Should Women be Treated Equally or are Women of Equal Value?

Women should not be treated equally to men but women definitely are of equal value to men. Actually the whole idea that treating women differently from men implies an insult against women or a suggestion that women are of less value than men is a feminist invention. In traditional society, in a patriarchal context, there was never any idea that women were “less than” men or inferior to men.

If men really truly treated women just as they treated men, treating women as equals like the feminists pretend that they want, then that would be treating and viewing women as inferiors and be highly abusive to women. This is because such a gender equality set up ignores the reality of male superiority in a number of areas of life. The man who pretends he is not superior in areas he is actually superior in is placing the woman at a disadvantage to himself; he is neglecting the woman’s true and actual needs.

Because of the clear injustice of men treating women equally to themselves what feminists demand in practice is gender equality in the masculine realm and female supremacy in the feminine realm; feminists demand equality in fields that men generally excel in and they demand special treatment in areas more closely associated with feminine strengths and feminine roles. In other words since gender equality is clearly abusive to women what “gender equality” feminist style means in practice is female supremacy; equality between men and women in the masculine realm combined with female superiority in the feminine realm.

What traditional patriarchy is based on is acknowledging and supporting the natural strengths of men and at the same time acknowledging and supporting the natural strengths of women so that both men and women can function at their best and be treated fairly and have their respective needs as men and women met. Under patriarchy men are treated better in some ways consistent with supporting the man’s role as a man and women are treated better in other ways consistent with supporting the woman’s role as a woman. Under patriarchy men and women are of equal value but definitely women are discriminated against in the masculine realm while men are discriminated against in the feminine realm.

In practice feminism is abusive against both men and women and in particular against children because the woman becomes focused on how she is being treated “unfairly” where it is claimed to be “unfair” whenever a woman is denied what she wants; in this way the woman placing herself above the man and being abusive against the man. Similarly the man views it as being “unfair” when he is expected to shoulder an extra burden on behalf of the woman or is expected to take on responsibilities while being denied power; the man reacting to this abuse against him, both real and imagined, by withdrawing from his responsibilities on behalf of the woman; this being abusive against the woman. Finally both the man and the woman involved in this mutual abuse against each other harms the children based on neglect of the child’s needs and interests and the bad relationship modeling involved.

Related to this subject I wish to respond to some things Crystal said in a comment recently at this site:

“As an egalitarian I believe biology is our only main difference and it should be respected and acknowledged because it is natural, and all others are societal and therefore arbitrary. No one is arguing with the fact that men and women are different biologically. What we’re arguing with is that the other differences (and sometimes the biological ones) are used to hold women back constantly from pursuits they want to follow and purposes they want for their lives.”

First off differences between men and women are natural, patriarchy is what is natural. If Crystal supports what is natural then certainly she should support patriarchy and traditional gender roles. Egalitarianism or feminism is what is an artificial social construct. Crystal however seems to be suggesting that only the plumbing of men and women is different; that all other differences between men and women are “societal and therefore arbitrary.”

This is an interesting claim to make, that what is societal is necessarily arbitrary as if society can just declare any kind of social arrangement it wishes as an act of will. The thing is that society decided upon traditional gender roles in the past precisely because traditional gender roles worked and produced good results. The cultural values of the past were not just based on an act of will; they were based on aligning societal values and expectations with human nature and the natural strengths and inclinations of men and women.

Crystal further said “What we’re arguing with is that the other differences (and sometimes the biological ones) are used to hold women back constantly from pursuits they want to follow and purposes they want for their lives.” This is perhaps the most important point. The feminist doesn’t want to be held back from “pursuits they want to follow and purposes they want for their lives.” In other words the feminist wants to do whatever they want, being supported by men in whatever it is they want to be doing, regardless of how it harms others and regardless of what their responsibilities and duties towards others are. This attitude that women are entitled to do whatever they want is the woman placing herself above the man and placing herself above children; it is a female supremacist attitude.

In addition Crystal asked:

“[D]o you think we have neurological and other such functional differences as well?”

Yes, there are functional differences between men and women besides plumbing and who has the ability to become pregnant. There are significant skill differences between men and women and significantly different ways of thinking and processing and interpreting information and different drives and ambitions and areas of focus and differences in what one finds attractive and desirable in the opposite sex. Men are better at things associated with the masculine realm while women are better at things in the feminine realm and the man is looking for femininity in the woman while the woman is looking for masculinity in the man. It is this generalized widespread difference between men and women that leads to the functionality of patriarchy and the dysfunctionality of all alternative social arrangements.

Crystal furthermore stated:

“[A] woman should be valued for her humanity first and foremost, and supposing a woman contributes something to society that is not traditionally feminine? Such a definition has the potential to exclude not only the trans community but also cis women who don’t match up to the “traditional woman” model.”

Women should be valued for their humanity first and foremost you say? This is a strange request to make. When I think about a woman I think of her as being a woman; I do not see how I can separate a woman’s femaleness from her humanity. To me it seems that her femaleness is part of her humanity or her femaleness is how her humanity expresses itself. I am not sure she is either a female first and a human second or a human first and a female second; instead she is a human female, both female and human at the same time.

What if a woman contributes something to society that is not traditionally feminine? In that case the great majority of the time what she is contributing to society is of inferior value and likely is downright disruptive and destructive of how society is supposed to operate. The traditional woman is the gold standard of the greatest contribution a woman can offer to society; other forms of female contribution being of lesser value or downright harmful due to the woman either operating in her area of weakness or worse directly attacking and undermining men’s area of strength.

Crystal then said:

“I would just say that women need to be treated both as equals and as people with equal value from now on.”

