Why Woman’s Economic Choices Have Made The World Stupid

August 22, 2013


How’s that for an inflamatory statement, hehehe.

OK, we all know NAWALT.. but let me explain why the general statement is true.

And i have proof.

I was recently over at my mothers for dinner when i caught this show being advertised on A&E.

A&E Premieres New Original Series “Modern Dads”

One can only wonder what kind of show it’s going to turn out to be, and whether it will further the misandry in our culture or show modern dads doing right by their kids in a system that works against them every day.

But it also dawned on me that it was just another damn ‘reality’ tv show.

Now i’ll admit, i have a small weakness for Parking Wars, but that’s about it. And to be honest, i don’t have cable in my home. I catch snippets of it when at my parents or other peoples domiciles. Cable is a fucking mind numbing disease nowadays.. but i reflect upon my early years and lament a time when this wasn’t always the case.

I bring to you the tragic tale of the channel i personally hold responsible for both my love and fascination of space, science, and the curiosity of the world.. and for the decline of our collective IQ’s, our attention spans and the whole of Western Civilization. This one channel helped bring about an Idiocracy on this continent.

I present to you



Let me take you back to 1994.

The Learning Channel was running a series of awesome shows at the time that really engaged me. They were The Practical Guide to the Universe (hosted by Tom Sellick) and Connections (hosted by James Burke).

These shows where full of awesome and interesting things to watch as they taught me about the world around me, how the mysteries of our universe worked, how the tiniest little interactions were interconnected and how they acted upon one another. The channel held up to it’s namesake very well. When you tuned into that channel, you were bound to learn something.

Over the course of a decade, while other channels were still pumping out mundane serials or comedy sitcom nonsense.. i could at least find refuge at The Learning Channel (or History, or Discovery) and be able to watch TV that actually mattered.

And then it happened.


It was the first. Many soon followed, and all of them tried to follow in it’s success. While there was a lot to groan about, it’s genre that it spawned could at least be considered a spiritual counterpart to game shows like The Price is Right or Wheel of Fortune. The element or risk/reward, challenges and hardships was there. Nothing was scripted, it was all about what the contestants did. We were watching in real time. Hence REALITY TV.

It was a novelty, but by this time TV was starting to take a nose dive. Survivor was ironically ‘the fresh air’ in a stale environment, which just goes to show you how shitty TV was getting, and how it seemed to pander to the lowest common denominator. It was selling people stupidity. One pivitol event in our lifetime brought this home.


When 9-11 happened, and the world effectively stopped to look inside itself and realize just how petty, lame, and ignorant we were about what happens outside our own borders.. and began to seriously question just how stupid a society we really were. What followed was startling. Most people didn’t know where Afghanistan was, or point to it on a map. Most people took Bush’s word on faith that they attacked because they hated ‘freedom’, oblivious and ignorant to the geopolitical realities and cultural conflicts that have been waged throughout history.

Those who do not study history are doomed to repeat it. Those who are ignorant of it will relive it.

Day in, day out i would see media personalities asking why so many people were so stupid regarding basic geography. Eventually most people would be convinced Iraq had something to do with it (when any sane individual would know that Saddam would be too fearful of losing power by helping Osama. Either Osama would turn on him, or the US would wipe him out. He knew these realities post Gulf War.. why didn’t so many others?) But most of all, there was a drum beat that we as a society were basically becoming an idiocracy. We didn’t know anything because we were too consumed by.. consuming stupidity. We had become a society that injested triviality, gossip and drama, nothing that enhanced or promoted civilization. Western nations had become the ultimate expression of self absorbed solipsistic narcissistic brats.

We only cared about what mattered the least. And only about us.

Still, i held out hope. 9-11 forced us all to come to grips with our own mortality, that we were not isolated from the rest of the world by bodies of water, that our security was more fragile and depended on more than just armies. And most of all, that we had to really understand our world in order to face the challenges. Both our own, and those that others faced.. to better understand why things happen the way they do. I held out hope that the stupid sitcoms and idiocy on TV would be replaced with programming that actually mattered. I really, REALLY believed 9-11 would be the turning point.

But at least i had my refuge at The Learning Channel. Well.. not really.

In 1998 TLC started it’s slow decline into madness.. which is part of that creeping stupidity that we made mention of earlier. Call it the “Life: Unscripted” phase.

In 1998, the channel began to distance itself from its original name “The Learning Channel”, and instead began to advertise itself only as “TLC”. During the period from 1999 to 2001, there was a huge shift in programming, with most programming geared towards reality-drama and interior design shows. The huge success of shows like Trading SpacesJunkyard WarsA Wedding Story and A Baby Story exemplified this new shift in programming towards more mass-appeal shows.

