A couple of months ago, I decided to go for a bushwalk in a small forest near my home. As I approached the path into that forest, three women emerged from the tree line on horseback and proceeded to pass me. The first of those women was in her late-40s to early-50s. I nodded at her, and she waved and smiled enthusiastically as she went by. The second of the of the three women was slightly younger–probably in her early to mid-30s. She acknowledged my presence with a quick nod and a brief smile as she and her horse trotted past. The third woman was my age, in her mid-20s. Unlike the two older women, this girl didn’t acknowledge my presence at all. Instead, she avoided making eye-contact with me altogether, seeming genuinely afraid to look at me.
At the time, I thought this was a perfect metaphor for everything I’d been seeing in the world around me. Older women, unspoiled by toxic third-wave feminism, were courteous human beings. The women my age, however, having been raised to believe that men are oppressive rapists who are the cause of all the world’s ills, are genuinely afraid of the opposite sex, leaving them cold, callous, and rude in their dealings with them. The incident in the forest, I thought, was the perfect metaphor for feminism, showing the progression from women who are genuinely kind and sweet human beings into the nasty, Buzzfeed-syle misandrists of today. It was a manifestation of all the effects of feminism that I’d been observing and cataloging as I interacted with women both in real life and online, and as I started critically analyzing feminist doctrines that I’d always taken for granted as true. Everything I’d learned about third-wave feminism accounted for what I saw in Western millennial women everywhere, which essentially boiled down to a complete lack of civility in their dealings with me and the rest of the opposite sex, an attitude I snarkily parodied in this tweet:
From this, I concluded that there is something terribly wrong with millennial women, and it was easy to see how feminism–a school of thought that rewards women for existing in a perpetual state of indiscriminate rebellion–was to blame.
But now I’m not so sure.
Last night, my best friend (an attractive and feminine woman in her early-20s) decided that she wanted to see what it was like to be a man on an online dating website. After telling her to locate a packet of antidepressants and a bottle of vodka, I gave her my login credentials for OKCupid and Plenty of Fish. What she found confirmed pretty much everything I’d told her: when you’re on there, the overwhelming impression you get is that the women on there don’t like you, don’t need you, don’t want you, and would love nothing more than for you to fuck off. Their profiles are either blank or grandiose; most of their replies are little more than grunting, generally consisting of no more than two words; and ‘conversations’ with them are invariably one-sided, painfully boring, and often end after two messages. She concluded her side of the experiment with an emphatic: “I don’t know how you live like this.”
I enjoyed the fact that she had this experience. We’ve had many heated disagreements during which I’ve asserted that women nowadays are rude, soulless, and dead, and that it’s their fault. She obviously didn’t take too kindly to this, but I never gave a damn because I, not giving a shit about political correctness anymore, will call the sky blue if I think it’s blue, regardless of the social ramifications. During her time acting as me on OKCupid, she got to see how it really was–or so I thought.
After this, I was bored, and I figured I should probably see how it is on the other side myself. I said that it was so that I could have a well-rounded view of all the things I complain about, but really I just wanted confirmation of everything I thought the situation for women on an online dating website was like: that men are generally of high quality and that women are just debilitatingly picky as they were described in Lori Gottlieb’s book, wherein women are portrayed (and rightfully so) as often willing to reject men over things like the color of their shoes. So, I logged on, and this was the first thing I saw:
Ah, I thought–the paradox of choice in a 50×50 square of pixels. My friend and I had talked about this very thing only hours before. During that conversation, I proudly gave her a metaphor explaining how I saw the situation. I told her that modern women are effectively inside a room full of diamonds of exactly the same size, shape, clarity, and value, and they’re going through each of those diamonds one by one, attempting to find the best one in the room. This metaphor was presupposed on the notion that men were generally of a high-standard and that the breakdown of civil intergender relations I was witnessing was almost wholly women’s fault.
Holy fucking shit was I wrong.
I didn’t bother waiting for new messages to come into my friend’s inbox. Instead, I decided to take a look at some of the conversations she’d already had. We’re pretty similar in terms of personality, and her responses were as high-quality as I’d expected them to be. She didn’t act like the girls she’d attempted to interact with when she was using my profile–her responses were witty, interesting, and didn’t make you yearn for a thick piece of rope and the branch of a high tree. So, I figured this would be particularly informative since there were no identifiable problems in her conduct whatsoever.
