Main menu:

Site Search


Recent Posts

Similar Posts

Most Popular

Recent Comments



Women: Parasites or Saviors?

Are women different from men? Of course they are, though I believe that women and men share many of the attributes that make them different. Women can be competitive, and men can be emotionally sensitive. The same is true for any two groups that are different, such as Chinese and Italians, Catholics and Buddhists, doctors and bricklayers. When you stop looking at the general group and compare individuals, you find many more traits in common than opposite traits, because we are one species. Yet it’s true that women and men are a special case, because there is a clear biologic basis for some of the differences.

So are women inferior to men? I hate this question. It feels to me like it comes from the dark shadows of our ignorant past. Yet a few months ago a Moroccan friend sent me this extract from Arthur Schopenhauer, a philosopher who had no use for women, seeing them as decorative parasites at best. It should go without saying that Schopenhauer’s only friend in life was his dog. He writes:

    One needs only to see the way she is built to realize that woman is not intended for great mental or physical labor. … Women are suited to being the nurses and teachers of our earliest childhood precisely because they themselves are childish, silly and short-sighted, in a word big children, their whole lives long…. [Nature] has provided her with superabundant beauty and charm for a few years at the expense of the whole remainder of her life, so that during these years she may so capture the imagination of a man that he is carried away into undertaking to support her honorably in some form or another for the rest of her life, a step he would seem hardly likely to take for purely rational considerations. Thus nature has equipped women, as it has all its creatures, with the tools and weapons she needs for securing her existence, and at just the time she needs them…. As the weaker sex, they are driven to rely not on force but on cunning: hence their instinctive subtlety and their ineradicable tendency to tell lies: for, as nature has equipped the lion with claws and teeth…so it has equipped woman with the power of dissimulation as her means of attack and defence….. To make use of it at every opportunity is as natural to her as it is for an animal to employ its means of defence whenever it is attacked, and when she does so she feels that to some extent she is only exercising her rights.

In other words, never has such a one-sided view of women been committed to paper, and with such self-satisfaction about it too! Schopenhauer claims that women use their beauty to trick men into taking care of them, because they have neither the intelligence nor the strength to care for themselves, and that lies and cunning are their basic survival strategy. He probably thought he was being contrarian, undermining the prevailing (and no less condescending) view of his time that women are men’s “better half,” noble in spirit but physically frail, the muse and inspiration for all masculine achievement.

Schopenhauer’s ideas came to mind again recently when I came across a piece by Rebecca Solnit, a talented essayist who has written several books including Hope in the Dark and A Field Guide to Getting Lost. In “Men Explain Things to Me,” which appeared on where she is a regular contributor, she discusses male arrogance, the idea that men “know” they are right even when proof they are wrong is staring them in the face. Worse, if you’re a woman and try to show them that proof, they simply won’t listen.

    Men explain things to me, and other women, whether or not they know what they’re talking about. Some men.
    Every woman knows what I’m talking about. It’s the presumption that makes it hard, at times, for any woman in any field; that keeps women from speaking up and from being heard when they dare; that crushes young women into silence by indicating, the way harassment on the street does, that this is not their world. It trains us in self-doubt and self-limitation just as it exercises men’s unsupported overconfidence. …
    Violence is one way to silence people, to deny their voice and their credibility, to assert your right to control over their right to exist. About three women a day are murdered by spouses or ex-spouses in this country. … I tend to believe that women acquired the status of human beings when these kinds of acts started to be taken seriously, when the big things that stop us and kill us were addressed legally….
    Being told that…he knows what he’s talking about and she doesn’t, however minor a part of any given conversation, perpetuates the ugliness of this world and holds back its light. … Most of my life, I would have doubted myself and backed down. Having public standing as a writer of history helped me stand my ground, but few women get that boost….
    Men explain things to me, still. And no man has ever apologized for explaining, wrongly, things that I know and they don’t.