This came at a time when Discovery itself was overhauling much of its own programming, introducing shows like American Chopper (which Discovery moved to TLC for a time). Much of the old, more educationally focused programming can still be found occasionally dispersed amongst other channels owned by Discovery Communications. Most of TLC’s programming today is geared towards reality-based drama or interests such as home design, emergency room dramas, other medical dramas, extreme weather, law enforcement, dating and human interest programs.

One of these things is not like the other. One of these things just doesn't belong.

One of these things is not like the other. One of these things just doesn’t belong.

For me, TLC’s demise came long before Honey Boo Boo or Toddlers in Fucking Tiara’s. It came when instead of learning about the cosmos, or how this was invented or how that thing changed history..



The absolute final nail in the coffin for the death of intelligent programming was the fucking writers strike of 2007. Basically, studio execs realized that it was a helluva lot easier to just not pay writers and have a bunch of retards gallavant around on TV and let you the viewer peer into their world. A world where unimportant people who would never have been famous are all of a sudden considered famous. Why???

Who the FUCK is Kim Kardashian? And why should i care?

Snookie is relevant? IN WHAT FUCKING WORLD??

It wasn’t even REALITY TV anymore. It’s barely scripted, ad-libbed but fully directed hoaxes. We weren’t watching challenges. We were watching bullshit. People poked and prodded in order to garner a reaction. It was no different than watching a Disney documentary about lemmings.

12 years after 9-11 and i have no doubt that if one of the darkest days in human history couldn’t snap us back into being intelligent beings nothing will. This degenerate society is on a roller coaster ride about to enter the apex corner with it’s rusty wheels about to come loose. We are a stupid society that is ready to become irrelevant.

Are men equally culpable? Your damn right.. but lets not forget that in our great capitalist society.. it is women who drive the economy. It’s why 3/4ths of all malls cater to womens needs. Men know what they want, get in and get out. Quicker the better. Women “FEEL” shopping. It’s why malls are built the way they are. Men Buy, Women Shop! It’s also why so many magazines and advertisements are tailored directly to them. And it’s why many of these stations that cater to a majority female audience correlate to showing the worst drivel that passes for entertainment! Women purchasing things of complete worthlessness, creating a single female economy that lives just to sustain and justify itself. We have a phrase for that.


Think about the things women buy vs. men. You might claim guys buy useless shit too and sometimes yes.. they will, but i’d say even the useless shit drives innovation and productivity in some form that benefits mankind down the road! Pissed off that your boyfriend just dropped $500 dollars on a stereo or TV? It was men like him and before him that drove the need for miniaturization of transistors and microchips, creating smaller more cost efficient devices… much like that fucking vajazzled iPhone you’re using there sweetheart. His purchase of that really huge TV years ago? Helped set in motion the creation of Tablets. Look back into history and think of every device you now use and think of it’s genesis moment BEFORE it was cool and then ask yourself.. who was buying it?

If it wasn’t cool, it wasn’t a woman wanting to use it.

When was the last time that dress, lipstick, handbag, or any of the thousands of products aimed at women ever help advance our society?

When was the last time you opened Cosmo, a magazine that created make-work jobs for women to become empowered by writing bullshit articles about 83 new sex secrets that will drive him mad? Or show you new fashion tips for the fall?

Think about what would happen if Cosmo disappeared tomorrow. Aside from some stupid bitches losing overpaid writing jobs and some marketing execs losing millions of sheep.. er.. viewers, what damage or impact would it have on the planet?


Cosmo is pretty much an enclosed eco-system of useless make-work work for women to have their own economy. It employs women writers to write nonsense. It employs female editors and top execs to show glass ceilings are being broken. It employs marketing firms and lawyers and all manner of parasitic individuals who simply seek to remain employed by tricking it’s readership into believing what it’s saying actually matters. It produces nothing of value to the society, it only serves one purpose, to employ women to sustain itself. Humanity does not prosper from it. We just grow stupider. Cosmo, Vanity, GQ.. you name it. Women’s mags are full of shit that serve one end only. Justifying it’s existence.

2013-07-31 10.46.07

Compare that to any tech magazine or science journal.

Toys for boys. I fucking hate that saying. You know something.. i was one of the drivers back in the mid to late 90’s. I was the one who jumped on the 3d bandwagon. I went out and got a job and started upgrading my 8 MB, 120 MB HD, 486 DX2/66 PC with the latest Voodoo 3DFX graphics cards to play shit like Unreal Tournament, HomeWorld and Wing Commander Prophecy. I continually kept plunking down huge amounts of coin for the latest generation of ATI or NVidia cards, and processors that drove the latest games from Half Life to CounterStrike. Every computer dweeb like me was looking at every option to squeeze an extra framerate or two out of their cards using benchmarks like 3DMark. Oh does this demo take me back to my childhood! If it wasn’t for the die hard PC addicts who keep purchasing the high end gear (and the software companies for continually driving the limits of that gear fostering a need for expansion).. we’d all still be using computers the ran on 640kb of RAM because fuck eh.. thats all we needed right Bill? (Ok, maybe he didn’t say that)

The next time you wonder why we live in the current society we do today, where computers that fit in your hand (your iPhone) that once upon a time would take a city block to house.. you can thank men for that. For creating them, for seeing the need for their use, and for buying them, creating a demand to supply for.  Yes there are many female gamers entering the arena now, but the history of it, and the demographics of the ultra hard core PC gamer (lovely Carolina excluded) resides in the purview of the men!

