By David Futrelle
Jordan “Women are Chaos” Peterson got into a bit of hot water a couple of months back when he told a reporter for the New York Times that some sort of “enforced monogamy” might be necessary to make sure the supply of women is properly distributed amongst the male population.
When people asked him what the holy fuck he was talking about, the Canadian fussbudget and Intellectual Dark Web icon insisted that he wasn’t advocating the “arbitrary dealing out of damsels to incels” or anything like that; no, he was just advocating the “social enforcement of monogamy” so that the sort of men who might turn to violence if they can’t get their hands on women would be able to get their hands (and wedding rings) on women.
He didn’t specify exactly HOW one might “socially enforce” such an outcome, though traditionally this sort of thing tends to involve considerable “socially enforced” (and legally enforced) restrictions on female sexuality.
Conveniently, some less-inhibited thinkers have been more willing to step forward with specific suggestions. One of those solution-providers is the energetically misogynistic neo-Nazi Andrew Anglin. In a recent post on his Daily Stormer site, Anglin offers a detailed plan designed to enforce monogamy by putting the “stupid whores” of today back in their place.
While Anglin is less concerned with redistributing sex than he is with increasing baby production, his plan would do both things at once. In a post with the lovely title “Stupid Whores Want to Spend Time Guzzling Cock Rather Than Producing Children,” Anglin explains what he sees as the central problem with women today:
Over a 25 year period, women in America have decided as a group that they are going to put off pregnancy in order to suck dicks, parade around like sluts, and get money through affirmative action hoax jobs to buy shitty, pointless consumer goods. … a huge percentage of women are waiting til their wombs dry-up on their eternal cock-quest and not even having kids at all.
It’s true that women are, on average, having children later than they used to, and having fewer of them. As the New York Times has recently noted, “the average age of first-time mothers is 26, up from 21 in 1972, and for fathers it’s 31, up from 27.”
This is actually, as Vox explained not long ago, the result of some rather progressive trends: a dramatic drop in teen pregnancies and a larger percentage of women in the work force, which has led more women in the 30-44 year age range to have kids. (It’s not clear to what extent dick-sucking and slut-parading have affected these larger trends. I should also note that Anglin is himself a 34-year-old man with no children, though he clearly doesn’t see his own bachelor lifestyle as part of the problem.)
Anglin’s “solution” is to promote marriage and motherhood — and to basically launch an all-out cultural attack on female autonomy. “The only thing we can do is get women back in their place,” he writes, “and we have to do that by disincentivizing whoring around.”
Along with restrictions on divorce and financial incentives for young married couples with children, Anglin recommends a few things that sound more than a little like something you might find in a GOP platform:
- Changing public school sex-ed courses to inform women that whoring is gross …
- Offering motherhood classes in public schools, informing girls that “mother” is a valid career choice
- Further restricting access to abortion and other birth control
But Anglin has some slightly more radical ideas as well:
- Men need to start publicly calling women whores
- Men need to STOP thinking women are above them, and start generally treating them like shit
- Men need to start telling women they have no purpose but to create children
- Divorced women need to be shunned by everyone in society
- We need more “no hymen, no diamond” memes (I don’t really think this is a valid position for most men to take, but they are great memes which make women go insane – they HATE it when it is pointed out to them that they are filthy whores)
He ends with this, er, miniature manifesto, which he puts in bolded type for emphasis:
These wombs belong to us, not the idiot creatures that they are attached to. They were given to us by God to reproduce ourselves within. The dumb animals they are attached to were supposed to serve us, but they have gotten out of control. We always need to be looking for new ways to get these stupid animals to give us back the wombs they have stolen from us.
“Enforced monogamy” would be ugly. Jordan Peterson’s version of it might not be quite as drastic as Anglin’s, but it would also, of necessity, require stigmatizing female sexual autonomy and independence. It would require, to some degree, putting “women back in their place,” as Anglin bluntly puts it. It would also require what Anglin calls “disincentivizing whoring around.”
