Where Have All the Cowboys Gone?

I will do the dishes if you pay all the bills
- Where have all the Cowboys Gone

The past for many  MRA is a wonderful world.

Where men were MEN and women were WOMEN.

Not the namby pamby limpwristed men that we have today. Indeed if one remembers I am one of those weak and limp wristed men who never really do anything macho.

The reality is different. I find that I regularly do “macho” things, just not as someone seeking to do them. I mean for god sakes, I live far from basic amenities in solitude, live by doing difficult work in harsh conditions and my only company is a dog. This is so cliche that I should be wearing a cowboy hat and possessing the sort of stubble and sex appeal that makes Tom Jones jealous. At this point? I have officially decided to embrace my role as “The Manly Man” and wear my shirts with not one BUT TWO buttons opened. Feminists may faint and gnash their teeth but it’s high time I embraced my true self and come out as “the Manly Man”. No longer will I be embarrassed into not telling people about all the furniture from Ikea I have put together. No longer will I hide the fact that I own power tools and an old stick for stirring paint. No longer will people not hear about my unlimited capacity to fish or play  the most manly and rugged of all sports. Golf.

The more I read about the “stereotype of manliness” the more I realise that  most women and many men should be clutching their private parts in ecstasy at everything I write. I would suggest that my absence from the greater atheist community and meetings is of benefit lest a panel discussion be bombarded in knickers and underwear. I am sure health and safety will be pleased to hear that and not require panellists to wear goggles lest someone lose an eye to an enthusiastically flung tighty whitey.

Sarcasm aside…

We are looking at A Voice for Men and this is a double piece by Clint Carpenter about the problem with women and MGTOW.

There was a time, way back when… when my grandmother remembers. A time when households operated much differently than they do today; in fact, my grandfather has a house that operates in the very manner that most houses once did. I’m talking about houses that were built before modern industry made many of the amenities we now take for granted; it has a wood stove for cooking and heating, bare wood floors, light came from windows during the day and oil lamps at night, and is generally very rustic; outside is a pile of wood (with an assortment of axes and saws), a large basin (for laundry and bathing) and a clothes -ine that doesn’t move, an outhouse a little way off, and a stream in the distance for water.

It sounds rather charming and idyllic, until you spend a week there, and your clean clothes run out, and you quickly realize that every bath requires a demanding workout of wood splitting and water-fetching, so by the end of a month, you’re either in great shape, or you stink, or quite possibly both (you can short cut this with a pale of heated water and a hand-cloth; but this is you sitting on a stool on the porch, naked to the world).

It’s a place to visit; it takes real commitment to stay as a life choice. Before the industrial age, this was the standard model of all houses. Also keep in mind that this was a time of extended families, so getting kinky with the spouse when the elders and kids are in the next room – and nothing for sound deadening – was the norm; the others would have to be a hundred paces from the house before sound of frisky finally abated.

And let me guess. You want to go back to this sort of lifestyle? Well I don’t have time to cut wood with an axe. The amusing thing is I say this as a man who owns an axe and has cut wood to power a fire in a house like this. For those who are unaware, I may be a nerd but nerds like hiking and the outdoors too.

Okay jokes aside, this is just a scene of the good old days. Where men were men and had the facial hair to prove it. Now men are (except for me. See above) sissy nancy boys and facial  hair is the domain of hipsters who would faint at a bare knuckle boxing match yet have the audacity to sport handlebar moustaches. So with this setting of a romantic and nostalgic look at rural life, let’s press on and stop larking about.

A lot of the article boils down to the justification that in the (manlier) past women had a tougher time keeping house. That’s true. And that justified a lot of the sexism present in gender roles. To want to go back to that is frankly naive and rather daft. I mean this is a romantic view of the past. A Mills and Boone look (Harlequin Romance to you Yanks) at the past where the world is idyllic and being Prince Charming’s Chambermaid involves a real backbreaking work cleaning up the place and a lot of emptying of chamberpots and garderobes inbetween all the bodice ripping action.