I had the good luck, I suppose, to be born a man, so that even on the many occasions when my ideas haven’t been taken seriously, at least I haven’t had to wonder if it was my condition as a woman that was getting in the way. I’m not going to argue with how Solnit perceives things, because I’ve experienced male arrogance for myself, even though I’m not a woman, and the blistering condescension of people like Schopenhauer is further proof. If a man “knows” in advance that women are parasites who want to trick him with their feminine wiles, he won’t even bother to listen to what a woman is saying, and she will be powerless to persuade him that she is smarter, more qualified and better informed than he is. Of course, that suits him just fine.

I thought of sending Solnit’s article to my Moroccan friend as a response to Schopenhauer, but we hadn’t raised the topic for some time, so I sent it instead to a friend of mine whom I felt would identify with Solnit from her own experience. In our discussion, I raised a question the article had left me with. Granted that women are faced with intellectual (and other) bullying from men. Why do they so often turn the other cheek?

    One thing I felt in reading this, is that men are more willing than women to stand their ground when their authority is challenged. Solnit documents not just male arrogance, but her own self-doubt despite her ample credentials. The female instinct to give in is the flip side of male arrogance. Where does that submissive posture come from? Biology? Social conditioning? If women had the same blind confidence in their authority as men, the world wouldn’t be a better place; but at least male arrogance would have nowhere to go without resistance.

My friend replied:

    From my experience, women have to be forced, coerced, or seduced in order to submit. They don’t, otherwise, willingly give in to authority. The wiser (and more survival-prone) response is avoidance. Women are good at avoiding distasteful situations.

I came back with more questions, which led to an exchange which is best presented as a dialogue.

    me: But is that enough? I wonder. Don’t we sometimes call that avoidance, denial, sticking one’s head in the sand?
    her: Only if the person avoiding isn’t consciously aware of what she is doing. Consciously avoiding is a perfectly good strategy for limiting damage or even death.
    me: The distasteful situation doesn’t go away simply because you’ve managed to strategically walk away from it. And the children you’ve protected will grow up into it.
    her: Yes, but they’ll be alive, and in the meantime, the situation may have changed. Think of the situation as it is today that is lived by the children of war-time German women, for example.
    me: Some things need to be confronted. Or are you saying that confrontation validates the abuse?
    her: I have to admit that I hadn’t thought of it that way. I suppose that would be true if the abuser were a masochist who was seeking a violent response. I think many abusers are really cowards, so the answer to your question, then, is, “No.”
    me: Again, I would argue that this is precisely the reason (in part) that women haven’t played the role in history that they deserve. Until they began to challenge patricarchal authority head-on, that authority could safely ignore them.
    her: I’d argue that that’s a male perspective. I think Solnit would say that the patriarchal “authority” wouldn’t hear or see them anyway.
    me: I suspect that women are much less likely than men to die in the Iraqi chaos. But the cost of this is rarely to leave the house.
    her: No, that’s the cost in Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, etc. In the “developed” world the cost is that women don’t get elected president of the country, don’t get acknowledged for the books they write, don’t get the job as CEO.
    me: When all the men have slaughtered each other, will women eat chocolates in the ruins?
    her: The Minoans managed to live quite well together. Why not try that paradigm?

The Minoans were an ancient people who lived on the Mediterranean island of Crete. They were known for their matriarchal society in which women, though not dominant in the sense that men dominate a patriarchal society, were at the center of daily life. The Minoans lived at peace with their neighbors, worshipped nature instead of an angry sky god, loved music and art, and built one of the great civilizations of the ancient world. They were eventually destroyed by the arrival of warrior peoples from the East who formed the culture of classical Greece.

I attempted to back down from the men-vs.-women dynamic I was getting into with my friend by offering a compromise.

