Right Wing Fighter

Month: October, 2016

Women and the Manosphere

According to the Manosphere, most women want a hulking He-man as the object of their affections, rather than an essentially normal man.

The idea is that they say they want a normal, responsible man. But in reality they are bursting at the seams, on the inside, for Conan the Barbarian to unleash them from their civilized behavior.

This is wrong.

There are some indecent, absurd women who want nothing more than a barbarian to have wild fits of passion with. But they aren’t large in number.

The most notable error of the Manosphere – and it is an error repeated literally everywhere in modern society today – is to take a single rule and apply it to all members of a particular group.



The fact is this: there are women who want He-man. But there are also women who like spindly rock stars who look like they’re on starvation diets. How does this fit into the Manosphere’s conception of the female mind?

It doesn’t.

The fact is, the Manosphere is just another ideological group with its One Big Idea that explains all of a particular section of life.

In this case, it’s supposed to explain male-female relations.

The basis of their philosophy is strength. The idea is that, evolutionarily speaking, the strongest survive. Thus women are supposed to want the strongest men in order to protect them, this being a holdover from the days when men are supposed to have wrestled with dinosaurs.

On the flip side of this evolutionary tale, men are supposed to want women with great looking bodies because they are supposed to be the best candidates for reproduction.

This all falls flat, however, in the face of experience.

The fact is, most everyone wants a spouse who looks great. But almost all of us value certain qualities more than appearance.

I, for example, wouldn’t mind marrying a model. But there are qualities that I will not sacrifice just for the sake of looks.

The same is true of women. Most women would like a strong, powerful man. But at bottom, this isn’t important to most women.

It’s like buying a car: you’d like an attractive one: but the most important, non-negotiable point is that it runs.

We’ve all seen mediocre looking couples who have lived very happy lives together. This is because looks were something likeable, but not important.

The Manosphere, like all groups and individuals promising dating advice, have merely cornered one section of the dating market. Having done so, they then treat that one, small section of the market as if it’s the entire market.

This is false.

There are many different kinds of people in the world, all wanting different things. Not to be trite, but there really is a woman out there for every man, because there are parallel sections of desires on both sides of the human race. Put another way, there are males and females who both want the same thing.

Thus the He-man routine of some men will work with a certain kind of cheap woman.

So to, the stable, normal life of the normal man will find its parallel in a certain kind of woman.

The mistake of the Manosphere is the mistake of all ideologues: they try to fit the entire panoply of human relational goals into one tiny box.

More People Backing onto the Trump Train

About ten minutes ago I was listening to a local radio host – a pretty big wheel in local politics.

Apparently someone called her call-screener and cussed him out because the host now supports Trump.

The host said that of course she supports Trump: otherwise Hillary Clinton will become president.

Now, this is from a woman who, about a year ago, maligned all of Trump’s supporters as dupes who were carried away by his slogan and rhetoric. She even said that his supporters, myself included, would continue to support Trump even if, quote, “A dead hooker was found in his trunk.”

She assailed Trump’s character endlessly. Far from merely questioning his motives, she positively stated that Trump’s campaign was just a “fling:” it meant nothing to Trump, but was just an outlet for his ego.

Now, after all the attacks, both on him and his business, it is plain that this is false. Trump is in it for the country. No one would endure such attacks for a mere flight of fancy. Has this woman recanted? No.

And then, today, she patronizingly puts down a critic by saying that of course she supports Trump.

This host will not be taken to task for her unjustified attacks on Trump. She will not be held to account for damaging his reputation for over a year, before finally, a month before the election, she decided to support him. And why is that? Because politics is pure expediency. Politicians make friends with yesterday’s enemies if it means they’ll get their support on election day.

Politics is an arena: everyone is looking for an edge in battle. As such, justice is always sacrificed. No one will expend political points to follow-up on unjust attacks.

Thus there is no justice in politics. Only expediency.


And as an extra note, here’s an extract from my post “Anti-Trump Folks Backing onto the Trump Train“:

When things start getting hot, election-wise; when November starts getting close, many anti-Trump folks are going to start talking about how we’ve “got to stop Hillary from getting elected. Oh I’m not saying we should vote for Trump: I’m saying we should vote against Hillary!”