It’s because of men that we’ve reached this pinnacle stage of evolution in computer graphics, hardware and software along with all it’s wondrous applications..

(including future Sex VR as i discussed about here)

I’m flying off a tangent here, but i got annoyed.

You get pissed when we shop toys for boys.. even tho each generation of purchases drives greater production and innovation efforts to make these things cheaper and better and more affordable and thus benefiting all of society. When was the last time you could say that about your Prada bag or your red pumps?

So because most of the economy now is based on getting females to purchase useless shit that adds nothing to society but is integral to intersexual competition among themselves, these TV stations want to siphon off as much add revenue as possible put on shows that the market demands. And when the target audience of the marketers is based primarily on female viewership…

Well, i’ll let the numbers just speak for themselves! (and keep in mind, we live in a world where Bush got to tell the world he got a mandate by receiving 51% of the vote.. just sayin)


LEARNING AND EDUCATION (primarily heavily male viewership)

History Channel

Viewership: M 64% / F 36%

America the Story of Us
World War 2 in HD
Pawn Stars
Swamp People
Ice Road Truckers


Viewership: M 58% / F 42%

Known Universe


Viewership:  M 57% / F 43%

How it’s Made
How Stuff Works
Planet Earth
Dirty Jobs
Nature’s Deadliest
Cash Cab.

NEWS SERVICES (relative gender parity with some political leanings)

BBC America

Viewership:  M 54% / F 46%

Mix of British television picked for American audiences lack of attention span.

Bloomberg Financial

No gender statistics tracked.


Viewership:  M 53% / F 47%


M 50% / F 50%

FOX News

M 50S% / F 50%


M 49% / F 51%



Viewership: M 48% / F 52%

Criminal Minds (bias)
Crime 360
The First 48
Parking Wars (I’m guilty)
Dog the Bounty Hunter


Viewership: M 42% / F 58%

Jersey Shore
16 and Pregnant
Teen Mom
I used to be Fat
MTV Cribs
True Life
When i was 17

OXYGEN (Oprah channel)

Viewership: M 28% / F 72%

Bad Girls Club
Hair Battle Spectacular
Tori & Dean
House of Glam
Love Games


Viewership: M 22% / F 78%

The OC
Gilmore Girls
Beverly Hills 90210
General Hospital
One life to live
All my children
The Young & the Restless

Lets add SPIKE TV in just for fun.. the male side of things


Viewership: M 69% / F 31%

What kind of shit is Spike selling?

1000 ways to die
Deadliest Warrior

Even here we see that there is an aspect of LEARNING and KNOWLEDGE and not just pure consumptionalist bullshit of drama drama drama.

Back to the women… and the worst of the worst

TLC (Formerly The Learning Channel)

Viewership: M 33% / F 66%

19 kids and counting
Sister Wives
What not to wear
Say yes to the dress
Kate plus 8
Cake Boss
My strange addiction
Toddlers in Tiaras
Honey Boo Boo

Capitalism. FUck. With the great respect i have for the Cappy Cap, i have to say Capitalism can be just as evil as Socialism. I’ll have a future post on Capitalism vs. Socialism that will probably make many in the sphere irate. I don’t care tho. Capitalism may have driven innovation, but lately the only innovation i see in the west is get rich quick bullshit, snuggies, slap chops, patent war litigation, and investment fraud. The entire collapse of 2008 chronicled in this documentary shows me that Capitalism breeds a type of individual who will destroy millions of people’s lives without batting an eyelash just so he can snort coke off a $1000/per hour escorts hip in a strip club.

Point is.. Capitalism is what keeps things like Cosmo going, keeps these stupid shows going.. because they’re making a shit load of money producing Honey Boo Boo and Say Yes to the Dress, and boatloads of other shit i wouldn’t watch with a hundred foot pole.  And sadly, if you look at that list above.. it’s women that are mainly watching this retardation, and advertisers are pandering to them. It’s women who love to watch retardation that is leading us into an idiocracy. As long as the retards are watching and buying, there’s no need for TV to alter the formula or to innovate.

Guess that’s why Hollywood is just rebooting shit left right and center.

This is our future. Downward spiral.

Shows where you learn about the world around you and how it works? Too boring.


Please, fuck off and die.