    When you say the male authority wouldn’t hear women anyway, even if they did stand up for themselves, I think Rebecca Solnit would reply that women should learn to assert the legitimacy of their viewpoint more, just as men should learn to listen more. She said there is a large middle ground between the two extremes where we would all feel more comfortable.
    Certainly I think that women’s increased influence in society, in recent years, has had beneficial effects for men. For example, women tend to take a more holistic view of their careers, and are more willing to seek a balanced role of professional life, family life and personal interests, rather than the competition-driven model of fighting their way to the top. This has given more room for men, as well, to try career tangents, step back from the rat race, and give place to personal growth or emotional balance.

In a striking coincidence, my Moroccan friend wrote me just then with a new link on the subject of women, this time to the writings of Esther Vilar, who had a moment of fame in 1971 as the author of The Manipulated Man, a book which advances claims very much like Schopenhauer’s, namely that women are the weaker and more ignorant sex that survives by manipulating the noble intentions (or sexual desire) of men. The link presents the first chapter of the book, enough to get the flavor of Vilar’s ideas. After telling a story about a man who stops by the roadside to help a woman change her tire, Vilar comments:

    Without thinking…a woman will make use of a man whenever there is the opportunity. What else could the woman have done when her car broke down? She has been taught to get a man to help. Thanks to his knowledge, he was able to change the tire quickly—and at no cost to herself. True, he ruined his clothes, put his business in jeopardy, and endangered his own life by driving too fast afterwards. Had he found something else wrong with her car, however, he would have repaired that, too. … Why should a woman learn to change a flat tire when the opposite sex (half the world’s population) is able and willing to do it for her?
    Women let men work for them, think for them, and take on their responsibilities—in fact, they exploit them. Since men are strong, intelligent and imaginative, while women are weak, unimaginative and stupid, why isn’t it men who exploit women? … Could it be that the world is not being ruled by experts but by beings who are not fit for anything else—by women?

My friend asked me what I thought about this, and I responded by sending him the essay by Rebecca Solnit, with this explanation.

    Here’s an article that expresses a perspective on women that I agree with. It’s a feminist perspective, but not caricaturally so. I think it’s an excellent answer to all those who claim that women have the advantage because they are faking weakness and incompetence to take advantage of men. For me, this is foolish and dangerous behavior, because it encourages the male sense of superiority which is very real. For that reason, if such behavior really exists among women, a feminist would be the first to condemn it.
    My overall take on “thinking” like Esther Vilar’s is that it is simliar to the kind of anti-Islamic “thinking” that goes into works like Oriana Fallaci‘s The Rage and the Pride or Bat Ye’or‘s Eurabia—or to take another example, the kind of “thinking” that motivates people to write books questioning whether the Jewish Holocaust ever happened—in other words, more polemic than reason, a piling-on of arguments that seem exciting and convincing at first glance, an indifference to contrasting views and immunity to doubt. I guess you can see that I despise this kind of “thinking”! And I definitely put polemics justifying the view that women are biologically weak, manipulative, irrational, or intellectually inferior in this category.

I went on to explain my feelings on the “woman question” in more detail. I’m convinced that in our multifaceted, rapidly changing world, women are actually better adapted for guiding our future evolution than men. (I’d already touched on this with my female friend, when I said that women’s greater involvement in public life has improved it in many ways, adding flexiblity and balance that weren’t there before.)