No, it wouldn’t require secret police kidnapping women and forcing them to marry the men who are currently declaring themselves “involuntarily celibate.” But it would require social pressure strong enough to send some women into the arms of these potentially quite dangerous men.
Peterson thinks that “enforced monogamy” would somehow reduce violence by reducing the frustrations of sexless men, forgetting that the sort of guy who threatens violence when he can’t get laid is likely to turn to violence if he deems his wife insufficiently obedient — or if he gets jealous of her talking, however innocently, with another man. “Enforced monogamy” won’t protect women from violence; it may put them more at risk. And the revival of “traditional” social restrictions on women would do damage of another sort.
Peterson often resorts to denials and obfuscation when people start asking about the implications of some of his more dire pronouncements — as he did, fairly successfully, when his “enforced monogamy” comments first stirred up controversy. And so Anglin may have done us all a favor of sorts by making a bit clearer what a nightmare “enforced monogamy” would be for women and for men who care about the rights of women and sexual freedom in general.
Cool piece on Ada Lovelace, the first computer programmer
I’d really like to see a commentary on Jordan Peterson by Barry Shitpeas or Philomena Cunk.
“There’s this bloke see, and he reckons we’ll all be taken over by lobsters, unless we start using reinforced mahogany…”
wwth: On the race angle, pretty sure Little Himmler here would also be fine with forcibly sterilizing any non-Aryan woman, and just offing the non-Aryan men. (There’s a reason for the difference, and it’s not any less disgusting than any of the rest of this scumbag’s philosophy.)
I’ve always wondered this too.
I get that it’s not easy to fight back against gender roles. But women do it all the time. We do it even though there’s a lot of negative consequences. We do it while still feeling the insecurity and isolation that goes along with it.
Women aren’t allowed to get away with saying “society expects women to act a certain way” to explain reluctance to ask for a raise or promotion. Or to explain abandoning a STEM field after finding the harassment too much. These things make the wage gap all our own fault, we’re told. Anytime sexism stops us from anything, it’s seen as a hollow excuse by most.
So why is it that men, despite having the privilege and being allowed to get away with so many more flaws or mistakes can just say it’s hard to cease mansplaining or hard to accept being beaten by or outearned by women or learn to flirt without being creepy because that’s just male socialization.
Just another male privilege, I guess. Women are the only ones who have to adapt to female gender roles. We’re also the only ones who have to adapt to male gender roles.
Speaking of Ada Lovelace, there is a wonderful steampunk graphic novel called “The Thrilling Adventures of Lovelace and Babbage”, WITH FOOTNOTES, and it’s excellent.
@Susan, @Raven, Nudger of Dead Things and Loremaster of Dark Ugly Places:
Fair points. I guess I’ve conflated the meaning of the word “career” with “calling” and “job” in my mind. Will do better next time.
@Raven, Nudger of Dead Things and Loremaster of Dark Ugly Places:
So sorry to hear about your husband’s attitudes towards you. That sounds terrible.
Once again, I’m so proud of myself for having only one child, and making that child with a brown dude. Doing my part in the white genocide! Anglin, both my “boys” are better men than you’ll ever be, times one thousand.
Li’l list of posts; apologies in advance:
@Raven, Nudger of Dead Things and Loremaster of Dark Ugly Places
100% agree with you re the importance of parenting, and unfortunately, yes, stay at home parents get none of the recognition or status that they deserve.
That’s a really hard situation you’re in, by the sound of it. I hope your counselor is helping? Lots of supportive thoughts from me (they’re not much use, but I’m offering them anyway).
@Malitia,
I’ve saved that video to watch at leisure, but previewed the first few minutes, and it’s an absolute treasure. Thank you!
@GrumpyOldSocialJusticeMangina
It’s really nice to see you 🙂
Ideologically, Anglin is a shell of a person.
It’s no surprise to me that he’s hopped from atheism to this weird mysoginistic religiosity, from performative anti-racism to hardcore racial hatred and so on.
