Shaming into submission
It is all the rage on social media to shame a man for not complying with the demands of women, but it is nothing new. Ever since the sexual revolution (if not earlier), men have been expected to be, or shamed into the role of, a plowhorse - be it through being brought up by a single mother, or being taught by female teachers - the majority of whom are either single or divorced. And of course, who can forget the sitcoms airing on TV?
The man’s only role is sacrificial; sacrificial for the benefit of "societal progress" - by which they mean that of women. Look at welfare for instance: most of it is used as handouts to single mothers. Almost every political stance involves some female group needing further advancement or accommodation. Man's health, wealth and time must all be spent to make everything on this planet as comfortable as possible for women.
Men need to make books and movies and TV shows appeal to women, and if these don't end up being successful for some reason, it is men’s fault. Their misogyny stopped those from succeeding.
Men need to make room in the workplace for women to grow; yet when the company fails, it is because of lack of cooperation from men.
Woman makes a bad choice in men and bears his child; but when she ends up single and the child fatherless, that's because no man was man enough to step up and save them from their cruel fate.
Woman needs to get to know a man before sleeping with him; yet when a man wants a low-investment first date to get to know her over a drink, she doesn't feel appreciated enough. Why wouldn't he take me out to dinner? Why would a woman like me even waste my time with a man who doesn't want to invest as soon as possible?
Keep reading with a 7-day free trial
Subscribe to Jack Napier to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.