  1. Grumpy today.

    Good post though. I’m from Australia and never really had cable. It may amuse you to know I didn’t really know TLC used to be the learning channel, I thought it stood for “TLC” in the “Tender, Loving, Care” sense, given the fem-centric BS is puts out constantly. Live and learn 😛

    I do agree with you observations though, although thanks to things like Kickstarter and the like there is possibly hope for the future. The internet makes it possible to reach very large niche markets in a way cable and free-to-air can never hope to match. It will probably take time but I think you will see this alternative start to take off.

    Also you left Syfy off the list! Ok they make plenty of bad movies (bad in a good way though) and there is plenty of dreck on it as well but they do make a lot of good original programming. Assuming you think things like Warehouse 13 are good, but I do so 🙂

  2. zllzzozozz

    i can show you the way, neo, but you must be the one to open the doorzllzo.

    take da red pill and you will see the butthetx fiat matrix for what it is:


  3. I also haven’t had a need for cable, and only watch TV shows when (like you) I’m visiting my mother. Before television got stupid, my favorite channels were History, TLC, Discovery, Spike, National Geographic, specials on PBS, Cartoon Network, AMC, and SciFi (now apparently SyFy?). Now I see these same channels filled with the most horrendous and mind numbing gobbledegook imaginable…Suffice to say, it hurts me deep inside.

    Will comment more tomorrow, too tired and rambling as of now. Just want to say good post, M3.

  4. The TV statistics are already biased IMO. Smart people barely watch TV at all. They’re all busy off actually DOING activities.

    Where’s the statistic for who watches TV vs who doesn’t? 😛

    Also, there’s some absurd statistics on how much men save in their 20s, 30s and 40s vs how women save. I don’t have the numbers off hand though unfortunately, but men have the long term planning in mind while women just splurge all of their money on “stuff.” It would be great if you could add that into this post. Pretty much exemplifies that consumerism is driven by women and it adds nothing of value.

  5. Seeing women as uber-consumers is using out of date thinking. MSN had an article on its home page awhile back about a small NY grocery chain setting up a “man” aisle. In the 80s, 84% of their customers were women, presently 69%.

    As more of the population stays single, they’ll have to figure put how to reach men. They’ll be doing all their own purchasing.

  6. […] LONG POST WARNING IN EFFECT How’s that for an inflamatory statement, hehehe. OK, we all know NAWALT.. but let me explain why the general statement is true. And i have proof.  […]

  7. Great post M3! I agree with you wholeheartedly. TV these days is mostly mindless drivel and serves no purpose but to drive consumption.

    Personally, I haven’t had cable (or satellite) for 2 years now and really haven’t missed it. And shopping…ugh! I hate it! I don’t even go near the mall unless its Christmas and I absolutely have to. There are so many better things to do. We (the kids and I) take the puppy on walks, play catch, hit tennis balls and watch manatee in the river. I hope that I’m able to preserve that innate thirst for knowledge in my kids.

    In my opinion, what is lacking in people today is what will end up being the selection mechanism that determines who will survive…the desire to learn and understand how things work and the ability to replicate it.

  8. Other than a few shows that are entertaining…tv is pointless to me.

    My reality tv is what I see with my eyes and my interaction in the world. The drama isn’t as in your face or all the time…but you see it out there. It’s live and unedited.

  9. Who has time for TV? Losers, homos, and women. So that’s who the programing is directed toward pleasing. Shit, you can’t even watch football anymore without women jumping in, ruining that shit with breast cancer awareness, misandric commercials, idiotic women on the sidelines asking players stupid questions, and the whole industry that’s popped up around tailgating/home watching.

    I enjoyed the post because I never really thought about how men’s TV is based more on utility/learning and women’s is based on consumption and false drama. I agree with some of your sentiments about capitalism, but I don’t believe that the problems you associate with capitalism (get rich quickers and other crooks) completely lie at the feet of an economic system. Rather they lie at the feet of a society in ever quickening moral decline. A society with no moral basis, that sees life through the lens of moral relativism, is doomed regardless of its economic structure. Capitalism only works well with people who understand the basis of their morality and adhere to their values. That isn’t the US anymore.

  10. It’s not capitalism that’s the problem. It’s capitalism joined with utilitarianism where all preferences are equally valid and the goal is preference satisfaction. You could have capitalism joined with virtue ethics (what I think the 19th century was more about) and you’d have something great.

  11. So, no economic system is perfect, I’ll agree. The biggest problem with capitalism is crony capitalism. It is capitalism mixed with political protection. Most people in the developed world understand the need to separate religion and politics, but few people agree on the need to separate the economy from politics. Even if you could get everyone to agree on that, the difficulty of the task is quite daunting at this point barring a major bloody revolution.

    What we have in the U.S. is crony capitalism, we have almost nothing left of pure capitalism in the U.S. The evidence for this is everywhere. There is regulation and laws that must be avoided and liability that must be covered in almost any economic activity you undertake in the U.S. at the moment. The financial meltdown of late 2007/2008 (for which no one has been put in prison) is proof enough that the politicians know who butters their bread, and they won’t put those same people behind bars.

