Matt Forney
Spread the Word!

No Girls Allowed

breastfeedingsoldiers

I don’t talk about my family much for various reasons, but I have to mention this one story.

The week after my failed attempt to gain entry to the Great White North, my mom informed me that she’d been reading my blog. (My family knows about what I’m doing, and my stats prove it.) At one point, she told me that I was coming off as “bitter” and that I should be “funnier.”

“Mom, I am being funny. Am I being too subtle for you?”

“I just think your blog would be more appealing if you didn’t seem so angry.”

“Well, I’m not writing for you. I’m writing for guys my age.”

I meant it, too.

This is not a blog for middle-aged hausfraus.

This is not a blog for hippie burnout retirees.

This is not a blog for arrogant, twentysomething girls majoring in fluff subjects.

This is a blog for young men.

My mother was just doing what most women do: trying to trespass in a male space where she does not belong.

One of the most disastrous and ignored consequences of feminism is the destruction of male-only spaces. Whether it’s golf clubs, fraternities or video games, whenever a group of men get together to do something, women either want to shut them down or force their way in. You’ll notice that this never goes the other way. Men generally have no desire to invade or destroy female-only spaces. I’m never going to set foot in a lesbian bar or join Oprah’s book club. Yet every male space, from the Augusta National to the military, is considered EVIL! MISOGYNISTIC! PATRIARCHAL! if it doesn’t immediately open its doors to the fairer sex.

Which is a problem, because there are very good reasons for keeping women out of male spaces, and it has nothing to do with “protecting” them.

When a woman intrudes on a gang of men (a gang in the Jack Donovan sense), the entire group dynamic changes for the worse, both due to the woman’s own actions and due to how the men react to her. The most obvious problem is that the men will start competing to fuck her, fucking each other over in the process. There’s nothing like the (faint, dim) prospect of getting some action to turn a bunch of loyal comrades into a backstabbing gaggle of white knights. Just look at the American military; now that women are allowed to serve in the same units as men, fraternization is widespread and screwing with our boys’ ability to do their jobs.

That’s bad enough, but the real reason why women should be barred from male spaces is because they wreck them.

Whenever a woman joins a male gang, she immediately demands that its rules be rewritten to suit her. Whereas the gang was once single-handedly focused on its goals, women introduce stupid and unnecessary rules that retard progress and inhibit the group from accomplishing its tasks. Wherever they go, whatever they do, women want the world to cater to them and their desire to not have their feeeeelings hurt.

Case in point: political correctness, the castration of language for the sole purpose of not (possibly) offending people.

Political correctness is not only nonexistent in male spaces, it’s completely alien. In a gang, men freely speak the truth without worrying whether or not it will offend their comrades. They aren’t needlessly dickish or antagonistic, but they don’t sugarcoat anything either. There’s a reason for this: not being direct can not only cause the gang to fail in its mission, but get everyone killed. Contrast this with female spaces. Women are generally indirect and beat around the bush; openly attacking or criticizing someone is a big no-no.

Political correctness exists for one and one reason only: women. Specifically, it exists because women have increasing political power, poisoning our discourse with tactics designed to protect peoples’ feeeelings. You can’t call them “blacks” anymore, now it’s “African-Americans.” Midgets are “little people.” Turd-wor—whoops, I mean third-world countries are “developing countries.” Fat women are “plus-size.” Language itself is used as a weapon to make pretty lies out of ugly truths:

An inflexible, authoritarian, shout-them-down tendency is often said to be a feature of PC-think generally. PC-driven marches and protests (on campuses for example ) typically are meant not to broaden a discourse but, rather, to repel or suppress an unwanted speaker — much as a mother, without any pretense of democracy or debate, would try to protect her children from an unwanted influence. (“Because I said so!”)

Women consider their feeeelings to be sacrosanct and inviolable, even more so than the truth. They value the sizzle more than the steak. You can get most women to believe or do the most ridiculous, repugnant things so long as you tell them in a way that they find pleasing. (Yes, there are men like this too, but far fewer women than men are capable of truly independent thought.) Conversely, women will recoil from the truth if it offends them. Go back to what my mom said. She didn’t say that I was wrong, she said that I was bitter. She wasn’t concerned with the factual content of my blog, she was concerned with the emotional state that my writing style instilled in her.

I’m reminded of when Roosh commented on the torrent of hate he got for writing Don’t Bang Denmark: “They’re not saying I’m wrong, they’re just saying I’m lame.”

And of course, the idea that women are largely responsible for both our welfare state and the police state has been beaten to death already. A quick reminder: Prohibition came about because of women. The temperance movement was founded and led by women like Carrie Nation, a psychotic bitch who ran around smashing bars with a hatchet.

The other problem with women who enter male gangs is that they are massively entitled. In a gang, every man occupies a particular role or niche because he’s earned the right to be there. Some men are natural leaders, some are fighters, some are thinkers and so on. The point is that those men are there because they’ve worked to get to where they are; there is a natural hierarchy of ability, a meritocracy. Women shit all over this meritocracy because they always want to cut to the front of the line.

Despite the fact that they’re in a man’s world, they want to keep playing by the rules of a woman’s world, where everyone is equal and they all get accolades just for being alive.

This is plainly obvious when you see feminists crying about the “pay gap,” the lack of women in CEO or management positions in major corporations, and whatnot. They fantasize about an “old boys club” keeping them down, when the reality is far more mundane: women earn less than men because they take lower-paying jobs and they’re more prone to take time off or quit outright for personal reasons (such as having children). You may hear about women supposedly earning the majority of college degrees, but the majority of those degrees are in worthless or marginal subjects like English, speech therapy or Canadian Studies. The majority of useful degrees (in math or the hard sciences) are still going to men.

And like I said already, there aren’t many woman roustabouts out here in Fracking Country.

But this kind of entitlement is also enabled by men. I hate to pick on the MRA losers again, but they’re exceptionally prone to this kind of pussy worship. Enter Girl Writes What, a fairly interesting MRA who makes fairly interesting videos:

I have nothing against Girl Writes What, but let’s be honest: no one would give two shits about her if she was a man. There’s precious little she’s saying that no MRA hasn’t said already. But because her genitals don’t dangle, suddenly these brave and courageous MRAs swarm around her and praise her to the heavens. Men who come up with interesting new ideas and concepts get ignored; women who parrot Men’s Rights 101 are treated like the second coming of Jesus.

Scroll back up to the top of this page. That picture of military moms breastfeeding in uniform caused a stir when it was published last summer for a reason no one wants to articulate: it represents the complete capitulation of a previously all-male space to female whims. Just read this howler from one of the moms:

“There isn’t a policy saying we can or cannot breast-feed in uniform,”  Echegoyen-McCabe says. “I think it’s something that every military mom who is breast-feeding has done. … I think we do need to be able to breast-feed in uniform and be protected.”

She thinks she should “be protected.” Lady, you’re a soldier. You’re supposed to be protecting us. I don’t think you can do that very well if you’ve got your tits hanging out to feed your crying womb-turds. Terran Echegoyen-McCabe is a living argument for barring women from joining the military as anything other than nurses or secretaries. She doesn’t care about how unprofessional she looks or how her actions reflect on her comrades, because it’s all about her. She and her fellow travelers are narcissists who will destroy everything around them to satisfy their egos.

Are the Russians or Chinese going to be intimidated by these photos? Is Echegoyen-McCabe going to rush into battle to defend us with her rifle in one hand and her baby in the other?

This is why I don’t care what women think, with a few exceptions (who know who they are), and those exceptions only exist because they’re earned my respect. My blog doesn’t explicitly bar women, but it doesn’t invite them either. If you’re a woman and you’re offended by what I write, feel free to suck my dick because I don’t fucking care. You don’t belong here, any more than I belong in a knitting circle.

It’s time for men to reclaim their spaces from invasive, narcissistic and solipsistic women.

This is the manosphere, emphasis on the “man.” Ladies, unless you’re young, attractive and serving drinks, you’re probably in the wrong part of town.

Read Next: The Way of Men by Jack Donovan

  • Pingback: Lightning Round – 2012/10/10 « Free Northerner()

  • Pingback: LIGFY – Oct 14 | Society of Amateur Gentlemen()

  • Pingback: Great Articles from around the Manosphere | Illusion of Sanity()

  • Didn’t even notice the girls in the picture were in uniform until I read your commentary. My focus went directly for the goods, then making sure my co-workers didn’t see my screen.

    “When a woman intrudes on a gang of men (a gang in the Jack Donovan sense), the entire group dynamic changes for the worse, both due to the woman’s own actions and due to how the men react to her.”

    So true, which is why I really enjoyed the meetings nights in my fraternity. No girls around, just guys hanging out not worrying about anything except having fun and giving each other shit. Feel like pissing in the trash can? Go ahead. Feel like using words like “cunt” and “faggot” without worrying about the headache of offended girls regurgitating what they just read on huffpost or some other similar outlet? No problem. Good post.

  • FrJanos

    You are right about the problem with feMRAs. When women intrude the ranks of antifeminists they do the same as anywhere else – why would they do differently.

    And yet the MRAs still have a very good reason to cheer for them: becouse they give legitimation to the movement. You can say that you don’t welcome women on your blog but then it’s very easy for the mainstream media to write off the manosphere as “a dark corner of the internet full of misogynists” – as they actually do, sometimes with exactly these words. Of course that’s not really a concern if you don’t seek mainstream approval. But the MRAs do. And in todays feminized society they absolutly must co-opt women to get it. Having women in their ranks also helps discrediting the accusations of misogyny.

    Btw, this is kind of similar to the case of male feminists. Most feminist women don’t like them. Some even hate them. But they know they need them to legitimize their movement. (And also to actually get shit done.)

  • Chaos

    “My mother was just doing what most women do: trying to trespass in a male space where she does not belong.”
    *gasp*
    And here I thought she was merely showing interest in her son’s activities, giving honest feedback and showing basic human concern over the emotional well-being of her child!
    … Yeah. You sound bitter. It impedes the illusion of objectivity you are trying to uphold.