    I think it’s true that throughout centuries of history until very recently, women have often manipulated men through seduction and intruigue, rather than stepping forward to perform their own accomplishments. But think about it, there’s a reason for that. Women were excluded from holding power, so they had no choice, to protect themselves and their children, but to work behind the scenes and use men as their shield. Since they didn’t have anything else that men admired, they had to use their sexual charms. This isn’t proof that women are that way—it shows their capacity to adapt in challenging conditions.
    A more healthy balance of power between men and women, as we see in the West and parts of Asia or Latin America today, proves that women can govern, excel in the sciences and the arts, engage in intellectual debate or lead corporations as well as men. There is no special compensation being given to women who achieve these things. They do it on their own merit, by the same standards as men. In fact, in some cases the obstacles are higher, and they have more to prove, because men are used to dominating and condescending, and assuming that women are shallow. But I think the female mentality is smarter and better adapted to our mulitfaceted, cooperative world—so men need to learn to be more like women and not the other way around.
    Did you know that the male Y chromosone is far less complex than the second X chromosone in women? In fact it’s decaying over time, throwing away genetic material it used to contain.
    Finally, some historians have shown that before the era of the great patriarchal religions, back in the “mists of time” before recorded history, the first intelligent humans organized themselves with women in the center, not men. These societies were more peaceful and egalitarian than those that followed. There was a major reversal around the time of the rise of the first great empires, with men becoming dominant and organizing society for war. Mythology and religion were rewritten to make women look weak. Probably the classic book about this is The Chalice and the Blade by Riane Eisler. I’ve just started reading it, and have finished the introduction. So far, it looks like Eisler is going to make the point that human evolution took a wrong turn when we started rewarding the most aggressive among us. That may have worked until now, but we’re at a critical point where humanity can no longer survive more wars and environmental destruction.

Once again, doesn’t it seem that women, with their cooperative instinct and ability to empathize with others, are better adapted to the challenges of a networked world, than men with their endless combats?


Comment from Jill
Time: June 12, 2008, 11:46

Once again, doesn’t it seem that women, with their cooperative instinct and ability to empathize with others, are better adapted to the challenges of a networked world, than men with their endless combats?

Not to mention our superior ability to multitask!

Comment from Apollo
Time: October 23, 2008, 00:16

what a rubbish post. Why is it that women’s character flaws have to be covered up with meaningless and vague terms such as “with their cooperative instinct and ability to empathize with others”?

what cooperative instinct? Many times they want the man to do things.. It’s really a vague term that’s meaningless without any context

or “ability to empathize with others”. What a bunch of bologny!! As if men are incapable of empathy? And you only give empathy when you or others deserve it, you don’t use “empathy” as an emotional tool to manipulate people and satisfy your own ego, which many women do. Women try to explain everything with just emotions, it doesn’t work, you can’t explain emotions with more emotions, you need logic and reason, something which the male mind excels at, and which the female mind is woefully inadequate

“men with their endless combats”? Which combats exactly? You mean when men have values and take issues seriously and want to know the *truth* be it in any field? Of course men are going to be in verbal combat when many others don’t want them to know the *truth*. To be a thinking person one will inevitably clash with the world, because the world doesn’t value critical cold hard thinking, the masses by and large never support critical thinking, so wise men will inevitably argue with them, something that women just aren’t made to do mentally or emotionally, women by and large follow the crowd, are more collectivist, totalitarian

and this “Jill’s” comments above are equally spurious, “our superior ability to multitask.” Like what multi-task exactly? Men have better eye-to-hand coordination, men pilots don’t crash planes all the time like female pilots, etc…

the whole state of custody, divorce, alimony, and even criminal justice law in the West only proves male superiority, by its constant and deliberate anti-male, anti-father policies. Males serve longer sentences than women for the same crimes, males pay more alimony, pay more taxes, women initiate most divorces and usually get full custody, and on and on, the anti-male envy is so obvious and blithering. The constant institutional prejudices against men in these important fields, in collusion with governments who want to buy female votes, only proves that society and women just want to parasitize off males and treat them nothing more as ‘expendable’. A return to real patriarchy would be the rid of male conscription, respect for male property rights, respect for male custody, no discrepancy with length of jail sentences with that of women of the same crime, no woman only government programs paid by men, no fault-free divorce. In short, basic rights for males. Then we’ll see who is really superior

