This is a response to a recent New York Times article by Jean Garnett titled “The Trouble With Wanting Men.” The subtitle says it all: “Women are so fed up with dating men that the phenomenon even has a name — heterofatalism.
Garnett's bad attitude will result in men walking away from her. Or, that may already have happened, and she is just venting about it, by blaming men for everything.
Great post, Tom. I read that NYT article a day or two after reading the Jessica Grose one about the "overblown" boy crisis, and I couldn't help but see a thread connecting the two. I also felt sad and disappointed.
Jean Garnett is a nasty skank. She left her husband to chase the tingles with another man. Hey Jean, maybe the problem isn't men. Maybe the problem is that you an old ugly woman who is shooting for men out of your league. Go for men in your own attractiveness range and you'd find one who would put in some effort. Your prime days are past you. It's time you developed a healthy acceptance of where your station in life really is
"About half of that income gap in both Australia and Germany was due to men working long hours and women effectively subsidising them to do this by cutting back their own work hours."
When in reality it is the men who subsidise women to work part-time or not at all.
No, no, no. You have to start from the premise that whatever it is, it is the fault of men. Feminism says so, as one of the three pillars of its foundational belief. Now you can re-write anything and it's only a matter of working out in what way in any particular instance this is shown.
It often leads to hilarious results like that article you pointed to. Hilarious if you have the training and experience to not be affected by the deliberate propaganda aspect of it. Hilarious if you put aside the collective effect of insidious drips of such propaganda upon society.
ChatGPT (not entirely reliable) includes these comments upon the article when asked to rate the article for the propaganda aspect inherent in it, regardless of what the actual content is:
🧩 Inferred Intent
While the article presents as reporting on research, its primary rhetorical function is advocacy for structural change in work–life balance culture, framed through a gender equity lens. The use of academic data serves more to legitimise a normative conclusion than to neutrally inform the reader.
🛠️ Would a trained propagandist write it this way?
Yes, albeit subtly. The piece employs mid-grade rhetorical control: consistent voice, emotionally palatable, intellectually credentialled, lacking adversarial tone — but still deploying narrative closure and moral framing to shape reader opinion.
Sorry, but I gave up on empathy with those bitches. Just what was I supposed to feel after being thrown into the street penniless and with no place to sleep at night? And being referred to a shelter when the dyke in charge said, "We don't give shelters to men." As far as I'm concerned, they owe me; I owe them nothing but contempt, hatred, and wishing that they would face a firing squad because that's actually kinder than what they imposed on me. For those who tell me to go to therapy, let me say this and don't forget it: THERAPY DOES NOT ERASE MEMORIES OF BEING ABUSED AND THROWN INTO THE STREET!!! Anyone born with a strong memory like mine knows that after suffering something of that magnitude, the damage has been done and there is no way to heal from wounds that big. The fact that my children still love me and say I was not treated fairly shows that I wasn't the monster that feminazis will claim that I am -- they're just the pot calling the kettle black! I gave up on fairness in life after so many decades of unforgiving abuse, so why am I supposed to pretend that it didn't happen to me? Sorry, anyone who calls me a liar is the real liar; I have a reputation for being "painfully honest," and at 73 years of age, I'd say that's how I will remain. The crazy ones are the ones who think I can have all those memories blocked in my memory; having been cursed with a powerful memory has not made life easier to tolerate, but I've survived somehow and I will make the best of the time that I have left.
I’d propose that women communicate to be heard and relate. Men communicate to understand, solve, and find a conclusion. So the problem with dating is just as you suggested, a two-way street of jacked up, messy individuals trying their best.
She can’t understand why he wants to speak with brevity and end the conversation. He can’t understand why she wants to say things in circles, like she’s talking just to be talking.
We are just different. This can be viewed as beautiful, when looking through the right lens.
All very true. Perhaps we should recognize two sides of the same truth. Men are Good...and Women are NOT which is why they can't seem to work with Good Men.
The phrase, what goes around comes around comes to mind. Women as a group completely lack self awareness. It's time that mirror mirror on the wall...starting letting down some wanna be princesses about where the problems in our society really come from.