Carpenter here blames technology for freeing women from the chains  of “housework” and giving her access to TV and literature and the time to indulge in those things which lead her into the grasp of those harpies we call feminists. The phone only made things worse! Now she could TALK to other women and find solidarity! Oh how tragic it is to be a man in this wicked sinful gynocentric era!.

She was still expected to provide moral support to her husband; and yes, sex was a wifely duty she was obligated to provide as per the terms of marriage. Despite the growing lack of interior household duties, she still wasn’t expected to maintain the exterior of the house; mowing the lawn, painting the siding and fence, pruning the hedge (gardening was optional), raking leaves, maintaining the vehicle, and shoveling snow were all duties of the husband to do on the weekend when he’s not working (backbreaking work during the week, to mind-breaking work on the weekend; no rest for the weary).

If the only reason you are having sex is because it’s a business contract then what you have is not love.

Also? This is living in the assumption that women don’t do backbreaking labour. Which I assure you is nonsensical. I have washed my clothes using a washboard, it’s not easy work. It will give you arms like Madonna.

This is just this frankly astounding problem with the MRA. That women do not like having sex and that sex is not fun for them. That somehow the creation of sex toys has made men redundant. Which is nonsensical. As any woman who has tried mixing toys and a man will tell you that a lot of toys get better when used in a relationship. I know it’s not explicit in this piece but the number of MRA who think that this is the reason why women don’t want anything to do with them is mindbogglingly high.

If you think the reason why women do not like you is the ownership of a hitachi magic wand (a device which I am assured is powerful enough to explode your libido) then you have a problem where you  compare unfavourably to an inanimate object. Where you see yourself as nothing but an orgasm machine which means that you have lost to industrialisation.

If you cannot fathom why  you  think you are losing to the industrialisation of the orgasm then the problem is not the machine but the man.

So now we get to the meat of the topic: women demand what? The man’s work expectation in regards to family provision hasn’t changed; while women working can be classified as a hobby. On average, the husband brings home twice that which the wife brings home; men make up 75% of the tax revenue, while women command almost 80% of the buying power; this means that he’s giving her the bulk of his earnings (after taxes of course). And women demand what?

To say  this is to fall into yet another MRA trap.

The trap of having no self awareness. And indeed ignoring all the women who have held down careers that are ANYTHING but hobbies. Such as my mother.

The Surgeon. Now Carpenter here may think it’s a hobby but not many people invest the sort of effort to becoming surgeons and class it as a hobby.

And the self awareness completely ignores the fact he thinks women work in less paid jobs due to it being a hobby rather than it being a problem with glass ceilings and discrimination.

Women demand their men to do “their fair share of household chores.” Let’s look at this from a fiscal perspective shall we? Women are happy to do their “fair share” household duties; this means basically cleaning up after herself, with all the modern amenities available to her. Many women are happy to receive the lump sum of his paycheck, while keeping her own. Women are happy to make use of daycare, and certainly schools at the earliest possible age (everyone’s child is gifted after all). But many women are not happy about cleaning up after her husband, who has added hours to his workload; and no, exterior household duties don’t seem to count.

Wait? Did A Voice For Men Seriously get a writer whinging about house work? That the “easy” and effort free jobs mentioned early in the article are now somehow tedious jobs. They are a Sisyphean labour, a never ending battle against the forces of dirt. To misquote Homer.

 It is entirely seemly for a man killed in housework to lie mangled by the vacuum  cleaner. In his death all things appear fair.

So, if a man has to continue taking care of himself, as he would if he were still single, why is he doubling her available money? He can live comfortably on that money alone, without her, do all his own chores, and still have time and money left over to do his own activities. If it’s intellectual stimulation she’s after, she’s obviously got the wrong job, and it’s he who should quit and become a househusband, or at least cut back significantly on the hours he works, stop trying to rise to stardom–but I have yet to meet a woman who was in a relationship of any sort, who didn’t rely on interpersonal relations or celebrity affairs as their mainstay of conversational topics; she may have been fascinating, even captivating conversationally before marriage, but afterwards that seems to just shut-off, especially after kids enter the scene.