Here’s some of the stuff I found in the first thirty seconds:
I could keep adding pictures here, but I think you get it. I filled up my iPad’s memory getting screenshots of stuff like this; there’s literally that many messages in this vein, and I haven’t even seen a fraction of a percent of everything that’s there. I didn’t cherry-pick these messages; I just chose at random.
My friend’s message history was packed with messages like this. There were overtly sexual conversation starters. Nonsensical bios. Conversations that continued even though she obviously had no intention of replying. Entire message threads of small-talk, some of them sent by men who thought it appropriate to go by usernames like ‘Bigcok98’. I can appreciate a quality man even though I’m not attracted to them. In the hundreds of messages I read, I could not find anything resembling one. The guys on there were so dumb that I’m now genuinely worried about the economy knowing that these guys are out there working to prop it up. I don’t know what jobs they’re doing. Can you get a job as a professional flagpole?
And this is all in addition to some of the stories she’s told me about men she’s encountered in public, one notable example being some guy in a van who saw her as he was driving past, did a U-turn at the end of the street, and then circled back to try and flirt with her through his window. It’s not just online dating where guys are acting like this; it seems to be everywhere. I also tend to think that the mild anonymity that online dating allows lets people show their true selves. Underneath their public personas (assuming they have one and aren’t actually like this in real life too), it seems that a tremendous amount of men out there are as ugly as can be, both in appearance and in their speech.
There’s a certain style of communication that suggests lucidity. It’s part of what makes a man charismatic. For an example of this, just watch any Jordan B. Peterson lecture and pay attention to his self-aware style of elocution. Every word he utters conveys the idea that his brain is firing on all cylinders. The style in which these guys articulate their thoughts, however, makes one wonder what’s really happening in their heads. Sure, the fact that they’re breathing and typing suggests that some neural activity is indeed taking place between their ears, but that’s about all you can say about them. I wouldn’t be comfortable talking to these guys if I were a woman. I wouldn’t even be comfortable talking to them as mates. There’s nothing relatable about them, and I’m skeptical that, if I tried to connect with them, that there’d be anything in there connect with. That’s an extreme thing to say, but it was really that bad.
Bigcok98 and his gang of barely sentient compadres aren’t the men I figured I’d see when I logged into my friend’s profile. Sure, I figured I’d see some guys like this, but I didn’t realize that the percentage of them would be close to 100%. There wasn’t a split between alphas and nice guys, the former being strong and attractive and the latter being weak but intelligent. Instead, what I found were that some guys had muscles and some guys didn’t and all of them were idiots. Absent were any of the guys I occasionally have the pleasure of interacting with on Twitter or in the Manosphere. There weren’t any of the guys I’d gotten used to seeing around the place who are civilized and virtuous, who love to read and think about themselves and the world around them, but who would also do fine in a fight or a situation where they needed to survive. There weren’t any men who would look just at home in a suit as they would in camo.
Roger Moore as James Bond.
See this guy here–that’s a real man. He’s strong but not a dumb meat-sack; he’s smart but not a nerd; and he’s stylish without being a metrosexual. He exudes dignity, class, intelligence, and authority. You wouldn’t catch him starting conversations with ‘Hey sexyyyyyy’.
I had a conversation with a mate of mine recently during which I–like the arrogant fuckwit that I am–insinuated that one of his buddies wasn’t what I consider a real man. This friend responded to my assertion by saying that the guy in question was a real man because he was competitive and aggressive, and I couldn’t help but wince. Being a man isn’t about punching shit. That’s a relatively recent conception of what men are supposed to be, and it’s destructively inaccurate. You won’t find Zeno, Seneca, or any of the other Stoics advocating men actualize their masculinity by yelling ‘do a fucken burnout, bro!!’ Masculinity is about strength–something that comes from the body and the mind. Strength of body without strength of mind is weakness, and, if you don’t believe that, look up the Wikipedia article for any branch of martial arts and do a bit of reading; you’ll quickly see what I’m saying. Martial arts are as much about the mind as they are the body. Martial arts are also lethal; the epitome of survival and strength. I thought the high-quality men in the Manosphere were the norm and that women were at fault for not upholding the tenants of civility and virtue in our society. Women, it seems, aren’t destroying civility, they’re as civil as you could possibly expect them to be when this is how men are acting. They’re actually upholding surprisingly high standards of propriety while men are gleefully flipping those standards the bird and acting like pigs. The behavior of men on these websites–something that I will again say is indicative of men everywhere and not just the ones online–is so bad that my friend had to constantly let the men on there know when they were being inappropriate and to stop, like a mother attempting to verbally control a child. Even the lowest man-hating feminist I’ve met has been less loathsome than some of the best guys I saw on those websites, and I would rather spend time with the delusional, purple-haired SJW stereotype than spend another moment talking to the men on there. The lowest quality woman in my experience is higher quality than most of these guys. There was nothing whatsoever to like about them.