Comment from blaine
Time: June 8, 2009, 14:13

after dealing with women in this culture, I can truly understand why men shoot their wives; north american women (especially white women) break down into two camps: there are the sociopaths – and then there are the idiots. The tragedy is that, the higher up you go, the more manipulative, deceitful, dangerous and pernicious the women become; the women in my life who were the most distasteful, venal, vindictive and untrustworthy all had PhDs from well-regarded schools. When you get right down to it, I fully appreciate why more and more men are dating and marrying women from other parts of the world: we don’t need the bullshit; we don’t need the mind-games; we don’t need the manipulation or veiled threats; we don’t need the emotional histrionics – and we don’t need the entitled princesses. Guys, women are usually pigs – but the worst pigs of all are to be found in western Europe and North America

stay away from ’em and look elsewhere; you will be much happier and you will live longer

by the way, women are far worse human beings than are men: most women treat their children like shit and use them for the baby bonuses, to gratify their own ego, or as a weapon against a spouse; I mean, what kind of fucking creature can go to the floor insisting that she has a constitutional right to flush her children down the toilet?

C’mon, women surrendered the moral high ground a long, long time ago

Comment from Henrik
Time: July 18, 2009, 22:49

Women in general are psi-vampires who suck the male energia.They are lethal.Bringers of death.All wars are started by women.The feared
Illuminati is also governed by a coven of mad and bloodthirsty witches.

Comment from eatbees
Time: July 20, 2009, 12:32

Henrik, it’s weird that this post has attracted so many comments from men who have serious issues with women as a group. I didn’t even know there were such men out there. Thanks, I guess :(

Comment from doodad
Time: August 15, 2009, 02:45

Obviously, eatbees is a female and does not have one iota of humor in her. The thing is, women claim superiority on so many fronts, yet it is women who always need help from a paternalistic society. Women cannot make it on their own, so they suck at society’s teat, and if they do succeed, they don’t want to give anything back in return (in the form of what they take). People of both genders have good and bad, but as Apollo alludes to in his post, women aren’t held accountable for anything, so in our sorry media, one only hears about the “great” women do, and not the bad. I am happy that people are finally seeing through the social experiment of “equality” when we all know that men and women aren’t even close to being equal.

Comment from eatbees
Time: August 16, 2009, 08:29

doodad, actually I’m a guy, I’m just not in your elite fraternity of guys who hate women :)

Comment from Jean
Time: August 16, 2009, 14:11

Most American women are parasitic – they suck men dry and give nothing in exchange. They can’t cook and they can’t clean. Bad for USA men, very bad… sorry for you men in USA…..

Comment from Stu
Time: August 31, 2009, 20:27

I have to agree, women are parasites. I have had 3 wives. I’ve worked hard all my life, like a slave, yet the most prosperous time in my life, was the 6 years I spent as a single guy in my own place. It’s the only time I ever lived in a neat, clean junk free home too. Not only did I work more hours when with women, I saved and accumulated less assets, and then found that what I had was considered not mine but theirs. If they are our equals, how come a guy with a year ten education, half deaf, with a ruined back, can get by and save and accumulate more money and assets when left to myself then all the office dwelling female parasites that I know, and how come I don’t need any assistance even when I was raising my son by myself. How come even though I got custody of my son that I didn’t get all the shit that goes with it if your female, how come nobody gives a rats about a child if it is living in a single parent household if the single parent is male. Because women are inferior, thats why…..they need to feed of everyone else because they can’t make it on their own. If you can’t see that your blind.

Comment from Stu
Time: August 31, 2009, 20:37

Women’s rights never came with responsibility, and although women have entered the workforce in droves and most women work now, they are involved in work that produces nothing mostly. Just look out your window, see all those buildings, roads, footpaths, electricity supply, water supply, everything. Men done it all, from mining and processing the materials, building, maintaining, you can hardly point at anything that is not a direct result of male work and male innovation. Lets face it girls, men took the human race from the caves to the moon before you jumped on the bandwagon. When all work was gut busting, boring, dangerous, and poorly paid…..most of human history in other words………you women didn’t want to be part of the work force…….content to stay home…, and looked after…… only wanted equality once male innovation had created safe cushy jobs……and you only wanted equality in that…….not in the mines….or the construction industry……or transport industry……or any of the gut busting dirtly stinking jobs that keep our civilisation going.