I don’t think the problem is the woman. But the man in this argument. Because clearly this man wants his woman to be everything. 30% Stephen Fry, 30% Martha Stewart, 30% Bill Gates and 10% Freak In The Bed.

Have you considered that even in a live in relationship that if a woman had her OWN life and her OWN hobbies and passions, that conversation would be more interesting? And that perhaps living together you have exhausted your intelligent conversation topics that you have built up over years of independent living.

I mean the notion that women’s conversation is about vapid drama is a stereotype because it assumes that every single conversation had by Carpenter is naught but pithy bon mots and intellectual intercourse the likes of which move the world.

If its sex, that’s once per day of blasé sex any street-hooker can provide, or mind-blowing sex once a week a well trained call-girl can provide; but since the advent of “marital rape,” sex is no longer a loving duty, so it has become whim and weapon; children are a neutral factor in this, a shared byproduct of an agreed upon transaction (unless the mother is pimping the child’s time to the father), they do not equate. If it’s companionship, friends and/or dogs can do just as good a job, because they’re actually interested in our other friends and hobbies; and they don’t expect us to cut-back or give them up for more cuddle time (speaking of which, that’s foreplay, stop leading men on). Expecting men to share the chores, is a sure sign she’s not interested in giving her husband moral support to keep plugging away at a job he’d rather do less of, or not at all.

Okay all that was me making fun of him. The main brunt of what I want to say is here.

Carpenter’s world view is so broken and toxic to women and indeed to men that he is not a Men’s Right Activist. Nothing here promotes men’s rights. What he is promoting is his bitter and toxic world view.

When you are dumped you go through a stage where your mind is “Fuck Women! They are more trouble than they are worth!”. Particularly if the break up was bad. I have had that. We have all had break ups that were bad. The thing is most of us grow out of that and move on and move back to a culture of sensible and healthy interaction.

Carpenter is stuck in that stage of post-relationship hate.

If your sex life is per-rota and as vapid as what Carpenter describes then you have problems. And judging from his statements so far, I am not likely to believe he is entirely without guilt. And stating that marital rape has weaponised sex because you can no longer force them to have sex is pretty much what i am talking about. It shows how morally bankrupt Carpenter and indeed the folk at AVfM and indeed his MRA fanboys are.

And this is without going into his notion that a dog is a good replacement for a human being because that’s pretty much what he wants. A loyal animal that doesn’t speak.

If women are demanding that their husbands do their “fair share” of the chores, then why do men need wives at all? In man’s attempt to make their wives lives easier, they have reduced the wifely duties to next to non-existent. Why, women? Why oh why would you drive those final coffin nails of obsolescence in? Aside from children, there’s no benefit left to having a wife.

Seriously? Are you complaining about doing chores?

Where have all the good men gone? Well… where have all the good women gone?

… … … And the gestational apparatus is already being successfully tested on goats.

Well they are holding out for a savvy Herakles to fight against the increasing odds of men like Carpenter. Gone are the days of chivalrous young men and in are the days of men who have grown up on Misogyny. And what goes through every woman’s mind is a list of ideals they want in a man, be it strength, speed, possession of a white horse. They want a man who compares favourably to the last son of Krypton, they want a man who is thunder incarnate. They want a man as strong as a typhoon or a tidal wave. A man who sets their veins on fire.

Are you man enough to do the housework and be this man?

Of course not! Which is why he’s got this fear of a gigantic feminist conspiracy theory to turn him into a “breeder”. That “literally” he will not be allowed to be a Man Going His Own Way which is a euphemism for a man witholding sex from women until they come to their senses and acquiesce to all his demands with regards to doing all the house work and having sex with him at whim.

it really is that bizarre. There are umpteen problems with Men’s Rights. Let’s look at a “Real” Men’s Rights person. Ally out here argues for men’s rights all the time. But if you note  his language is about empowering men in areas where they are weak. Not shutting women out of society and moaning about doing housework.


  1. starcatherus says

    I found it more than a little humorous that the writer posted a Japanese shonen-ai video smack dab in the middle of the article. Shonen-ai, for those who don’t know, is a subset of Manga dealing with gay relationship between younger and older men. I thought the MRA type generally were homophobes.