So the basic surmise is: women have desires and it is mens fault that they are not being met!!
There is a huge disconnect between reality and idealogical desires.
We saw this in Janice Fiamengo's videos when the Groups of women (and sometimes men) were screaming at her and hating her while accusing her of 'hate speech'... huge disconnects that one has to wonder if such behaviour is actually pathological - especially when it is on going!!
Huge disconnect between: Feminists wanting equality and for women not to be treated as sexual objects (but, exclude the advertisements for products made for women and sexualised in the advertisement but not protested against!),
and,
rational women with desires and who want their pussies stroked by men and happen to love it !!!
There is little evidence to support "Feminists wanting equality". Last I looked around a good sampling of many feminist organisations, they mentioned equality, if at all, in terms of wanting "equality for women" which translates inevitably into "gaining the advantages men have without losing the advantages women have" — and that is not equality.
Lately, however, the phrase used by the internationalist Marxists who steer what feminism is around the world is not 'equality' but 'equity'. That allows for men's continual disparagement and disadvantage because of skewed concepts of historical female disadvantage hundreds or thousands of years ago.
oh I know that the feminists don't want equality...
addition: many sites have very hidden wording.. I think you and we all know this or soon work it out.. they use Gender rather than 'female/women' as if trying to cover up their real intensions but that becomes obvious is one looks thoroughly through their website....
A very iconic, true, genuine and powerful quote. For some reason feminism and feminist forgot to adopt this philosophy into their paradigm of equality and lost it on accountability road right to misandry lane.
To truly be equal like modern women claim they are. They also have to be equally accountable for all their actions. Including blaming all men for what they’ve conjured up in a gender war they started, their incompetency’s, inadequacy’s and misunderstandings of reason and logic. You open one door. You must open another. If you blame all men, then you must also (especially under the guise of equality) blame all women as well. However, men know and have become very aware within the last 30+ years of this draconian feminism. Accountability is kryptonite to women.
Radical Feminists hate men Misandrist women have ruined feminism God help our sons and grandsons fathers and uncles in this hateful world Not all women and men are good in the real world
But this horrible agenda brought in by the UN Marxist Socialist radical left is just nasty 🤮 They want to divide us Don’t let them
Well written and presented. Of course little to none of what you've presented will be enacted. Women are highly neuroticism and encouraged by modern gynocentric and misandrist society (thanks to feminism of various guises and socialism) and culture to be narcissistic, manipulative, coercive, dishonest and have zero empathy for men and by extensions boys, who are considered and treated as defective girls and the later as disposable ATMs, emitional tampons, scratch posts and kitty litters. Modern women are inculcated and indoctrinated to be selfish, conceited, whorish, sado-masochistic sybiarites and nihilists. Is it any wonder that demographics and society is collapsing under the weight of it all, not to mention that the usual girl-boss/feminazis are almost always in the lead for extolling the alleged virtues and whatever fad is going or being promoted at the moment. Men conceptualise, create, build, protect and where necessary sacrifice. Women control, manipulate, consume and eventually denigrate and destroy. The whole concept of women, their natures, rolls and what they actually are, needs to be re-evaluated with wide open eyes . The same also need to be done with men. Good luck with all the above, it probably isn't going to happen, at least not any time soon. If it does, God alone knows what the results will be?
Such a well-written and argued article, Tom, thank you 🙏
I occasionally return to re-read Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars: An Introductory Programing Manual Original. It describes everything that's happened since the 80s. I'm sure the completely contradictory feminist and woke narratives were an update to these occult strategies.
I'm feeling that I'm too outspoken about my views, but I've paid a high price for the fact that I wasn't born with a vagina. I'm detecting sentiments that are not favorable, so I will probably not participate any more. I detected earlier that I was being told to remain silent; now I'm convinced that is the case, so having an unwanted intruder out of the picture won't be disturbing.
Garnett's bad attitude will result in men walking away from her. Or, that may already have happened, and she is just venting about it, by blaming men for everything.
Great post, Tom. I read that NYT article a day or two after reading the Jessica Grose one about the "overblown" boy crisis, and I couldn't help but see a thread connecting the two. I also felt sad and disappointed.