    The evidence for this cronyism is everywhere. In the U.S., cable television monopolies are protected by politicians. There is no worldly reason why cable companies should be a monopoly, but they remain so. You can get telephone service from any company, why isn’t there choice w.r.t. television? The answer is political protection. Furthermore, the content providers had to be forced by popular law to offer a la carte programming, as before they would simply offer 2-4 different bundles of channels and make you pay a premium for each tier up.

    TLC, when it was new, was attempting to provide NOVA-like programming on cable. The old science-ey channels did a great job of this, and I used to watch all of them along with the NASA channel. As just one of many channels in a protected bundle of channels, they could afford to put on programming that was niche and make some money on it. However, when the cable companies were (imho rightfully) forced to provide channels a la carte, suddenly TLC and the others panicked ant thought they had to create mass market appeal or they might be dropped altogether. It is easy to look at this event and blame the introduction of choice and competition for destroying TLC, but this forgets the fact that the cable companies themselves are protected from competition.

    Lets face facts. Television network executives are among the dumbest human beings on the planet. The list of good shows and even extremely good shows that they cancelled too early is huge. That subject in and of itself is probably difficult to properly study without grant money to be honest. What you are watching when you watch television is COSMO with motion pictures. Why is this? Because the same kind of morons who create Cosmo have jobs as network executives and they think so highly of themselves that they literally think they are some of the most important humans on the planet and have good taste in the arts. Nothing could be further from the truth. They’re morons. That industry has needed a major shakeup for many decades, but it doesn’t happen because television networks NEVER GO BROKE.

    Now, why do television networks never go broke?

    Crony capitalism. Competition in television broadcasting was and in many remains artificially restricted.

    Where do you find the best intellectual programming now?

    Youtube and Netflix.

    That is not an accident.

  12. I’m with you all the way. Though I don’t hold capitalism over the fire quite as you do; the issues IMO are more about the social/cultural erosion. The run-up and bubble burst were not just about the dangers of capitalism, per se, but rather the result of that cultural erosion, the response of the individual e.g. consumerism, greed, and diffusion of personal responsibility, and the carnival that is central banking/fiat currency, cronyism, and the military industrial complex running free, hyped up on fear (“security”) and rent-seeking (“jobs”), etc. Our “system” is not particularly capitalist when viewed from the perspective of the masses.

    In any case, at the core we probably agree on most of what has been driving the shit-show. Where the rubber hits the road in terms of social and relational dynamics, I find it to be fairly straight forward that the feminization of the consumer loop as propagated by all forms of media is at the core of all kinds of sucking sounds.

    Your example of the TLC slide into the abyss is right on, but I’d also argue that the shifting gears into the vacant, navel-gazing, “reality” programming is due as much to the ability of the media to drill down into their audience as it is about some shift in the content creation economic model. The cheaply produced mash-ups of “reality” that quickly became the go-to form also came about as the mainstream TV was getting crushed by other forms of media and systemic changes in broadcasting.

    The expanding platforms and corresponding choices fractured the market, e.g. internet, streaming, DVR, switch to all digital stretched and flattened the market that had been dominated by network formulaic content. The descent into “reality” was just one end of the continuum in which the individual took greater “control” over their media consumption. That control just happened to include a great deal of data, feedback, etc. that culminated in the crossover of traditional media and social media – the other end of the continuum. But it is driven by the same things, it feeds the same beast – the growing monster of hedonism-voyeurism-exhibitionism that is just one result of the broader social/cultural erosion at play.

    “Social media” (redundant, I know), has basically allowed the individual to craft their own experience in this “reality” media. Bind this together with smart-phone tech and the feedback loop is complete. Media has bridged the extrapolation challenge. They no longer need to rely solely on long-production models and then sussing out via rather archaic ratings samples. The audience, the consumers are coming to them.

    In any case, as you say, women “feel” shopping, but they also feel – and can now experience their own lives as a reality show of their own design. They are producer-writer-actor, drunk with the (false) sense of ownership and freedom and creativity, a delusion that the media happily maintains with very little effort.

    People no longer identify with a brand and make the purchase accordingly, but rather they actively brand themselves (its EMPOWERING!), their identity is a collage of brands; they are now affiliates, ambassadors, spokespeople for the things they consume – or even better, desire to consume. Image has supplanted the individual.

    Their lives via social media are nothing more than a string of echo-chamber sound bites, reprocessed pop spirituality/psychology, and product-placement advertising. All of which is so embedded that they can’t see the sell-out. They are too busy working to maintain their brand, their image, their ego. The writer-producer-actor believes she is freely crafting content, sharing her life and “connecting”, but the only reality is that she is doing the work for them, all under the guise of empowerment. Sound familiar?

    Think about how much you hear about “community”. Let’s connect! Think of all the good we can do if we were all a part of this wonderful community. The fact that the community is just a bunch of people who “like” Chipotle and are now giving real-time feedback and advertising and branding services for free is lost in the noise.