Comment from Nour
Time: November 16, 2009, 01:54

Looked after? men built civilization? Wait a minute, how old are you? You think that women don’t work when they care for a baby? who fed you? who made sure you were safe when you were 3 months , 9 months, 2 years and 5 years old? Even at home, Women work harder than men: they work longer hours and they don’t get paid. Men kept construction going..that is not civilization…they used mostly slaves to start with: who build the Pantheon? that’s civilization!? oh well, you guys dissing women are just a waste of time and so completely uncivilized

Comment from eatbees
Time: November 16, 2009, 09:46

Thanks Nour! I’ve been wondering where these guys come from. Are they lurking everywhere in the shadows, waiting for someone to say something nice about women, then they jump out to attack?

These reactions surprised me. I’d forgotten there were people with this point of view. It’s instructive, I guess. Masculine ignorance and insecurity still exist, even though I know longer know guys like this personally!

Comment from ithil
Time: December 24, 2009, 12:40

Pick up a HIStory book and you’ll see nearly every huMAN accomplishment of note has been the work of a man or of a group of men. Women, collectively, have in the past seldom been able to distinguish themselves as anything more than a womb with legs. It’s no surprise that the gynocentric vagina worshipers you’ve quoted as “proof” of your female supremacist nonsense spend so much time trying to rewrite history with themselves at the center. Women simply cannot legitimately claim to have been nearly so important – or necessary – to human progress as men, and this FACT must be erased from view before any advancement of the rabid uterus worshiper world view is possible. There was no gynocentric/matriarchal past. That is a fiction invented by women who knew that, if they wanted to portray themselves as being the centerpieces of human history, they’d have to lie to do it. The whole idea is so crazy and so counter-productive that it has been disavowed by feminists themselves. Read Cynthia Eller’s “The Myth of Matriarchal Prehistory: Why An Invented Past Will Not Give Women a Future” and see for yourself what a disservice such nonsense stories do both to the truth and to your own self-interest:

Amazon,com link:

New York Times book review with excerpt from chapter 1:

Woman haven’t been nearly so important a piece of the human condition as you want to believe. That may change, but only if they step up to the plate and actually work to make themselves relevant the way men have always done. Women who choose to forgo such action in favor of staring into their own vagina’s in a self-satisfied quest to invent and imagine their own gyno-friendly reality will certainly never accomplish anything more than continuing the tradition of female irrelevance. You think misogynists are afraid of people like you? No, they love you. Women who think like you are too divorced from reality and too full of their own nonsense to ever accomplish anything of real merit in the real world. Dream your silly little dreams of female superiority, dearies – they won’t matter to anybody but you.

Comment from Albert
Time: April 28, 2010, 20:42

Women only demanded “equality” after all the heavy lifting was done by men. I still don’t see women lining up to take any of the dirty or dangerous jobs like coal miner, construction worker, fire fighter, soldiers in combat, etc. They only want the safe, cushy jobs. Equality? who do they think they’re kidding. Men made the mistake of supporting equality for women without demanding anything from them in exchange.

Comment from Zipzap
Time: May 23, 2010, 10:10

Your post is bang-on. Women ARE parasites.

As proof, I offer the following: Better than 70% of the time, women initiate divorce, and in the vast majority of cases, they initiate it because, like the immature, spoiled creatures they are, they got bored with their spouses and couldn’t lift a finger to try to resolve their boredom. Or they saw a Bigger, Better Deal (BBD) out there and decided to kick their husbands to the curb in favor of the BBD.

This kind of behavior is entirely consistent with the way parasitic organisms behave. When the host no longer provides sustenance, or it has been drained dry, or a new host appears to provide even more favorable conditions for the parasite, it vacates and moves to infest the new host.

