Calling for a new species

The Guardian:

Instead of constantly putting manhood under perceived threat, we must rethink the concept entirely, and maybe – to be so daring – throw it out. Because we have centuries of war, of pillaging, of violence that show us that manhood was never in crisis, but always was central to this mayhem. So we may need to just rebuild everything with the whole concept of manhood excluded.

Brecht:

The Solution

After the uprising of the 17th of June
The Secretary of the Writers’ Union
Had leaflets distributed in the Stalinallee
Stating that the people
Had forfeited the confidence of the government
And could win it back only
By redoubled efforts. Would it not be easier
In that case for the government
To dissolve the people
And elect another?

18 comments on “Calling for a new species

  1. Ah, those wacky guardianistas, what will they think of next? Thank god the British left have made themselves unelectable.

    How do they propose to do away with manhood? Chemical castration via the water supply?

  2. How do they propose to do away with manhood?

    Judging by a lot of the postings I read on Facebook, I think they’ve already made giant strides in that area.

  3. It will solve the Malthusian worries and the Club Of Rome won’t have to worry as the remaining 51% of the population will gradually die out, reducing its impact on the environment.

  4. A classic article – However, if you read Facebook, as Tim Newman suggests – or even, ye gods the ‘unholy Trinity’ of 38 Degrees, Avaaz or Change-org, I think we’re well on the way to the abolition of ‘manhood’ – Let’s hope when ISIS are at the shores of the UK it can be rediscovered once it has been abandoned, or perhaps will we submit the jihadis to ‘Gender Studies seminars’ on the beaches…..

  5. Always with the fucking “we”, these people. We must do this, we must do that. No we fucking mustn’t, you dozy cunt.

  6. It’s unsurprising that an androgynous hack should so hate manhood when he probably suffered a good few kickings for acting and looking like a nonce.

  7. We have reached peak Guardian. I fucking hope so, anyway.

    He asked a group of men to name important women in history, which they did, but when pressed on what those women did, the men really couldn’t respond.

    Why is the conclusion from this not “History teaching is shit”? And were they history undergrads, or physicists? And if you asked a history undergrad to name important women in science, how would they do?

    This is just astounding logic:

    This lack of actually knowing women’s lives led Powell to the conclusion that if these men couldn’t connect or care to intimately know about women’s lives, they weren’t able to respect them enough not to perpetrate violence against their bodies.

    What an amazing series of leaps.

    First, if you can’t detail what some female historical figures did, that proves you don’t care about the lives of women who are alive today.

    Secondly, if you don’t care enough about the details of their lives, you’ll rape them or assault them. Because obviously.

    And yet most men in long-term relationships will assert (when their other half isn’t listening) that one of the things that keeps the relationship content is not listening too much to the shite the other half care about. And, if they’re honest, women feel the same way about us. I just don’t care what Jennifer Aniston has chosen to wear this week, which is apparently a REALLY IMPORTANT THING to women. I don’t want to rape every woman who does care about it.

    It just lets men be more educated about the women they are perpetrating violence against.

    But he just said that they’re perpetrating violence against them BECAUSE they’re not educated about them. WHICH IS IT?

    We’ve seen this recently with the high rate of reported transgender murders in the US – the number sits at 22 so far this year

    Is that high? How many transgender people are there in the US? There are 16000 murders a year, so 22 might be pretty low. Depends.

    Depends on the data HE’S NOT GIVING US.

    This is just yet another — although a spectacularly inept — rehash of what lefties have been saying for decades. They often claim that the world would be so much better if only it were run by women. And yet the same people DETEST Margaret Thatcher and Golda Meir.

    I wonder what this eejit does when he needs a shelf put up.

  8. The Guardian contributors, editors and a large part of its readership will not be happy until we men cut our little chaps off, preferably without any anaesthetic or painkillers as self punishment, to atone for all our individual, group and gender-group crimes against females.

  9. @ Squander Two
    I know what Madame Curie did, and Queen Elizabeth (“Gloriana”), also her two Marys, Catherine the Great, Isabella (accompanied by her side-kick Ferdinand), Salome, Miriam, Deborah and of course BVM (and a few more – NB Boudicca was unimportant in the context of history). History was my worst subject at school apart from the two non-academic subjects – Art and PE. So who was he talking to? A carefully selected group of drunks?
    What *really* annoys me about these whiney wimps is that they portray manliness as being a bully when it is actually about standing up to bullies. If they were bullied at school that was down to their own personal failure – real men stand up to bullies.

  10. The More Important Issue:

    “Powell, who recently released a memoir”

    What happened to “published”? This is endemic these days.

    “Released” often sounds pompous somehow.

  11. Squander

    Touche – They have their fifth columnists already in place certainly – I was thinking they might still need to achieve a military taekover via invasion but we might have a supine enough establishment under Corbyn for it to be a matter of allowing them to bring the Caliph over unimpeded……

  12. I’m trying to remember where I recently read that “civilisation” means the the women have already won the war – the emphasis on monogamy, peace, and stability being more favourable to females than to males (who tend to prefer polygamy, fighting and mobility). I’m not saying I necessarily agree with the sentiment, since it relies on behavioural archaeology, but there is something about it that is attractive.

    As others have said, lets wait and see how long radical feminism lasts when the next dispute over territory comes around …

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.