I would estimate that men are 80% responsible for the monster that third-wave feminism, women, and even liberalism has become. Why do liberals hate straight white men? Because by all accounts, straight white men are complete mental cases. Why do liberals like homosexual men more than straight men? Because gay men almost always have a bit of intelligence and class (at least when they’re not flouncing about the streets half-naked for children to see during Mardi Gras). Men like I used to be, who are surprised that women think they’re intellectually inferior rapists, after seeing the sheer amount of sexually explicit comments women get both on these websites and occasionally in real life, have got to be joking. You can’t see men act this way in these quantities and not think that this is a rape culture. And is it any wonder the divorce rate is so high when this is the average intelligence of men? Maybe the divorce rate is so high not because women are picky, but because the men they’ve settled for are garbage.
Going back to my OKCupid account, with a message from a woman every few days, felt like going from a clogged, traffic congested road in the city where you can’t hear yourself think to a tranquil steam in the never-never. I always thought that it would be amazing to get so much attention from the opposite sex like women do. That’s not true. I would take the reasonable amounts of attention I get from women over this deluge of acid any day. I’m glad that my friend’s experiences are not mine.
The guys in the Manosphere are real men—we’re classy, attractive, philosopher types who venerate knowledge but who wouldn’t mind snapping someone’s neck if the situation truly called for it. This is not the norm. I am disgusted by the objectively terrible behavior of some third-wave feminists, but the standard behavior of men, it seems, is way out there. This is what you get when there are no clear and defined gender roles for both genders instead of what we have now. Feminism paints a clear path for women–it lays out a clear path to success that, once attained, women can point to and say ‘I’ve done it.’ Men have nothing like that anymore, and this is the result. Men haven’t always been this dumb. Older gents aren’t dumb. Men like Roger Moore were men, but they weren’t morons. You wouldn’t find Roger Moore in an alley marking his non-existent territory with a can of spray paint.
So I’m a feminist now, or at least I most certainly understand why third-wave feminists and women in general are the way they are now. You can’t not have a change of attitude after seeing something like this. Even the screenshots don’t do it justice–it’s really difficult to explain without experiencing it. This complete change of opinion may give people the impression that my worldview is schizophrenic. It is. There is no profit in having a static worldview, and having a dynamic one that updates upon the receipt of new information comes at the cost of consistency. This is a complete 180 in my thinking. I think that’s healthy. I like not thinking the same thing I thought last week. I believe that, if you think more or less the same thing you thought last week, you probably didn’t do much with your week. You won’t find me watching Amy Schumer movies after this (because I value my eyes) or protesting the Wage Gap (because I value my dignity) but, whenever I’m bitching about humanity on Twitter or wherever going forward, there’s going to be a lot more nuance in my worldview. Hopefully said bitching will still be funny.
It strikes me as weird that many feminists have tried to explain all this to me and most of the other guys I know again and again, but we’ve always written off their words as ridiculous. It makes me wonder why we did that. I think it’s because, as is the trend these days, people don’t debate anymore, they lecture. I can’t empathize with someone if they lecture me as if I were a child; no-one can. There’s so much division of thought in the West now because of this that, if the 2016 U.S. election is anything to go by, it could lead to the second American Civil War. In the case of the trans community, for example, they’re not just lecturing they’re threatening and hitting people. I don’t know of anyone–trans or no–who doesn’t think that community is toxic and evil, or who takes them seriously anymore. It is very difficult to see people as anything but villains when they act exactly like villains. Many third-wave feminists are in constant attack mode, and while I now understand why, that attitude is creating more problems than it solves. This whole thing wouldn’t have been as successful if my friend didn’t go on my online dating accounts and acknowledge my side of the situation over there first. Like a teacher who knows that students appreciate feedback that lists their work’s merits before launching into criticism, all we have to do is to acknowledge the other side’s position first before respectfully disagreeing for them to understand. No-one will, but that’s beside the point.
So that concludes my story of an anti-feminist’s adventures in blue pill land. Now, I’m gonna go and have a glass of wine, while I try to ignore the guy chain-messaging my friend every few minutes even though she’s never replied to his messages.
Author’s note: I was going to title this article ‘How Buzzfeed happened,’ but then I didn’t.