Jean Garnett is a nasty skank. She left her husband to chase the tingles with another man. Hey Jean, maybe the problem isn't men. Maybe the problem is that you an old ugly woman who is shooting for men out of your league. Go for men in your own attractiveness range and you'd find one who would put in some effort. Your prime days are past you. It's time you developed a healthy acceptance of where your station in life really is
Looking at the latest article on The Conversation
https://theconversation.com/new-study-finds-the-gender-earnings-gap-could-be-halved-if-we-reined-in-the-long-hours-often-worked-by-men-260815
The rationalisation gets twisted.
"About half of that income gap in both Australia and Germany was due to men working long hours and women effectively subsidising them to do this by cutting back their own work hours."
When in reality it is the men who subsidise women to work part-time or not at all.
No, no, no. You have to start from the premise that whatever it is, it is the fault of men. Feminism says so, as one of the three pillars of its foundational belief. Now you can re-write anything and it's only a matter of working out in what way in any particular instance this is shown.
It often leads to hilarious results like that article you pointed to. Hilarious if you have the training and experience to not be affected by the deliberate propaganda aspect of it. Hilarious if you put aside the collective effect of insidious drips of such propaganda upon society.
ChatGPT (not entirely reliable) includes these comments upon the article when asked to rate the article for the propaganda aspect inherent in it, regardless of what the actual content is:
🧩 Inferred Intent
While the article presents as reporting on research, its primary rhetorical function is advocacy for structural change in work–life balance culture, framed through a gender equity lens. The use of academic data serves more to legitimise a normative conclusion than to neutrally inform the reader.
🛠️ Would a trained propagandist write it this way?
Yes, albeit subtly. The piece employs mid-grade rhetorical control: consistent voice, emotionally palatable, intellectually credentialled, lacking adversarial tone — but still deploying narrative closure and moral framing to shape reader opinion.
Sorry, but I gave up on empathy with those bitches. Just what was I supposed to feel after being thrown into the street penniless and with no place to sleep at night? And being referred to a shelter when the dyke in charge said, "We don't give shelters to men." As far as I'm concerned, they owe me; I owe them nothing but contempt, hatred, and wishing that they would face a firing squad because that's actually kinder than what they imposed on me. For those who tell me to go to therapy, let me say this and don't forget it: THERAPY DOES NOT ERASE MEMORIES OF BEING ABUSED AND THROWN INTO THE STREET!!! Anyone born with a strong memory like mine knows that after suffering something of that magnitude, the damage has been done and there is no way to heal from wounds that big. The fact that my children still love me and say I was not treated fairly shows that I wasn't the monster that feminazis will claim that I am -- they're just the pot calling the kettle black! I gave up on fairness in life after so many decades of unforgiving abuse, so why am I supposed to pretend that it didn't happen to me? Sorry, anyone who calls me a liar is the real liar; I have a reputation for being "painfully honest," and at 73 years of age, I'd say that's how I will remain. The crazy ones are the ones who think I can have all those memories blocked in my memory; having been cursed with a powerful memory has not made life easier to tolerate, but I've survived somehow and I will make the best of the time that I have left.
?
Blame the nearest man.
I've seen it in very small girls.
Old women, middle aged women, young women.
It's innate I guess since women require a Daddy or brother or husband to provide and protect and build.
Excellent take.
I’d propose that women communicate to be heard and relate. Men communicate to understand, solve, and find a conclusion. So the problem with dating is just as you suggested, a two-way street of jacked up, messy individuals trying their best.
She can’t understand why he wants to speak with brevity and end the conversation. He can’t understand why she wants to say things in circles, like she’s talking just to be talking.
We are just different. This can be viewed as beautiful, when looking through the right lens.
All very true. Perhaps we should recognize two sides of the same truth. Men are Good...and Women are NOT which is why they can't seem to work with Good Men.
Smile---that is one way to look at it!
The phrase, what goes around comes around comes to mind. Women as a group completely lack self awareness. It's time that mirror mirror on the wall...starting letting down some wanna be princesses about where the problems in our society really come from.
Outstanding !!
🙏🏻🙏🏻❤️❤️💪🏻💪🏻
Thank you Joyful Joe
What if a man wanted a woman who wasn’t in an open marriage and had group sex? He would be a misogynist!
So the basic surmise is: women have desires and it is mens fault that they are not being met!!
There is a huge disconnect between reality and idealogical desires.
We saw this in Janice Fiamengo's videos when the Groups of women (and sometimes men) were screaming at her and hating her while accusing her of 'hate speech'... huge disconnects that one has to wonder if such behaviour is actually pathological - especially when it is on going!!
Huge disconnect between: Feminists wanting equality and for women not to be treated as sexual objects (but, exclude the advertisements for products made for women and sexualised in the advertisement but not protested against!),
and,
rational women with desires and who want their pussies stroked by men and happen to love it !!!
There is little evidence to support "Feminists wanting equality". Last I looked around a good sampling of many feminist organisations, they mentioned equality, if at all, in terms of wanting "equality for women" which translates inevitably into "gaining the advantages men have without losing the advantages women have" — and that is not equality.
Lately, however, the phrase used by the internationalist Marxists who steer what feminism is around the world is not 'equality' but 'equity'. That allows for men's continual disparagement and disadvantage because of skewed concepts of historical female disadvantage hundreds or thousands of years ago.
oh I know that the feminists don't want equality...
addition: many sites have very hidden wording.. I think you and we all know this or soon work it out.. they use Gender rather than 'female/women' as if trying to cover up their real intensions but that becomes obvious is one looks thoroughly through their website....
“With great power comes great responsibility.”
A very iconic, true, genuine and powerful quote. For some reason feminism and feminist forgot to adopt this philosophy into their paradigm of equality and lost it on accountability road right to misandry lane.
To truly be equal like modern women claim they are. They also have to be equally accountable for all their actions. Including blaming all men for what they’ve conjured up in a gender war they started, their incompetency’s, inadequacy’s and misunderstandings of reason and logic. You open one door. You must open another. If you blame all men, then you must also (especially under the guise of equality) blame all women as well. However, men know and have become very aware within the last 30+ years of this draconian feminism. Accountability is kryptonite to women.
Radical Feminists hate men Misandrist women have ruined feminism God help our sons and grandsons fathers and uncles in this hateful world Not all women and men are good in the real world
But this horrible agenda brought in by the UN Marxist Socialist radical left is just nasty 🤮 They want to divide us Don’t let them
Well written and presented. Of course little to none of what you've presented will be enacted. Women are highly neuroticism and encouraged by modern gynocentric and misandrist society (thanks to feminism of various guises and socialism) and culture to be narcissistic, manipulative, coercive, dishonest and have zero empathy for men and by extensions boys, who are considered and treated as defective girls and the later as disposable ATMs, emitional tampons, scratch posts and kitty litters. Modern women are inculcated and indoctrinated to be selfish, conceited, whorish, sado-masochistic sybiarites and nihilists. Is it any wonder that demographics and society is collapsing under the weight of it all, not to mention that the usual girl-boss/feminazis are almost always in the lead for extolling the alleged virtues and whatever fad is going or being promoted at the moment. Men conceptualise, create, build, protect and where necessary sacrifice. Women control, manipulate, consume and eventually denigrate and destroy. The whole concept of women, their natures, rolls and what they actually are, needs to be re-evaluated with wide open eyes . The same also need to be done with men. Good luck with all the above, it probably isn't going to happen, at least not any time soon. If it does, God alone knows what the results will be?
Such a well-written and argued article, Tom, thank you 🙏
I occasionally return to re-read Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars: An Introductory Programing Manual Original. It describes everything that's happened since the 80s. I'm sure the completely contradictory feminist and woke narratives were an update to these occult strategies.
I'm feeling that I'm too outspoken about my views, but I've paid a high price for the fact that I wasn't born with a vagina. I'm detecting sentiments that are not favorable, so I will probably not participate any more. I detected earlier that I was being told to remain silent; now I'm convinced that is the case, so having an unwanted intruder out of the picture won't be disturbing.