The sad part is that our justice, er, legal system, and so-called family courts reward and protect women who engage in this kind of behavior, because it feeds other classes of parasites – lawyers, cops, judges, social workers, psychologists, psychiatrists and children’s aid workers, and all sorts of other hangers-on who depend on the continuation of the destructive, pointless and un-necessary divorce industry.

It’s funny seeing how women insist that they are fully equal to men in every sphere, but the minute you demand that they demonstrate, without government help, that they are indeed equal, they run for the hills.

This too, is evidence of parasitism. By definition, parasites take, take, and give nothing back. When you try to get a parasite to reciprocate, the parasite sees this as a threat to its survival and promptly exits the scene.

Comment from whatever
Time: May 25, 2010, 21:36

Holy shit! What a bunch of assholes. wow, so many reasons why I don’t bother dating anymore!

Comment from eatbees
Time: May 26, 2010, 06:17

whatever — Obviously you are a parasite, and you’ve stopped dating because you no can longer get anything from these guys who are too smart for your clever tricks ;)

But seriously, I don’t know why this post is like honey for these flies. If it hadn’t been for their comments here, I wouldn’t have imagined such views still existed in this world.

Comment from John
Time: June 15, 2010, 20:54

Such views do still exist in the world, because women who do exactly what is being described by these (obviously bitter) men still exist also.

Not all women, but enough so plenty of guys feel this way. I wish it weren’t true, but it is. Many women are self-satisifed without justification, demand a high standard of living without contributing to it, and run for the hills the moment the guy they’ve been living off has enough and demands that they become the equal partner they claim to want to be.

Again, not all women, by any means. Not even most, in fact. But a substantial enough minority to give the rest a bad name.

Comment from smile
Time: September 29, 2010, 09:58

I agree women are parasyte,i am single not married,i am interested in women yes only their body,i use them and kick them,none of them will i merry with since they are worthless,like my brother the victim of woman,being slave of his queen like wife.women are sinner,the more women were born over men mean the end is near.

Comment from Ross
Time: January 10, 2011, 18:38

I got married, had kids, she divorced me (over her family problems with parents… no cheating or anything I did) then she used the family law system as the engine of her parasitic revenge to extract all the assets and alimony she could from me (and still is) – many women do this. They are vindictive little children with little or no pride who choose not to take care of themselves… never taking accountability for their actions. I’ve spent years looking for one who isn’t this way… I’ve been through a lot and so far no diamonds in the rough (i.e., exceptions to the rule). It’s too bad women refuse to do it on their own, they are capable, but just plain lazy and choose not to.

Comment from SalaciousCrumb
Time: June 3, 2011, 00:27

I know that this is an older post, but I still wanted to comment.

eatbees said this:
“But seriously, I don’t know why this post is like honey for these flies. If it hadn’t been for their comments here, I wouldn’t have imagined such views still existed in this world.”

You must live in a very insular world. Men are not born as misogynists like the ones who have commented here. Misogynists are made by women. These men are only reacting to the interactions they have had with American women. Everyday, more American men become misogynists because of how they are treated by these women. If you believe that this is some type of dying sentiment, then you are completely out of touch with what is going on. Women have been poisioning the well male/female relationships for the past 40 years. Don’t think for a second that there won’t be any repurcussions for this behavior.

Comment from Andrew
Time: August 1, 2011, 01:22

True, modern women ARE parasites. They keep claiming that they are victims in order to reap benefits they don’t deserve. If any women would like to counterargue my point, please explain to me why women can have WAY lower sucide rate, lower substance abuse rate, lower premature death rate, lower crime rate, lower chance of being murdered or assaulted, and overall lower incidence of mental of physcial disorder. The VAST MAJORITY of index that measure happiness don’t support the notion that women are oppressed, and these are true in ALMOST ALL parts of the world.