    The sad irony is that it is the very essence of community that has been lost in all of this. If the individual is being absorbed into the machine, being lost in the wake of real-time branding, how can there possibly be a community? The real community has been marginalized to the point where most young people have no idea that a community requires investment, not merely identification, association, or acquisition/consumption. It is about giving, being vested in something outside the self. But we are a nation of takers, consumers made to feel good about “giving” as long as that giving is actually consuming or attaching to the right brand. Come on everybody, Race for the Cure!

    If you want to see how women soak this up, go to OkCupid and look at female profiles. The longest, most detailed section is almost always about TV shows, books, movies they like; the self-branding section. What does your brand say about you? What are you consuming? Its creepy. And nobody seems to notice. Oh yeah, and yoga. She’s deep.

    If I find a woman who doesn’t watch reality TV (or any), isn’t on FB, doesn’t read Cosmo or some other rag, and/or isn’t enamored with “things”, she goes to the front of the line straight away.

    I’d rather die alone at sea at 50 than endure the reality TV couch surfing, laptop/smartphone facebook fingerbanging, weekend binge-consuming “relationships” with one of these drones that our culture is pumping out.

  13. I LOVED the first Survivor. Richard Hatch took the candy from the babies and they all cried for mama! It was hilarious.

    Haven’t had cable TV for the past 10 years because I refuse to expose my children to that trash, and I refuse to be influenced by it myself.

    I think it’s hands-down the best parenting decision I have ever made. Well that, plus the whole stay married to Daddy thing. That’s pretty important, too.

    But I agree 100%. All these women who MUST work because they can’t afford to live otherwise? Bullshit. Take a look at your monthly budget. If it doesn’t involve decent food, a small amount of clothing, shelter for a modest dwelling, heat or necessary medicine, it’s bullshit.

    Everything else is driven by women’s insatiable desire for useless crap.

  14. Well, I agree with the main point of your argument, but disagree with a few specifics. First, reality television started with MTV, ‘The Real World’…stupidest show on the planet at the time and I never thought the idea would carry on, this is when I was very young and foolish and had too much faith in humanity.

    But the brain drain truly started with talk shows. The hosts would try to outdo each other with the wildest shite they could come up with, bring it to everyone’s home and pretend it was kinda normal. “Middle school girls who beg to have YOUR baby!”, “Granny strippers ride them poles!”, “Parents who dress their children as farm animals and make them bend over to be pumped by clown puppets!” The masses were 1 part appalled, 2 parts in awe…these people were even more f*cked up than they were! “Pass me the fry daddy…er no! Make that the fry gran-pappy, it’s a party Skeeter!”

  15. We don’t watch television in our house either.

  16. Eh, I don’t know. Women, in the long run, make everything cheaper by creating demand for things like various foods, various type of cloth, other stuff that makes homes comfortable. Without big demand, those things wouldn’t be affordable to the average person. Sure, they don’t invent it themselves, but it isn’t their role. And sure, a man can probably live withour tea, spices for his food or comfortable sheets for his bed, but we don’t need computers to survive either. We shouldn’t have made ourselves dependent on something that needs tons of (finite) fuel anyway, and then overpopulate the earth.

    I’m not sure what’s worse. A person who can’t invent anything and lives in a grasshut, or someone who invents shit that allows people to breed like rabbits, and then makes them all dependent on non-renewable energy resources.

  17. Firstly we all know this isnt capitalism, its fascism. And its admitted that government is in the culture creation business. Second, why would women care about tech? Based on their preferences we will be going back to mud huts and cooking with dung. One only needs to look at the open scorn of the “nerd” tech caste vs the love of the more thug caste. Women may love their iPhone but not the nerdy engineer team behind it.

  18. Reading Emma’s post…

    The concept of innovation is always an interesting juxtaposition between subsistence societies and more prosperous ones. Edison’s much repeated “genius is 99 percent perspiration/1 percent inspiration” bit comes to mind. In a first world country innovation is laudable…”if at first you don’t succeed…” and all that.

    Take this concept to a subsistence society and hypothetical Ishmael, the free thinker tries a new agricultural technique in hopes of tripling his food output, but fails. Instead of tripling the output his family starves along with the village. In a prosperous society, he can try again but in a non-prosperous one, he’s a hazard. There’s probably an equal but opposite anti-Edisonian proverb for a “fool who risks everything on an idea” in subsistence societies.

    Which ties into western capitalism too. The double edged sword. Looking back at the origins of the usury ban in some religions, societies back in the day had few to no income producing capital assets. But it wasn’t a “misunderstanding of capital markets” like some today would deem it. It served a function. Bans on usury are stabilizing to societies at the edge of subsistence.