    But, then again, these are a group of men who don’t want any women in their lives, but claim to be heterosexual, so that shows me what I know.

  2. says

    It is entirely seemly for a man killed in housework to lie mangled by the vacuum cleaner.

    …the old lie:
    Dulce et decorum est, per vacuo mori.

    Please forgive the casual discombobulation I have probably just given the declension of vacuum, but my last Latin class was in 1989. And it was an 8am class.

  3. Pen says

    It’s quite funny to read, but I really don’t get it. If he prefers being single, why doesn’t he just get on with it instead of writing huge long blog posts trying to justify that preference?

  4. angharad says

    These guys always seem to have a very narrow view of the past. ‘A long time ago’ always translates to North American frontier life. 200 years ago my ancestors were down t’pit – ancestresses too, for that matter. Further back, on a mediaeval peasant holding there was very little that was considered gendered work (except the house work, of course, such as it was when you lived in a one room hut). Ploughing was men’s work. Shearing sheep was women’s work. Everything else was for any able body.

    I’m also given to understand that the amount of time spent on housework generally remained the same across much of the 19th and 20th century. Technology didn’t reduce the amount of work. It just raised the standards. The reason spring cleaning used to be a thing is that most households could only manage the effort and disruption to do many kinds of cleaning tasks in one big go when the weather was fine. This included many things we might do once a week (or more often) now, like cleaning carpets and bed linens. As the writer himself observed with regard to washing – if something’s that difficult, you don’t put in the work, you just do it less often.

  5. says

    Adding to Angharad’s comment, I’ve highlighted the things on his list that are, in fact, products of the industrial revolution, and were when his grandparents were young too.

    I’m talking about houses that were built before modern industry made many of the amenities we now take for granted; it has a wood stove for cooking and heating, bare wood floors, light came from windows during the day and oil lamps at night, and is generally very rustic; outside is a pile of wood (with an assortment of axes and saws), a large basin (for laundry and bathing) and a clothes -ine that doesn’t move

    In a preindustrial farmstead, you’d have a firepit, or maybe a stone hearth if you’re well off. Floors are made of packed dirt, sometimes strewn with straw. Light comes from windows and the firepit; that’s all. If you’re well off, you might have a few candles, but you don’t use them much ’cause they ain’t cheap. You’ve got one, count ‘em one, axe, and quite probably no saw at all unless you’re a lumberjack by trade; that’s why houses were often built of unfinished logs (‘log cabins’), or out of fieldstone if you could get it, or adobe or the like depending on climate. A washbasin large enough to even have a hip bath is unlikely; if you ever bathe, you do it in the stream in the summer and not at all in winter. Actual preindustrial life sucks to a degree this dipshit can’t even imagine.

  6. Onamission5 says

    So the gist of this screed is that he’s threatening (promising?) to personally withhold sex from women until we as a society bring back what he sees as his dog-given right to marital rape.

    That’s like… I dunno what that is like actually. It’s like refusing to kick someone in the shins until they promise to let you punch them in the face?

  7. Onamission5 says

    And another thing, this–

    unless the mother is pimping the child’s time to the father

    –implies that, in the event the parents are not cohabitating, a non custodial parent’s visitation with their child is something which can be withheld by the custodial parent unless the child support has been paid. Which, in my experience and by law (IIRC) is about as far from the truth as one can get. Visitation is one court order, child support is a different one, ne’er the two shall mix. My ex is *years* behind, more than a decade and a half, even, and at no point would it have been legal for me to deny him visitation for non-payment, because visitation is all about the emotional needs of the kid, not for the parents.

  8. Ysanne says

    He can live comfortably on that money alone, without her, do all his own chores, and still have time and money left over to do his own activities.

    Well good for him that he figured out that it’s better for him not to be in a relationship anyway.
    Saves himself a lot of disappointment, seeing how I can’t imagine anyone wanting to put up with such a jerk longer than it takes to say “bye”.

  9. B Cazz says

    I want to break free….

    Okay, great article, but the sudden appearance of Freddie did make me laugh so hard I forgot most of it.

    (short attention span, I know)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>