Regarding male arrogance, I have a point. Is women’s opinion truly worth listening? Well, the fact is, it seems that most things that make sense from their point of view make very little sense when evaluated with logics or reasons.
Just take the women who post comments here as an example. The MAJORITY of them are simply using shaming tactics as a way to assert their points, and logics tell us that it make NO SENSE to argue in this way. Quite frankly, I don’t think you can blame men for acting “arrogant” if they find it usually useless to listen to women.
If women truly wish to deal with “male arrogance”, it would be better for them to think about their own argumentative style first. True, not all women are like what I have described, but it seems that the overwhelming majority of them are.

Comment from saintluger
Time: August 28, 2016, 16:10

this is all you’ll ever need to read:

they’re weak parasites indeed with the shit they pull.

Comment from kathleen
Time: November 5, 2019, 10:41

As I’m finishing Plutarch’s Lives I became curious about what Plato, Socrates and Aristotle had to say about women. This is how I happened on mr. eatbee’s interesting Women: Parasites or Saviors? Never made a comment to any blog before but I’m compelled!
I am a 66 year old woman who left home at 17 before my mother’s husband finished beating me to death. This man worked my mother for sixty hours/week to pay his gambling debts. After fourteen years of marriage, he left her destitute when he went into hiding from a gambling mafia, and took his secret mistress with him.
Bill Younger was the paramount parasite.
Following my escape came a scholarship to OU, a degree, and a marriage to a medical student who proceeded to bully me out of my mind. Next came another marriage and a son with a man who had sex with my friends (or the other way around).
All the while, I ALWAYS supported myself, even while nursing and caring for my little child. I ALWAYS worked longer days than my frivolous second husband. I often made more money.
The construction industry possibly interested me because my mother’s husband, Bill Younger, destroyed everything he touched. I wanted to know how to build and repair stuff. In 1977, I entered an all-male workforce and was constantly hazed and sexually harassed by men. It was BRUTAL. But, much of construction can be performed by one hundred pound people such as myself, so I persisted and learned to wire, plumb, build and cobble despite my aggressive, angry coworkers. Eventually, I designed and built solar houses for myself and others, which I’ve done now since 1987.
When I come on my job sites now I’m treated with respect because DINOSAURS like the men who’ve here voiced such snarling dislike for women are DYING OUT. They are being replaced by a different kind of young man—and by women. My young goddaughter is now becoming an electrician, for instance, and though she is very beautiful, she is not harassed on the job.
My hunky, gentle husband of the last four years is a retired philosophy professor, and universally respected by both men and women. He is nothing like my other two husbands or any of you awful male writers. He’s not angry, domineering or aggressive. He’s not unfaithful (the main reason women file for divorce, guys). He is strong, brave and true: all the best human qualities, and ones I’ve particularly admired in men. When I was young I couldn’t find anyone like him. It seems they were in short supply at the time. Culture is evolving.
The reason you guys find women who are parasites—and there are PLENTY—is because you are jerks. That’s all you can get, and you are all they can get. You jerks and parasites keep sticking together, okay? You deserve one another.
What smart, enterprising, hard working, honest, faithful woman would have anything to do with you contributors to violence, paranoia and disrespect? And hey, I just had another thought: are you all Incels?

Testosterone seems to have created a violent, aggressive human world. It’s true that men did all the terrible work (so far) in making almost everything—-and I’m deeply grateful. (Women were busy dying in childbirth, a trade-off given much credit and respect by ancient Spartan men.) Maybe women can’t compete in the world you’ve made because of our tiny little bit of testosterone. (Men daily make 20X the testosterone made by women.) But, I don’t want to compete, anyhow. I want to cooperate, and the changing world has made that a lot easier.
So much more to say but I’ll quit here because I want to read more of mr. eatbees’ output on other subjects. Maybe I’ll be moved to make my second comment on a blog!
ps You may notice from my email address that I also managed to be a self-supporting painter.

Write a comment