I am suspicious of this statement, it seems like female supremacy to me. It is the claim that women should be treated both as equal and as superior at the same time; treating women “as equals” seeming to mean that men and women should be treated the same in the masculine realm while treating women as having “equal value” means women should be treated preferentially or as superior in the feminine realm. Instead I would say that women should be treated as having equal value, not that men and women should be treated “as equals” because clearly men and women are not equal to each other, instead men and women are different.

Lastly Crystal made the comment:

“Third-wave feminism embraces homemakers IF they choose this path for themselves. This is an area where second-wave feminism erred greatly, I admit. Which is why I don’t buy into the “all women must have a job” dogmatism, because the traditional role of homemaker is just as meaningful as anything else you do.”

The traditional role of homemaker has greater value than the career woman role and this is true whether a particular woman wants to be a homemaker or not. The moral value of the traditional woman role is superior as an objective reality, it is not about whether a particular woman prefers that role or not. The idea that the woman has the right to choose whether to be a homemaker or not simply based on her own preference is again a manifestation of a female supremacist mentality; that the man should support the woman in whatever the woman decides to do and that the interests of the children don’t matter, that only what the woman wants matters. Instead it is an objective reality that women are SUPPOSED TO fulfill their traditional roles and obligations as women and men are OBLIGATED TO support and enable women in their traditional roles as women. This is what men and women owe to each other as men and women and it is also what adults owe to their children.

About Jesse Powell TFA

Anti-Feminist, MRA, Pro-Traditional Women's Rights Traditional Family Activist (TFA)
This entry was posted in Gender Politics Analysis, Women's Duties and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

67 Responses to Should Women be Treated Equally or are Women of Equal Value?

  1. WayneMan says:

    Yes and yes. The answer t those two questions should be obvious.

  2. Dragonfly says:

    You might be interested in this awesome article I found that explains this from a Christian perspective!

    • Crystal says:

      The Botkins are not Christian. They belong to a pseudo-Christian cult called Biblical/Christian Patriarchy, and teach many things contrary to Scripture, not only sociologically, but theologically too. I would encourage you to look them up and read about them extensively before calling them “Christian”; they are not worthy of the title.

  3. Crystal says:

    I think women should be treated both as equals, and as people with equal value. Ta for letting me comment and tolerating dissent on your blog, Jesse.

    • FamilyFirst says:

      Do you think men should be treated both as equals, and as people with equal value? Should men have the right to choose between staying at home with the kids or have a career or does that right only belong to women? Women can choose between being nurturers and providers while men must be providers?

      • Crystal says:

        The same criteria applies to men as to women. Equality is for all.

        Seriously you sound like the “All Lives Matter” guys. Discrimination against women is a real problem AROUND THE WORLD. Why, just recently, Pakistani women’s rights activist Qandeel Baloch was brutally murdered by her brother. Please, you can’t just ignore this. Around the world, women are beaten, raped, betrayed. I’m not saying these things can’t happen to men; they do! However feminism is about women’s rights so that equality may be more fully ensured between the sexes, and this man’s rights business seems to me to be a deflecting of that. I’m not saying men don’t have problems, or can’t be raped; but rather that when the blacks say “Black Lives Matter” don’t say “All Lives Matter” without hearing the black people out first.

      • Crystal says:

        In case I didn’t make it clear, it’s the same for men AND women! Men shouldn’t be forced to adhere to a role any more than women should. People should be free to choose their own destinies regardless of sex or gender.

  4. smurray30 says:

    Do you have a Facebook page or YouTube channel to also follow?

  5. No, just this website here is my only outlet at this time. You might be interested in looking at my old posts and comments at The Thinking Housewife:

    The Thinking Housewife – Search Jesse Powell

  6. lauren says:

    a woman should be a homemaker whether or not she wants to be !!! this would be where a man comes home from work to be greeted by a frustrated,bored & angry wife,crying children whose needs would be better met at school or with a carer-male or female who wants to be there…I could not keep my sanity if I was “forced” to stay at home with kid(s) all day washing cooking cleaning yes it needs to be done but a washing machine can be operated by either gender,kids can be driven to sports by either gender…jesse please don’t breed

    • Crystal says:

      Exactly my thoughts, Lauren.

      I plan on writing a thorough rebuttal to that point and the others he raised (especially as the article is directly answering a reply I gave another commenter, something I never realised in the beginning but after reading it I know), but I’ll give you a spoiler: what about Mother Teresa? Is she somehow inferior because she never married and had kids? As for the response, stay tuned.

      • FamilyFirst says:

        Sir Isaac Newton, who has been called the father of modern science, never married nor had children. Is he somehow inferior because he never married and had kids? Please include that in your response. After all, it should be about equality, correct?

    • FamilyFirst says:

      And should a man be a provider whether or not he wants to be? Many would welcome the opportunity to stay at home and raise their kids – both men and women would love to do that. A lot of men may not be able to keep their sanity since they are “forced” to work at jobs they hate to support spouses and ex-spouses who resent them. A lot men may not be able to keep their sanity since they are “forced” to support children they hardly see. So would you be willing to support a male homemaker? Do you believe men should have choices too?

  7. lauren says:

    thank you for your acknowledgement Crystal,i’ve just reread the full article by jesse & his responses to your response to another poster many of jesse’s views feel they speak for every woman & those that would differ their views are some how inferior.just as jess does not speak for every man,the women who uphold his views don’t speak for every woman,but respect is earned by you due to the thoughtful,respectful ways you disagree with him & make your point..

    • Crystal says:

      Thanks, lauren. I will generally endeavour to disagree – or agree – respectfully with someone because the fruit of such intellectual pursuits is far more long-lasting than it is when someone is being rude and using ad-homs. I would like to give people a reason not only to be open to my opinions but also to give others of like mind a reason for the hope that is in them, and the tools to explain that hope. You’ve provided me with a supportive comment; thanks a heap and I hope to get my responses up soon.

  8. Elizabethan says:

    I love how you don’t have space in your delusion of how the world is supposed to be for non gender conforming woman, whether they be lesbians, bisexual or just not maternal.
    You have no space in your world view for woman who prefer to work, don’t want to breed or don’t like men.
    Woman have inherent worth, whether they want or need a man or not, whether they have kids or not whether they work or not.
    Feminism only exists because men through out time have abused and raped woman, its delusional to act like there is any other reason why suffregates and feminists exist.

    • Crystal says:

      Heya, I can understand your frustration! Seriously, because we’ve tried the patriarchal model and it doesn’t work – not long-term – because it’s not based on a system of equality for all but rather “All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others”.

      I hope you don’t mind if I recommend that you check out the comment I put up that received critique; it might make you feel better.

      • FamilyFirst says:

        Well, the patriarchal model lifted humans from their primitive origins to advanced societies. Has any matriarchal model done that? Ultimately, a model has to sustain humanity through prosperity and the generation of wealth. A model can’t be built on demanding that some create and build wealth and then turn it over to those who don’t in the name of equality. Equality means that everyone contributes to society and reaps the rewards from society equally. Equality doesn’t mean that some must generate the wealth so that others will redistribute that wealth according to their own preferences.

      • Crystal says:


        I don’t know about matriarchal models so I am not qualified to answer your question on that score. However, to what degree did patriarchal models lift humans from their primitive origins to advanced societies, and at what price? It’s possible that if women ruled the world we would be less technologically advanced, or again more so; I’m not sure. Women do invent things, and contribute greatly to society, and when they’re wives and mothers – are you trying to tell me women do absolutely NOTHING?? They birth, they bleed, they raise children, they propagate life. I agree that equality means that everyone contributes to society and reaps the rewards from society equally, but I think we define that differently. Because as I mentioned women give their bodies and lives to the task of childrearing whereas men only offer manpower.

      • Crystal says:


        Do women get financially rewarded for being wives and mothers? For, if not, please don’t tell me that women aren’t contributing and equal rights is an unfair distribution of wealth. Honestly I’m not sure where you got that idea from but it’s wrong.

      • Bri says:

        Here are some examples of matriarchal or matrilineal societies or constructs that actually exist/existed:
        The Iroquois Confederacy
        The Ethiopian Royal lineage (passed to women only)
        Mosuo culture in China (in many aspects)
        Several communities in India (I.E. the Khasi)
        Ancient Vietnam
        The Hopi Native Americans (egalitarian)
        Many African tribes (I.E. the Akan,
        Minangkabau in Indonesia
        And probably many more. Please, do you research before you try to drive women further into the ground that men polluted. 🙂

      • FamilyFirst says:

        And how successful were those matriarchal societies? Did they advance science, medicine, technology, economics or law?

        Overall, female rulers were more likely to be tyrants:

        Empress Wu Zetian of China was vicious. She falsely accused those who opposed her with treason and had them tortured to death. She strangled her infant daughter with her bare hands in order to further her own career. She blinded people and cut out their tongues.

        Mary I of England known as “Bloody Mary.” She executed hundreds of Protestants because they weren’t Catholics. Most of her victims were burned.

        Elizabeth Bathory killed hundreds of girls. Horrific actions included the burning or mutilation of hands, biting off of faces, needle torture.

        Ranavalona I of Madagascar used forced labor (slavery) and killed half of her population with torture shrinking the population from 5 million to 2.5 million in 6 years.

        Indira Gandhi is most famous for her State of Emergency. In 1975  Indira declared a state of emergency, giving her dictatorial powers.  Civil liberties and democracy was suspended during The Emergency.  Opposition leaders were arrested. A controversial family planning  program was put in place, which led to many Indians (mostly females) being unwillingly sterilized.

        Next time do your research before you blame men for the grounds women polluted. 🙂 Also, do research on all the great things men have created and praise them instead of finding ways of driving them into the ground.:)

  9. Adrienne says:

    How is your life affected by women who don’t adhere to a separate-but-equal life formula? Why do you care so much whether or not a woman wants to wear pants or a skirt, join the army or make pies, start a business or start a family, marry or remain single? Not to mention that the word “feminine” can be interpreted myriad ways, and that for a person of Christian faith, equality in opportunity and personal power between men and women is referenced continuously in the Bible. The world will not explode if a women dares to step outside the “feminine realm” and, shockingly, perform just as competently in any area as a man would. In fact, we do it every day, and it is not to spite men or bring them down–we are simply created on an equal playing field with compatible gifts and abilities.

    • FamilyFirst says:

      Well, Adrienne, one can ask the same question of you. How is your life affected by men who don’t adhere to the alpha male formula? Why do you care so much if a man has a job, wears skirts, dresses, high heels and make-up? Why do you care if a man wants to stay home and be supported by a woman? Will the world explode if a man dares to step outside the “masculine realm”? Women are still hypergamous – why is that? Why do women seek to take full custody of the kids after a divorce? Why not seek joint custody? So, Adrienne, why are women threatened by real equality – equal rights and equal responsibilities for all?

      • Elizabethan says:

        Lol, you are hysterical, and hypergamy isn’t a thing, read a book, leave the house, family first!
        Who cares what men are doing, when they are writing increasingly deranged and out of touch of reality posts like this and his other Red Pill buddies, why would I do anything with men? If men are this desperate for sex and control!

      • Adrienne says:

        This didn’t answer my question at all! I’m not even sure what point you’re making. You’re just asking more questions.
        I can answer them, though. I don’t care what men do. A man can choose whatever job he wants to. He can be blue collar, white collar, work at a cupcake factory, stay home with the kids, whatever he wants. My original questions were rhetorical, because I would like to know why some men seek to control how women shape their lives. If I don’t mind what you do, why do you mind what I do? Equality does not hurt men so very much, I’ve found, as much as loss a loss of power, ego, and money that equal opportunity causes.

      • FamilyFirst says:

        It answered your question, but not in the way you wanted it to be answered. And what’s wrong with asking more questions? Are you only allowed to ask questions?

        A woman can choose what she wants to do. She can be blue collar, white collar, work at a cupcake factory and stay home with the kids as well. And she could have done that before feminism.

        I don’t find that men want to control how women shape their lives. I find that women want to control how men shape their lives. Women have the freedom to have abortions, collect welfare, collect alimony and collect child support, while men don’t have as much freedom when it comes to those things. Society wants men to be responsible and accountable while allowing women to be privileged and entitled. Now that women are being held more accountable, they are complaining. No one said equality was easy or fair.

        You are right, though. Men seem to be benefitting more from feminism than women are. Now men can demand that women work to pay the bills and support them. Men more and more can now collect alimony and child support. If a woman wants a certain lifestyle, she can no longer just demand it from her man, no, she has to work for it. A man doesn’t have to marry a woman any more. Enjoy the new society especially as the welfare state crumbles.

      • Henry says:

        So, where to start is a good question…first of all let me tell you that what happens is a result of power dynamics and you know what they say about absolute power…matriarchial societies advance they make strides and continue on because of it. The women you sighted as tyrannical are no different than men that could be sighted by anyone at a given time. I totally advocate on a daily basis for men to have the choice to stay at home or be out in the workforce and as far as divorce and custody laws are concerned they are set up the way they are because of the exact model you seem to be complaining of. The patriarchial model paints men as solely providers and women as solely nuturers and therefore in divorce he pays and in regard to custody she gets it…it’s not fair but it is what it is, working to make change to this way of thinking is much needed so men have better choices as to the direction of their lives as well.

      • FamilyFirst says:

        I cited those female tyrants in order to prove that shifting power to females isn’t going to lead to a more just and equal society. In fact. a larger percentage of female rulers were tyrants when compared to male rulers. If we want to use history as a qualifier of revenge justice (which feminists love to do) then it can be argued that females should rule at all since they are more likely to be tyrants; but that would be just as ignorant and wrong as the nonsense that today’s feminists are trying to push. Rulers should be chosen based on their qualifications and abilities, not just on gender.

        Remember, the “patriarchal model” was a reaction to the environment of the time. When the patriarchal model was developed, they didn’t have technology. You had to be strong to dig the ditches, farm the land, build the housing, fight off invaders, survive disease and war and so on. As the world became more stable and advanced, men and women could enjoy more choices. When you don’t have to fight for mere survival, there are more choices for everyone.

        Going back in history and using those events to administer justice in today’s environment is ridiculous.

  10. FamilyFirst says:

    Did I say that women contribute nothing? No. You said the patriarchal model does not work long term and I pointed out that it has been in effect for ages. It was mostly men that created the legal system and contributed to science, technology, literature and more. Yes, there have been horrors and inexcusable acts committed but then again, the same can be said for female rulers as well. There were female inventors and female tyrants too. Are you saying that a matriarchal model would be superior to the patriarchal model?

    Do men get financially rewarded for being fathers and husbands? For, if not, please don’t tell me that men have equal rights. In fact, men spend years working at jobs that are dangerous, low-paying and unfulfilling just to support their families. The vast majority of men are not high-paying CEOs, executives and law firm partners. And what do they get for their sacrifices? A married woman can have another man’s child from an extramarital affair and the husband will still have to pay child support for that child. A woman can file for divorce for any reason she pleases and take away the father’s children while taking his money, property and child support – which she can spend anyway she pleases without necessarily benefitting the children.

    If a single woman doesn’t want her child, she can abort it or give it up for adoption. If she wants the child but can’t support it, she can obtain welfare from the state. And she can file for child support from the man without necessarily giving him any type of visitation or considering whether or not he even wants to be a father. So women can opt out of marriage and motherhood whenever they want without regard to what the men want AND be compensated for it? Are men and children mere commodities to women – to dispose or collect money from them as women please?

    If you feel that women should be allowed to charge men for being wives and mothers then should men charge women for being husbands and fathers? And are you saying that marriage and parenthood are nothing but a series of financial transactions? Sorry, but if you feel the need to charge money for being a spouse and a parent, then you shouldn’t become a spouse and a parent. Marriage and parenthood are not forms of prostitution. Honestly, I am not sure where you got that idea from but it’s wrong.

    How do you expect humans to love and respect one another when you raise them to believe that loving and nurturing children requires monetary payment? How do you expect anyone to love you and care for you when you are ready to leave him and send him a bill for the love you gave them?

    When a woman is a stay-at-home mom, should the man calculate the room and board that his stay-at-home wife consumes? Should he charge her for his share of the income she gave up when she quit her job to raise their children? And if he is now paying for the mortgage and her student loans solely with his income, should he charge her for those in the event of a divorce?

    And why stop there? Why not charge your children rent for living in your womb for 9 months? They say it takes at least $250,000 to raise one child from infancy to adulthood (18 years of age). On your child’s 18th birthday, should you present that child with a bill for $250,000?

    Or maybe your child should file for “childimony” on her/his 18th birthday. S/he could claim that s/he wasn’t happy with the way you raised her/him and now wants a divorce with support.

    Gee, Crystal, is this how you see a family? Just some type of financial compensation system?

    • Adrienne says:

      Men are the loudest voice in history because they are the ones writing the history books. Were we to go back in time, we would likely see that women contributed much more to literature, science, etc. than we give them credit for. As Virginia Woolf said, “For most of history, anonymous was a woman.”
      I know you’ll find a way to insult any argument, but this is for any people reading who need some encouragement and truth.

      • FamilyFirst says:

        Men are the loudest voice in history because they made history. They have contributed the most to society. Yes, there were a lot of bad men who did a lot of bad things but the majority were good men who advanced society. Women contributed but men contributed far more. That’s a fact and you know it.

      • FamilyFirst says:

        I would also like to point out that men need encouragement and truth too. Bashing one group so that another group feels better accomplishes nothing for any group.

  11. FamilyFirst says:


    I sound like those “AllLivesMatter” guys? What does that mean? Is that supposed to be an insult? Are you saying that all lives don’t matter? Which lives matter and which lives don’t? I don’t understand the way you argue.

    Katherine Knight stabbed her partner, skinned him and then tried to feed him to his children.

    There are many cases like this. All around the world, men are beaten, betrayed and raped. Don’t these men matter too?

    Feminism should be about equality for men and women but it’s not. It’s about giving woman more rights and privileges at the expense of men’s rights.

    And everyone has a right to speak. Why should some groups speak first? All humans should allow others to speak. Why do you insist on restricting people? More whites are killed by cops than blacks are. Don’t these lives matter? If there is a problem with the police, all the victims should be heard. Why do some victims get to speak first while others have to wait at the back of the line? Who gave you the right to decide that? You may think you believe in equality, but you clearly do not.

  12. FamilyFirst says:


    You typed: “Because as I mentioned women give their bodies and lives to the task of childrearing whereas men only offer manpower.”

    And how do you rear children without manpower? You have to raise crops to generate food. You have to work in order to bring in a paycheck, which will be spent to feed, clothe and house the children.

    How do you build a civilization without manpower, Crystal? All the science and technology that you enjoy today – how did that come about without manpower?

    Do you ever think what happens to the stuff you flush down the toilet? You probably don’t think about it, but it goes to a sewage processing plant where it’s usually men who deal with it. The structure you live in – did that get built without manpower?

    Men have never given their bodies and lives to the task of childrearing? Men just offer manpower? How did you develop such a low opinion of men? From your posts, you apparently believe that men don’t offer that much, can’t really be victims and yet they owe women so much. Why do you have such high expectations of men when you clearly believe that they don’t possess much value?

  13. Crystal says:


    I’m honestly not sure what Sir Isaac Newton has to do with this conversation? Because I was specifically addressing my comments to women’s issues, as that was what Jesse was discussing in his article. However I would like to make it unequivocally clear that regardless of race or sex no one is inferior for not getting married and having children. I for one plan to adopt this lifestyle and believe I will be perfectly happy doing so.

    I’ll consider your proposal but I’m not sure why you made it??

    PS: I feel terrible about the way these conversations have been turning out. I never thought I would stoop to insults but I have been insufferably rude and I’m dreadfully sorry; may I ask your forgiveness and make it up to you as I believe in treating people as people and I have been very wrong not to live up to that. I’d really like for us to start again, this time having conversations on a balance of mutual respect for each other as people rather than treating one another as antagonists.

  14. FamilyFirst says:


    Well, what does Mother Teresa have to do with this conversation? You brought her up. The point is, there are people who never married and had children and yet they contributed so much to society.

    Why do you keep bringing up women’s issues when there are so many human issues to talk about? Why focus on one segment of the human population when every segment is suffering? Don’t you think men suffer too?

    Thank you for your apology but I would like to have more conversations about how we can help all humans, rather than focus on the issues of some humans. All humans have suffered and continue to suffer. All humans have been the victims of crime, poverty, unfairness, oppression and more.

    From a humanist perspective, anytime a victim is ignored because of race, gender, religion, sexual orientation, etc., that is a violation of that victim’s human rights. This is not taking away from specific victims but an attempt to solve the problems that all humans face in a supportive and unified way. It shouldn’t be blacks vs whites or feminists vs MRAs, it should be humans for humans.

  15. FamilyFirst says:

    @Elizabethan Lol, delusional, aren’t you? Hypergamy is definitely a thing and it’s becoming more rare as more men are disengaging from women – and the women aren’t happy about it. Leave the house and read material that isn’t feminist propaganda.

    Everyone cares about what men are doing. You clearly do or you wouldn’t write a post on a patriarchy blog about how no one cares what men are doing – that is clear proof that you care very much about what men are doing.

    Men aren’t desperate for sex and control – they got it. Today, men can have sex without marriage and can choose what female partners they want to have sex with. They clearly don’t want to have sex with you so you pretend that you don’t care what they are doing – and that is making you hysterical.

    • Stephanie says:

      Great job Family First. Enjoying your comments here and agree with what you’re saying.

      • FamilyFirst says:

        Thank you, Stephanie. I just don’t know why so many people want to make men and women enemies all of the time. We should help each other. All humans should help in any way they can.

    • Crystal says:

      Why are you mimicking people’s styles and ways of saying things? With all due respect, would you consider this immature behaviour if I did it to you? If so, please stop this because it’s wrong and it does nothing for persuading people to your side but rather makes you look immature to your opponents.

      • chia maria says:

        +1. It is pretty corny and juvenile. But you know what they say, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery :).

      • Crystal says:

        @chia maria,

        It’s nice to see you again. That being said I’m trying to be more respectful in my comments to FF because I know it’s the right thing to do. I’m sorry we left off that interesting discussion we were having so let’s get back to it.

        For starters, what do you think of chivalry, and why?

    • Elizabethan says:

      Such a precious offended man, why respond to me? I care about humans not abusing one another and not having out of touch delusions and getting together in gangs discussing their tactics to rape people and get their dick wet, mostly cuz they are desperate and lonely.
      Sorry I don’t want anyone abused or raped, and not sorry men are disengaging from woman? Are they all gay now?
      Hypergamy and all that bullshit is conspiracy and self delusion, seek help.
      Sorry. You are so offended by me not believing your red pill lies. I offended you by not believing in you!
      I don’t believe in your little cult, cry cry cry, again gain gain. My face like a mannequin.
      I’m bisexual so yeah, don’t need no man!
      Men are so desperate for sex I’ve seen 20 get your dick wet blogs, and red pill on reddit, and whatever the sexless Christians are writing, the desperation is real, the last guy I dated smelt of it. The desperation is real. Men are so desperate to control woman and get sex, you posting and responding to me to try and justify your lies is all the proof I need. Men are desperate!
      DickFirst, I do have the Red Pill Truth, for you, Be Channing Tatum, that’s the truth, that’s what’s woman want, just be Channing Tatum, Channing my Tatum, and stop gas lighting me and copying me!
      If anything men are out to get the youngest vagina they can get, tell me how that’s not manipulative and pathetic? Can’t get a grown up, date a teenager? Discuss? This is “hypergamy”, no?
      Dread Game, say I flirt with your friend, you get angry? Was I wrong to do so? Would you hate me for doing that?
      Say I sleep around and always date men younger then me? Would you call me names?
      Say I do anything of the red pill theory to you, as a woman? Would you like it? Should I dread game you? Should I fake a personality? Should I hold my frame?
      Be Channing Tatum, go back to your cult and tell them all to be Channing Tatum or maybe The Rock? Either way, be humble and know your a dork, super hawt, woman like that.
      Red pill is such a lie, alpha males scare me…

      Your delusional and spending your entire life fighting with every well adjusted woman on this site is stupid, go back to red pill hell, where you belong?

      Its sort of pathetic, if you have to threaten someone, or dread them, or be a bully or be a persons boss to keep them or tell them what to do, you must have nothing else going for you, sad…

      • FamilyFirst says:

        @Elizabethan Such a darling, frustrated woman, why did you choose to respond to anyone? And you should care about all victims. There are male and female perpetrators just as there are male and female victims.

        Is your definition of a gay man someone who disengages from women? How narrow-minded are you? I couldn’t care less whether you believe me or anyone else. Do you think you are that important to total strangers on the Internet? Are you so offended that no one applauds your ramblings?

        Hypergamy is not self-delusion, it exists. You clearly have a personality disorder and you need to seek help. When you treat a person in a terrible way, they will disengage. You clearly don’t realize that.

        Men are desperate for sex? What about all of the women who contract STDs and unwanted pregnancies over and over again? Getting abortions over and over again. Having kids they can’t afford over and over again and collecting welfare. Women, overall, are the ones who are desperate. They make terrible mistakes and then expect someone else to pay for those mistakes. So many women dependent on government programs. What happens when those programs are cut – more poverty. It’s happening everywhere.

        Cuntabethan – a man like Tatum Channing will never want you. He wants a real woman, not some pathetic loser who hates everyone and thinks she deserves the best. Why shouldn’t men get the best women they can? Why shouldn’t women get the best men they can? Be successful, treat people well, and you will find a great person. You obviously don’t know that so you rant on blogs.

        Flirt with who you want, do I care? If someone is dumb enough to go with a desperate, mentally ill person like you, that’s their business. I’ll bet you sleep around and then run to the taxpayer-supported clinic to receive treatment for your STDs.

        Again, I don’t care about you. You are clearly having a conversation with people you have had relationships with and projecting them onto this blog.

        Spend my entire life fighting with every woman on this board? I have only been here recently? Do you think you are every woman? You are not and thank goodness. There are intelligent, happy women out there and you are not one of them.

        It’s sort of pathetic how you fear and hate everyone. You are the one who has nothing else going on in your life so you post under different names and threaten anyone who challenges your warped view of men. Get help, sad loser.

  16. FamilyFirst says:

    Why are you rational in one post and then hostile in another post? People have said rude things to me and I respond in kind. People say intellectual things to me and I respond in kind. You want me to respect you, then respect me.

    Why do you want to control the way people post and why do you resort to name-calling? Furthermore, who exactly are my opponents and what makes you think you can speak for them assuming I have opponents? Not only do you sound immature but you sound delusional as well. Why do I frustrate you so much? Is the thought of equality and fairness too overpowering for you?

  17. FamilyFirst says:


    Why are you rational in one post and then hostile in another post? Why do you resort to labeling and insulting? People say rude things to me and I respond in kind. People say intellectual things to me and I respond in kind. If you want me to respect you, then respect me.

    Who are my opponents and what makes you think you can speak for them assuming I do have opponents? Why do you feel the need to control the way I post? That sounds immature and delusional to me. Why do I seem to frustrate you so much? You apologize to me in one post and then become hostile in another post. Does this seem like appropriate behavior to you?

    • Crystal says:


      I wasn’t being hostile. I was simply pointing out that this might not be the best way to debate someone. I had absolutely no intention of being rude in what I wrote. However since I have caused offence please tell me, how could I have worded my request better?

      • FamilyFirst says:


        Calling someone immature is a form of hostility. You may not think so but it is. I don’t call you names unless you called me names first. If you want to disagree with or engage in a debate with me, fine, but why do you feel the need to make it personal?

      • Crystal says:


        My intent was to reference certain aspects of your behaviour as immature, not you personally. If this makes you feel any better, I don’t think *you personally* are immature at all. That being said, I will try to remember to reference your behaviour more specifically for next time so that I don’t give you the impression I’m accusing *you personally* of anything when I didn’t mean it that way.

        I stand by my statement that mimicking people is not a good way to debate. At the same time I recognise that some of your arguments are intriguing and worthy of serious thought; I hope we can still engage one another in the spirit of dialogue and I had no intention of putting you off by anything I said.

        I realise my behaviour might seem a little strange but I am still reeling from the intense cruelty that three people online inflicted on me in my past and I am trying hard to be polite in the way I used to be but feel worn to a frazzle. Please bear with me.

  18. FamilyFirst says:

    @chia maria

    You said: “+1. It is pretty corny and juvenile. But you know what they say, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.”

    +100 So are you saying that I am imitating Crystal and that Crystal is pretty corny and juvenile?
    +200 What’s with the rating? Well, I can do that too. I now have 300 points. Are you flattered?
    Wow, I obviously had quite an effect on two people (assuming they are not one person) on this blog. That’s another +200. I now have 500 points.

    • Chia maria says:

      No one’s more affected than you here.

      • FamilyFirst says:

        I disagree. You are the one who keeps monitoring what I type and responding. After a period of inactivity, why did you feel the need to start responding to me again? Were you thinking about me this whole time? Were you reading every post I submitted? That’s proof that you are affected.

      • Chia maria says:

        And you keep monitoring what absolutely everyone types. You seem to live on here, ready to attack anyone. Look I’ll let you have the last say, again (and I know you’ll say something to this), because it seems you can’t sleep properly at night unless you are the last to speak, even if what you say is cringeworthy and ineffective. So have the last say and sleep tight baby, thinking you got everyone beat.

  19. FamilyFirst says:

    I don’t monitor what everyone types. I engage in a discussion. There is a difference, which you clearly can’t tell. I don’t insult someone who disagrees with me the way you do. You are clearly not here to engage in an intellectual debate; rather, you are here to vent your frustration on anyone who doesn’t share your point of view.

    You don’t let me have the last say. You just can’t respond intellectually to my points so out of frustration, you lash out. You obviously don’t think that what I say is cringeworthy and ineffective because you keep responding to it. You like to claim whatever false victory you can just to feed your insecure ego. You post under different names. You have probably thinking about how to respond to me for quite some time. I think you are the one who can’t sleep properly at night thinking about what I post and how you will respond to it. You need my discussions because you don’t have any stimulation in your own life. Get help. Learn to love, darling child, and your life will improve.

  20. FamilyFirst says:


    I am not mimicking anyone. I simply analyze the argument that someone makes. It is very common in debating forums.

    I can certainly sympathize with someone who has been the victim of online cruelty. There are so many angry people out there who are so quick to attack just because you disagree with them, even when you are not saying anything offensive.

    • Elizabethan says:

      Tell me how has red pill worked for you? Its all abuse and rape!
      Say a woman did to you what you did to them? Would you like it?
      Why do men need many many blogs to attract woman? How is that not pure desperation?
      How do you feel about pretending to be Channing Tatum? The ideal man? Good or bad?
      Why do you post so often on this blog? Why so offended a couple of woman don’t agree with your cult?
      Is red pill a cult? Is it a religion? Is it a cry for help?
      How much sex do you get? All day every day? Once a week? Be honest?
      I am hostile to traditional men, how does that fit in your belief system?
      Also, bisexuality, I am open to dating woman, weak, soft, woman? How does that fit I not your belief system that woman want alpha men?
      The closest I came to a man who was datable was not an alpha men, had a weak chin and was easy to chat to? How does that fit into alpha theory?
      Frame? What is it?
      Why are all the men who write red pill theory married? If it really worked wouldnt they rather be single?

  21. FamilyFirst says:

    Stop ranting about your life of abusing and raping and get help. Who pretended to be Channing Tatum? Are you high? There are way more blogs on women talking about men than the other way around. I will post where I want. Do you want to dominate all of the time? Too bad. You don’t have the right to control anyone. Yes, the closest you come to dating a man is a loser man because you are a loser woman. Alpha Theory? Yes, alpha men don’t date loser women. Yes, it’s better for a man to be single than to marry a loser like you. That’s what bothers you.

  22. Stephanie says:

    Family First, just saw your comment way up there about all the failed women rulers. You’re right on all mentioned, and there are more that you didn’t mention I think (the way some of the wives that controlled countries by default, and also oppressed their people ie. Evita Peron and others).

    But even look over at Europe and see how things are going with women filling the role (in the past which would have been traditionally men) of Defense Minister. Basically the main person in charge of defending their countries from threats (within or from outside).

    Take a look at the above picture linked. Those countries with female and overly polite feminine politics have almost destroyed their countries through the Muslim migrants they’ve welcomed with open arms. Their crime rates have sky-rocketed. Their countries are dealing with massive counts of sexual assaults on boys, girls, young mothers and even women as old as in their 80’s! The migrants are destroying their societies and it looks to outsiders like cultural suicide.

    Then take a hard look at the new US Defense Minister. Look at what he says in that quote about dealing with Muslims who may be radical. Can you imagine at all those women saying anything like that? I’m sure they wouldn’t. And that’s part of the problem.

  23. FamilyFirst says:

    Stephanie, thank you for your post. It is very insightful and informative.

    I think too many European politicians are more focused on maintaining political correctness rather than achieving what is best for their respective nations.

    Many nations in the West have a lot of poverty within their own borders and are not really in a position to take in more of the poor from the developing nations.

    Also, wealthy nations such as Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates haven’t gotten their stories or numbers straight when explaining their policies regarding refugees.

    Nabil Othman, acting regional representative to the Gulf States at the UNHCR, said Saudi Arabia has accepted 500,000 Syrian refugees, but called them “Arab brothers and sisters in distress.”

    Kuwait extended the residency permits for Syrians stranded there. Spokesmen for the Gulf States have issued other statements claiming that they have accepted many Syrian refugees.
    Most likely, Syrians living in the Gulf States are largely workers and some could be related to the Syrian communities in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait that existed before the civil war.

    Some Americans and Arab critics argue that the Gulf States should accept more refugees. There are millions of immigrants in Europe – meanwhile, Saudi Arabia, one of the wealthiest nations in the world, only takes in 500,000, a number which probably consists largely of workers who were there already?

    I don’t think that redistributing poverty is the answer. It only creates more problems. People in need should be helped but not at the expense of other people who are also in need. Many European nations and the U.S. are overburdened and cutting many social service programs and yet they are expected to make room for more poor people with traumas? The standard of living is falling in so many Western nations, particularly in the U.S. The future seems bleak.

    • Stephanie says:

      Yes… and introducing people with a religion where their prophet sanctioned pedophilia, child marriage (“blessed pedophilia”), raping infidel women, having sex with young boys (mentioned several times in the Qu’ran!!) and try to mix them with people of a Christo-secular society where they have laws AGAINST those actions… it’s just probably not going to end well.

      You may really like this man’s youtube channel – he’s red pill and awesome (if you aren’t already aware of him that is). But here’s a case where a woman is concerned that telling people the truth would be bad because it’d hurt their feelings.

      • Stephanie says:

        And aside from the problem of increased poverty when they can’t even take care of their own, the migrants are creating areas of towns in these countries where police can’t even go into. Which is just insane. In Sweden I think the police admitted that they’ve lost total control of enforcing the law in 50-55 what they call “Muslim No-Go Zones.”

        So in those Muslim-gang controlled towns/areas, they follow their own laws (Sharia law) and abuse their children and wives and get away with it. They are not assimilating in these cases, but instead creating separate societies with separate laws to govern themselves. And often living off financial aid and welfare to do it. Really just insane stuff … so sad that it’s happening at all.

      • FamilyFirst says:

        Excellent research and analysis of a growing problem.

        Many “globalists” believe that we can all be one big happy family but they don’t realize that in many parts of the world, freedom, equality, individuality and other human rights are not widely respected.

        If we are to help those in the world who need it, we need to develop their own economic, legal and social systems in their own nations instead of just redistributing poverty and social problems to the Western nations.

  24. The Virtuous Atheist says:

    I think that men and women are “equal in dignity, separate in function”. Both sexes are equal in their inherent worth as human beings, but both are different by nature and have different needs and capabilities. I would say both complement each other. Men who treat women as inferior are wrong to do so, but the liberal feminists that push women to want to be men are wrong too in that they are devaluing women as well.

  25. Jacob says:

    I’ve got just one thing to add. You’re way of thinking and believing is the exact reason I’ll never find a woman to settle down with. You value women how exactly in what scale? My mother is a math professor at a top rated college and my father is a English literature professor they stand shoulder to shoulder in every way and all 6 of my siblings and myself never felt and don’t feel now like my mother damaged us in anyway. She isn’t inferior because she chose to be a fully developed woman and my father isn’t weak because he supported her in doing so.
    We are all human.

  26. I respectfully disagree. Equality is NOT female supremacy because we Also support Men Who don’t choose their traditional roles. Stay at home dads and men Who choose traditionally female career, such as nursing, teaching, or medicine nowadays, are more than welcome if they are competent and willing to work Hard. In Spain, where I live, 88% of nurses and 70% of doctors are women, Hospitals would colapse without career women, and this pattern repeats itself in different countries, which to me means two things
    1)There’s more than home to the feminine realm, and therefore it is a good thing that women have other options besides being homenajes. Can men be nurses? Sure, and some of them Excel at it, but the fact is less than 10% of them are willing to do it, probably Also because, on average, women posses more of the required qualities to be a nurse (Of course statistics say nothing about particular cases and there are exceptions to the rule which deserves our respect and Credit) . So, we either let women be nurses, force men Who don’t want to do this and don’t have the requiered qualities to be nurses, or face a Great problem in our health system (I’d pick the first one). And since this women are working Hard to provides us the Best health care (Spain has one of the Best Health care systems in Europe)
    2)Women contributions in other fields are not necessarily inferior. X Rays were invented by a woman (Marie Curie), the most profitable technique of the CSIC (the most important centre for scientific research in Spain) was invented by a woman(Margarita Salas), Just as the basis of the informatic code (Ada Lovelace), or the very WiFi you are using (Hedy Lamarr). Some of the most importante literary and philosophical works have been written by Women (The Bronte Sisters, Agatha Christie, Jane Austen, Carolina Coronado, Teresa de Ávila, Rosalía de Castro, Gabriela Mistral, Christine de Pizan, Hellen Keller, Ana María Matute, Mary Wollstonecraft, María Zambrano…) and some of the greatest leaders in History have been women too (Queens Mary I and Elizabeth I of England, Boudica, Joan of Arch, Queen Isabella of Castile, Hatsepsut, Anhotep, Queen Victoria, Catherine of Aragon, Catherine the Great, Grainne O’Maille…) What would the World be like today if these women had not being allowed to contribute in this fields? May be a Man would have done the same they did centuries later. Or May be not, but the fact is we owe this women so much and the World wouldn’t be as we know it without their works. So yes, I agree with this woman that we Should Grant everyone, both male and female, freedom to choose their own paths as long as they contribuye to society and are honest People Who cause no harm.
    For another comment, I think you are a Christian. I don’t know if you are a Catholic, but if you are, I would suggest you read “Mullieris dignitatem”, by John Paul II.
    And to finish with, my humble opinion as a Biology student; Sexual dimorfism does indeed existe, and there are some abilities and preferences which are more tipically masculino or feminine. However, Genetics are very complexo, and sex is not the only factor which determines a person’s appeareance or behaviour. In fact, when it comes to behaviour, Environment, education and culture play a Great part in determining our abilities, personality traits and preferences. We can see how many things regarding masculinity and femeninity are different in different countries and have Changed through History. Also, while there are theorethical models for the feminine and masculino brain, almost no real human brain stocks to them strictly, and statistics tell us nothing of particular cases, so they Just can’t be used to determine a certain person’s destiny

  27. Pingback: Idealism leads to Patriarchy and Selfishness leads to Feminism | Secular Patriarchy

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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 )

Connecting to %s