    When the only real source of income is human labor and property, a debtor frequently becomes a slave. A person without a stake in society isn’t as liable to defend it. States were weakening by dispossessed freeholders and and insolvent debtors. If all it takes is a drought for your debt to make you a slave and then your children and their children’s children you don’t have much to lose. Then came the age of smoke-stack industries and those who maintained the usury ban weren’t able to compete as well. Large-scale industry is hampered without credit markets. But conversely, it can open the door to too easy credit, massive personal debt, and eventually perhaps even systemic collapse too (and then, potentially, things reverse themselves and once again the population enters an age where too many do not have a stake in society).

  19. M3 you rock! It’s homerun after homerun. I wonder how many posts like this a woman needs to read in order to sink in!

    I’d say blinded by the light!

  20. In addition to not having television for almost a decade now, I try to be frugal with my money. What does one really, truly need?

    A living space.
    Maybe heating and cooling.
    Medicine, if you’re unlucky like some of my friends are.
    Student loans from college.

    Other than that, your budget is full of unnecessary purchases. It took me over a year to get “real” furniture after moving out at 17…just wasn’t that important in my mind. Now don’t get me wrong, I buy fun stuff too. But my fun stuff is videogames, dice, miniatures and other gaming stuff…and if it doesn’t fit in my budget for the month, I don’t buy it.

    Yup. It’s *that* simple.

    Maybe I’m missing something here, but how would you be able to live *without* working…woman or no? I am fortunate enough to have a job that I love, but I still need to work to pay my bills and eat! No one else is going to do it for me, you know. 😛

  21. @ Jeremy

    Well said and i think i pretty much agree with all you state.

    And FireFly should not have been cancelled.

  22. @ TZ

    Excellent points as well.

    Every time i think of an era like Little House on the Prairie.. i can’t image people in the community fucking each other over, precisely because there was a community to answer to. Megacities that remove the social tribe aspect also breeds individualism to the point pure selfishness and callous disregard for other people as long as you come out on top.

    Also saw a funny cartoon today (ironically on Facebook) with 2 panels. Kids playing in 1913 (kids playing in a playground with each other) vs. kids playing in 2013 (same kids in the same playground, huddled around the same tree, but all staring down into their phones/tablets/laptops clicking away on their keyboards). Social media is a most unsocial thing.

    “If I find a woman who doesn’t watch reality TV (or any), isn’t on FB, doesn’t read Cosmo or some other rag, and/or isn’t enamored with “things”, she goes to the front of the line straight away.”
    Fits my girlfriend almost to a T. She enjoys Breaking Bad, Lost, Walking Dead… but no reality drama crap. Hates Cosmo type rags and prefers LinkedIn to Facebook. I guess it’s sad that im on FB more than her.. but i use it to showcase my art, and share funny memes.

  23. @ JB

    And that’s why we love you lady! 🙂

    I couldn’t believe it when Hatch pulled that off.

  24. @ Liz

    True enough.. i totally forgot about the Maury’s of yesteryear.. Rikki Lake? Jerry Springer? Who else was on that horrible shit list?

  25. @ Emma

    I guess i was relating more to the consumables of women that i (personally) find no value in and that they seem to exist simply to exist for women and create an unnecessary economy. Think home deco. It’s one of the big things guys like me, MGTOW’s crow about shortly after leaving a bad marriage. How there was always some renovation that needed to be done to shit that already was fine as it was. A minimalist like me doesn’t have to worry about throws/pillows/ornate tables and any of the myriad of items that end up cluttering a house.

    And for fuck sakes.. with a 5 to 1 ratio for clothing options, 100 to 1 ratio for shoes.. items which simply exist only to help women compete against women and do nothing except create more wage slave corpses in another collapsed garment factory in India.

    I can walk into downtown Toronto and point to thousands of women on the street that i know have a job that does nothing to further society and only exists as a means of justifying itself to give women jobs so they can be all empowered and shit. Think director of marketing. Think fashion critic. Think anyone on the staff of writers for Jizzabel, the biggest make-work enterprise for useless twats on the planet! The stuff they buy does nothing to enhance human society or ingenuity. They work and live in the same solipsistic bubble their own minds work on. A self enclosed ecosystem that has no bearing or impact on the world around them.

    But DAYUM.. are they showing their moxie or what!

  26. @ Shameful

    Yes, there is definitely scorn of the nerd caste when it comes to the actual people who are truly nerdy, and are neglected for the badboybillyrockerdrummerbikermcnasty.

    Recently tho, society has been trying to trend hot girls in thick bordered glasses as being nerdy.. thus making them acceptable. Of course this only applies to the beautiful. All you ugly nerdlings can go crawl into a hole and die!

  27. […] You get pissed when we shop for toys for boys… even though each generation of purchases drives… […]

  28. Terrific post – always impressed with how you can sit down and write such long-form thoughts. I sometimes start to write longer pieces, only to stop mid-way.

