, that’s the ‘manosphere’.