I wonder what his followers would think if they knew that he used to jump on the bandwagon of any group that he desperately wanted to be part of or that he used to piss people off until they would beat him to a pulp and that he would lay there and take it to prove that he “didn’t feel pain”?
This guy is gutted of any sense of genuine worth. He’s just a screaming hole of need for something meaningful.
@Mish of the Catlady Ascendancy
I’m with you. I did marry a white dude, and had two white sons, but ALL of my grandchildren are racially mixed and all my step-grandchildren are black. I’ve happily done my part.
@Raven, Nudger of Dead Things and Loremaster of Dark Ugly Places
I don’t know how useful my insight (as a man) will be, given that I am proud of the achievements of the women in my life, but if I had to hazard a guess, I’d say that these men wouldn’t be proud of a male close friend doing better at something than they can. The must-win competitiveness is also present in their relationships with men, because that’s what they believe/have been socialized to assume is how the world works, in a social Darwinism sort of way.
BUT, to a certain extent, it’s all right and natural to be bested at doing manly things by another Manly Man Who is Male and Has Manly Testicles and Does Manly Things, because you’re competing among yourselves. So being beaten by a MMWMHMTDMT is survivable. But being beaten by a woman… Well, you may not be very good at doing Manly Things, but at least you’re better at them than a woman would be, and while she may be better at Womanly Things than you would be, it doesn’t matter because Womanly Things are dumb.
It’s not unlike how one reason for the prevalence of racism among poor white people in the American South (as I understand it) is that once upon a time, however miserable their lives might be, at least white people could look down on black ones, and so retain at least a little pride, even if from an outside perspective, both whites and blacks were living in equal misery.
Another part of the difference, I think, is that male-male competitiveness is seen as just how things are (“I hunted more mammoths than you, nyah nyah!”), while male-female competitiveness is “Ebil wimmins invading my male safe space! You’re getting cooties all over my mammoth-hunting spear! Go away! I’m scared!”
Unacknowledged is the fact that women succeeding in stereotypically male spaces means there’s even more competition, so the men will have to try harder, or even try in the first place. So part of it is also just laziness.
But, as I say, this is me guessing from the outside, because I don’t quite understand it either.
@Rabbit
I don’t understand it either. My dad was the one who stayed home to take care of me and my sister, so I wasn’t exposed to that sort of male jealousy at home.
Dear Andrew Anglin,
My “affirmative action hoax job” involves teaching people how to use punctuation marks, and phrasal verbs like “dry up” don’t take hyphens. You DO use a hyphen if the phrasal verb becomes a noun phrase. For example:
Anglin thinks we should set up a white ethnostate. (no hyphen)
The set-up of a white ethnostate is a fucking ridiculous idea. (hyphen)
Forget “no hymen, no diamond.” I’m all “no hyphen, no wifin’.” (This means I won’t ask you to become my bride, which I’m sure you’ll be very sad about.)
More about hyphens: https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/punctuation/hyphen
Talking about women in this gross way and treating women like shit is supposed to ENCOURAGE women to want to have kids?
Especially if it means having sex with these critters, I’d say that their rhetoric is a good selling point for voluntary sterilization. If I knew that I was going to a) bring a child into a world populated by these douchenozzles and b) have to have sex with one of these douchenozzles to produce said child, I would have had my uterus removed long ago, rather than waiting until I was an infertile old bat with a uterus full of fibroids and polyps.
It’s incredible (but not surprising) that these shitbrains don’t take into account the women whose reasons for putting off pregnancy don’t include riding the infamous cock carousel. Some women might have had an interaction with one of these crap stains, which put them off of relationships. Well, I know I did. When I was younger, I was very insecure and found no shortage of awful men that I thought I could “fix.”
@Raven, Nudger of Dead Things (I absolutely love your username, btw)
I’m sorry to hear you’re having problems in your relationship.
Have you considered divorcing him and taking all his money? (a good suggestion I picked up from MRA posts showcased here)
….but seriously….
sometimes it does come down to “would your life be better without this person” and hard as that decision is to make sometimes the answer is yes. I don’t know your full story, but what you have posted here sounds like abuse tbh. I hope you are taking care of yourself and please know that you have a right to be treated as an equal and have your contributions to the marriage recognised.
@otrame
*white genocide fistbump*
@Tovius
I hope this isn’t too familiar of me, but your parenting experience is probably one of the reasons why you’re such a lovely person 🙂
@epitome of incomprehensibility:
Your entire comment was brilliant, but this made me LOL.
Also “no comma, no momma”, since these guys can never seem to break up their interminable, appalling sentences in a way that makes them more readable (and it comes across as deliberate and contemptuous, almost as if they can’t abuse women, so they’ll abuse language instead). Just one of many reasons not to reproduce with them.
@Buttercup,
@epitome’s posts have always been good, but lately they’ve been spectacular, imho
Ellipsis of two, no nookie for you.
Call me a female, you get no tail.
@Mish – oh yes, seconded!
Use an intransitive verb as a transitive verb, your notch count I will curb.
Suffix of -oid, your sex life is void.
Im always amazed at how far the author has to go to twist things around to deliberately misunderstand a position, especially when there are plenty of truly misogynistic assholes to cherry pick from
To be clear enforced monogamy is an anthropological term that has been around sine the start of the field
Secondly its women who tend to enforce it, as evidenced by opinion polls of the questions of laws regarding pornography and prostitution
As for workplace harassment – well ladies two points,
One, you stood up to be counted as competitors, and that makes you a threat to my long term well being and that of my family.
As a threat I am inclined to use whatever legal means necessary to disadvantage you in relation to me
Secondly, the majority (again according to polls) of the harassment women receive is from other women
Andrew Anglin is not “truly” misogynistic? If he’s not, who is?
So what?
I repeat: so what? You would do well to remember that pornography and prostitution both chiefly benefit men, inasmuch as they benefit anyone. Men are the foremost producers, profiters, and customers of those two things, and in those two things is much abuse of women.
What the fuck, man? How pusillanimous are you, that other people’s existence threatens your own?
Let’s see those polls. What conclusion are we to draw from them anyway?
No Peterson is not
The author pretended that the term was coined by a mild mannered Canadian who probably wants to dole out women like chattel slaves, thats what
Where was the objection to this term anytime in the last several decades?
And given that violent sexual assaults against women drop with access to pornography I think it is dirty pool to assume that because a few men benefit financial that women as a whole have no benefit at all, as for prostitution the majority of crimes against women in that realm stem from the fact it is illegal. In locals with legal sex trades crimes against sex workers drop to level commensurate with the public at large.
Learn to read, I never said their existence threatens my existence. I said that their stepping forth to compete with me (for job resources, pay raises, career advancement) was a threat to the long term benefit I could accrue for me and my family. How is it cowardly or timid to acknowledge that as an equal and a competitor they are deserving of being treated as such?
Ever hear of Google?
https://www.google.com/search?q=polls+on+legalization+of+portitution+mlae+v+female&rlz=1C1CHBF_enUS798US798&oq=polls+on+legalization+of+portitution+mlae+v+female&aqs=chrome..69i57.16071j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
Shorter lujlp,
Jordan Peterson and/or Andrew Anglin isn’t misogynistic! Cherrypicking!
Also, here’s why they are right and you ladies totally deserve sexual harassment.
Nope, no misogyny there.
And I’m not sure where luljp is, but where I am, sexual harassment is actually illegal. The fact that he thinks it’s a great means of beating out the competition women represent does say one thing. He knows he’s not actually skilled or hardworking, just coasting on privilege. He knows he can’t compete and win on a level playing field. Very telling, his post is.
Nobody actually claimed Peterson made up the term “enforced monogamy.” The issue is that he used it to imply that if women were compelled to date or marry incels, incels wouldn’t murder people.
It’s a cheap deflection to point out that it’s an academic term. Not least because it’s so unoriginal and those of you in the cult of Peterson trot this tired ass shit out every time someone criticizes him.