    I would take some issue with your notion that TV is worse than ever. If the only thing you see is “reality” TV, then you would probably be right. But, if you move to scripted TV, you get a very different picture. The Sopranos, Breaking Bad, Mad Men, Battlestar Galactica, The Shield – these are some of the most thoughtfully written shows in the age of mass entertainment. What is notable about these shows is that most of the writers & producers are men, although Mad Men is noted for hiring a number of women writers.

    Men approach art as a creative enterprise, while women tend to approach art as a reflective enterprise. In Plato’s Republic, Socrates argues with his students that art which simply reflects society is not truly art. After all, a mirror can reflect, does that make the image a piece of art, by itself?

    I have a hard time believing that a woman would or could go come up with an alternate reality like Game of Thrones. I can imagine women watching yet another Jane Austen remake, where courtship and its rules are of the utmost importance.

    But, the problem is that women make up the most sought after demo in television, so even shows that are geared toward men may feel pressure to attract women. This was especially tru before the time of basic cable dramas. One of my favorite shows in the 1990s was “Homicide: Life on the Street” – It was a cop show, where more often that not, crimes did not get solved, or murderers got away with their crime. It was written by cops and journalists from the streets of Baltimore, and they did not want to have a happy ending for each episode. It was also noteworthy for having a cast that was almost half black, which allowed for those black actors to develop unique personality traits. Unlike a show with just one black guy, who would often just be a 2-dimensional character.

    While critically acclaimed, the show did not pull in great ratings. NBC execs kept pressuring them to bring in more female-friendly plot-lines, maybe a love triangle. They wanted the story-lines to move away from the crimes and the toll it takes on police, and more towards relationships. The producers held out as long as they could, but they did eventually give in – and hired some unusually good-looking female cops, start setting stories in more fashionable places, like Miami. It was still better than most other shows, but comparing later seasons with the earlier seasons shows the viewer what was lost in the pursuit of female viewers.

    Even in matters of sex & writing , there are different approaches. E.L. James “Fifty Shades of Grey” is porn for suburban women – with various descriptions of sexual acts. But, Nabakov’s “Lolita”, the focus is on how men’s inherent attraction to youthful women, if not channeled and kept under control, can wreck havoc. One book will soon be a joke to a trivia question, while the other stands out as one of the most controversial books of the last century.

  29. @Ted

    I agree with everything you’ve said, but would like to point out that there are *many* spectacular scifi and fantasy novels written by female authors. Here are some of my favorites:

    Anne McCaffrey = Pern series
    Octavia Butler = Lilith’s Brood trilogy
    Margaret Weiss = Dragonlance series
    Erin Evans = Forgotten Realms author
    Janny Wurts = Empire trilogy
    Patricia McKillip = Riddlemaster trilogy
    Rob Thurman = Cal Leandros series
    K.A. Stewart = Arcane West
    Diana Jones = Howls Moving Castle
    Ursula LeGuin = Wizard of Earthsea
    Magnus Flyte = City of Dark Magic

    Carol Berg = Lighthouse trilogy
    C.J. Cherryh = The Dreamstone duology
    Andre Norton = Avalon series

    There are obviously a great many more out there, but I’m hesitant to recommend anyone I’ve not read myself. Also, for women who have written under a male pen name, I’ve not included their true name…you’ll have to search that yourselves, mostly because I am at work now.

  30. Hunger Games was a pretty good “alternate” reality piece, I thought.

  31. There’s also Harry Potter, wasn’t my kind of thing but a lot of people liked that series and it was definitely an alternate reality.

  32. NAWALT!!!
    haha, just had to say it!

  33. I’m not a loser or a homo, but I am a woman. 🙂

    TV is going in two directions: way down (Housewives, Snooki, reality shows of all kinds) and way up (dramas). Dramatic TV is good enough nowadays that I’ve actually gone off movies for the most part. I think television over the past decade has had far more interesting stories to tell than film, and the quality of acting, writing and production is much better. Sopranos, Game of Thrones, Deadwood, Boardwalk Empire, Mad Men, The Wire, House of Cards, Breaking Bad… any one of those is better than almost any film of late you could name.

    I will also admit to a longstanding Law & Order addiction. The original, not the spinoffs, and mostly the first ten seasons before that talentless twat Elisabeth Röhm came on. It’s filmed on location in NYC and it shows, so it makes me nostalgic for my hometown. Also, its predictability is comforting to me. 🙂

  34. Regarding Cosmo: I can’t believe women still fall for that. (actually, yes I can) Some of their advice is truly nonsensical. I was reading one of their dumbass “20 Sexy Things To Do With Your Man To Put You Both In The Mood For Love”. One of the things on the list, was, I swear to gods:
    –Have your sweetie give you a manicure.

    I cracked up when I read that. Even if, for some reason, it does put one or both of you in the mood (yeah, the smell of acetone is a real panty-wetter), you won’t be able to do anything about it until your fucking nails dry.

    {makes gun-shooting-at-own-head gesture}

  35. […] As if you didn’t hear me complain about that already […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: