antifeminism evil women idiocy manginas masculinity misogyny MRA patriarchy rape rapey reactionary bullshit

Alcuin in Wonderland

The Intellectual Renaissance of Western Patriarchy: One big sandwich joke.

At first glance, Alcuin’s blog would seem to be some sort of parody. The blog’s slogan – “Promoting the Intellectual Renaissance of Western Patriarchy” – seems so over-the-top pretentious that even the smuggest of would-be intellectuals wouldn’t be able to post it with a straight face.

But if Alcuin is a troll, he’s a dedicated one, and one (at least based on my less-than-exhaustive survey of his blog) who never seems to break character.  So I’m assuming he’s real. Which makes him a pompous ass with a lot of irritating ideas he’s somehow convinced himself are new and interesting. Take (please!) his recent post “Back Where They Belong.” And yes, “they” mean who you think, and “where they belong” means where you think.

Men should run the government, business, education, and religion. Women should stay at home. Young unmarried women can briefly work as kindergarten and elementary teachers, but there are no reasons why men can’t usually do this as well.

I’m not sure if Alcuin understands that women actually hold most of the jobs that currently exist, and that removing virtually all of them from the workplace would cause the economy to implode like, well, Alcuin, if you suddenly removed all of his idiocy. Also, how many kindergarten teachers do we really need?

As long as women run things, men will continue to be sidelined and slandered because feminism is a zero-sum movement.

Women … run things?

There can be no peace between the sexes until women are back where they belong. The sexes are meant to complement each other rather than compete and put one another down.

Yes, and the best way to show how the sexes “are meant to complement each other rather than … put one another down” is for one of the sexes to, er, put the other down by sending them back into the home.

Women have no business being lawyers, judges, educators, doctors, bureaucrats, writers, or religious leaders. Their attempted leadership in these areas, an illegitimate coup d’etat, is destroying our society.

I agree. Lady Pope is doing a terrible job of dealing with all those abuse cases!

Sadly, they prefer to enjoy their present situation, and let society rot, than go back where they belong and participate in building things again. Much like enjoying the concert on the sinking Titanic – though in this case, don’t expect chivalrous men to jump into the cold water so the ladies can have space on the lifeboats.

A little Titanic humor always enlivens a dull rant, eh?

Knock knock!

Who’s there!

An iceberg!

Damn, I guess we shouldn’t have kept going in zero visibility in a part of the ocean where icebergs had been recently sighted, in our ship that doesn’t have enough lifeboats for everyone!

I crack myself up sometimes. Back to Alcuin:

Feminism is a hate movement that brings out the worst in women.

Unlike the Men’s Rights movement, a hate movement that brings out the best in men!

It hates women because it hates femininity and motherhood, the chief characteristics of what it means to be a genuine woman. It brings out the worst in women by turning them into men, or trying to masculate them.

Damn you, feminism! Don’t go masculating those ladies! First they want to wear pants, and the next thing you know they’re growing ironic mustaches and using Axe Detailers instead of loofahs and subscribing to Bass Fishing Monthly.

It hates men because it blames everything on men, and regards masculinity in men to be evil. It emasculates men at the same time. Gays and, much more secondarily, manginas, are somewhat acceptable to the gynocracy, especially when the furniture needs moving or some bitch can’t pay her own bills.

Because when you need furniture moved, or some money, you call … the gays? Is this some new gay stereotype I’m not aware of? I mean, manginas, sure, manginas are furniture-movers and money-to-bitches conduits extraordinaire. That’s how they get access to pussy, after all.

But what’s the incentive for the gays?  They don’t need pussy; they’d, presumably, prefer to spend their money on tiny dogs and gym memberships than on some bitch’s bills; and while gays may have strong opinions about where the furniture should go, are they really interested in carrying it there themselves?

Women generally use men, and feminism continues this grand tradition. A man’s value is defined according to his use to women. Deeper than that, feminism regards men in the same way that the Nazis regarded Jews – men are Untermensch and cannot be granted the same rights and privileges that women are.

And … now we’ve got Nazis.

Feminism aims to bring men down, as it is a zero-sum movement. It doesn’t simply aim to improve the lot of women through, for instance, education, but seeks to exclude men from education.

It does? Last I heard, colleges were actually lowering their standards in order to enroll more guys.

Thus the current propaganda about campus rape, and the attempt to make it easier to accuse a university male of rape in the USA. Thanks, government. You are, once again, the handmaiden of misandry.

And handmaidens are bad. Not like Shieldmaidens.

Feminist hate will never be satisfied, so men can’t keep avoiding the issue. We must avoid feminism as much as we can, and educate each other about it and about alternatives.

Generally it is advisable to actually know something about something before trying to “educating” other people about it.

This intellectual Renaissance of Western Patriarchy business is a lot trickier than you might think.

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
10 years ago

Holly: Sell the ring? Hah. The best one can get is spot price for gold and maybe 20 percent of the carat price for the diamond.

If you ever have the money for an experiment go to the jewelry district in LA, or New York (London, Paris or Amsterdam, if you have the money). Buy a 1ct. diamond. Go next door and try to sell it. Unmounted, you will be lucky to get 40 percent of what you paid for it.

The only way diamonds appreciate is being in a setting which is 1: old, and 2: considered some sort of stylish. A ’20s Dec setting will have more value than the gold, and, if there are enough stones, be a bit more valuable then the present price of the diamonds.

Then one gets into the intricacies of cut. The modern, “Brilliant” cut is shiny. It does need a stone with no flaws (but settings can hide a flaw), but the really important thing is that it uses less stone than any of the older styles, so more jewels can be cut from a single diamond.

This is part of why my engagement ring was a sapphire. I don’t know what I am going to do with it, now that I am not marrying her.* I am so used to wearing it, and it was chosen because it suits me, that giving it up seems a bit odd.

My fiancée doesn’t mind it. We’ll work it out, and there will be no diamonds in the mix.

AmandaJane: Sounds as if there is no moral hazard to your stones. The question is, “Do you like it?”. It seems the answer is yes, so get it cleaned.


*my ring is a white and yellow gold 4-band puzzle, with a blue sapphire, hers was made to order, a leaf pattern with a blue sapphire, a couple of small white sapphires, and seed pearls, in yellow and white gold.

1 15 16 17
%d bloggers like this: