Thursday, May 20, 2010

Men's Night? Men Are Free and Drinks Are Half Off

Hmmm, I just got back from a local restaurant where prices differ depending on what gender you are. I asked for the half off margarita anyway and the waitress told me the prices are only for women. I told her that I will not be drinking a drink at all then...

Apparently ladies night price schemes are implemented to make a profit. The thought is that since women are inherently valuable and inherently worthy of mating and reproducing, simply by having their presence increases the amount of males who attend.

I am not sure why there have not been class action law suits against businesses who discriminate by gender to make a profit. How does it work if one were to purchase a drink for a female on ladies night? Do you have to specify that the drink is for a female in order to get it at half price or do men pay full price for the privilege to make a drink gift offering present to women?

How is it that women are treated with economic privilege when they are our competition for resources by way of economic & political laws and policy? Why do women expect to be equal yet still feel inherently deserving of being provided for by society and from men?

Why is it ok to implement a business policy that discriminates against men for the sake of making profit yet to allegedly do so to women is against the law? In fact, it is considered so wrongful that Affirmative Action, Title IX and Gender based hiring\ promotion freezes are placed upon men so that women may once again be first, ladies first. Was there ever any policy that discriminated against women to begin with that would warrant discriminatory policies against men?

What is the real reason males are heavily represented in the top ranks of organizations? Is it because men are more driven to compete? Is it because men are more driven to acquire resources? Why would men be more driven toward these things? Does having such things make men more worthy of a female being that males carry no inherent value as a mate and therefore must earn it and furthermore present these earnings as offerings to females? Is this "male privilege" women speak of something men are given or something men earn? Is the male condition in fact even a privilege or choice? Is it ok if we should expect women earn the privileges given to them as well?

Is it just me or is the whole thing a lie and a farce? Is it just me or have women tricked us? Is the truth really that women were never unequal to men but actually more valued and treated better than men all along? Is it just me or has their welfare always been put before and above that of men? Is it just me or is it really that women are not only "equal" to men but in fact hold more privileges and choices in life and society than men do..both in public and private life???

I am not quite sure why so much deference is given to women above men. Why are women always put first? Why do women make sure that they are put first in the event of an emergency? How is it that they do not see men as important and valuable as themselves? Are men responsible for the welfare of women? Do women have any responsibilities toward and for men? Is there any instance in which women defer to men? Is there an instance that women are expected to put men first? Do women have any social obligations toward men and our welfare as men have for women? Can someone explain to me why women are put first above men?

Are women more valuable than men? Are they more important, more lovable, more deserving? Why are women given such privileges and deferred to over men both socially, politically and economically?

Question.... all things apparently being equal, does it make sense to treat men unequally in these realms of public and private life, if so, why? Question....should the welfare of women come first, above and before that of men and if so, why?.........

20 comments:

Hughman said...

The Swedes, god bless their socialist hell-hole, banned gender discrimination on such matters.

Women would get free club entry, discounts, have their sexual products on display etc

Some guys, who somehow still had a spine, pressed a lawsuit. They won. The feminists got angry but couldn't say anything sensible in the slightest, so they guys got some justice.

Hestia said...

Are women more valuable than men? Are they more important, more lovable, more deserving? Why are women given such privileges and deferred to over men both socially, politically and economically?
This is a topic I've pondered much myself. In the past some of this may have made sense, when the population was small and children were desperately needed to survive. Under this model women had their own responsibility of having children so while everything may not have been equal in the true sense of the word, something was being given. But now? This system of women first is grossly inappropriate and has no business existing any longer.

I've found it interesting to observe how men are expendable attitudes relate to chivalry within the proper family, not only in more public life. Nearly every time I share the funny story about the first hurricane I ever went through and how I had to figure out how to get wooden boards up on the house, somebody gets grievously offended and questions my husband's manhood, completely forgetting the fact I'm a army wife and my husband was in Africa when the hurricane hit. The same offense has come up when the funny tale of changing the first tire with a small child in tow is shared or when people realize the house fire we had on Christmas Eve '08 happened when I was all alone, that my husband didn't come home on emergency leave because I never sent a Red Cross message. My smoke inhalation was not that bad. I had enough help from family, neighbors, and fine volunteers in the community. There was no reason for him to come home until his planned R&R leave several months later. Yet criticize him many, many people did. It was absurd and ridiculous.

As I reflected on all of this, however, I realized this was about something deeper. it seems almost that my husband is worth less than me in the eyes of many. I'm apparently some little princess who is above doing work that others feel is unacceptable for me to do, all while my husband is not. This was interesting to realize and fascinating now to see the reaction again and again. Many of my husband's harshest critics have not been women, but men who think he isn't a Real Man because he'll ask for my help on this or that task or deploy and expect me not to let the house, finances, and our child go into a damaged state.

Last month I spent a few weeks helping my parents with some work around the house. My dad is getting ready for back surgery this summer and there is much he can't do right now. I put in fill dirt, put down sod, cleaned the gutters, finished their garden, chopped up some wood, and deep cleaned the entire house. This work also offended some of the very same people as my dad could have paid (quite a bit of money) to hire a man, rather than have my sister and I do it like we did. *rolls eyes*

I do believe there is much that women need to do for men. There are many times men need to be put first. From the basics of civility and respect towards strangers to being ready to roll up their sleeves and do whatever needs to get done for their families. The team is only as strong as the weakest link and a family can be all the more stronger if a wife is deeply invested in making her husband and family a success.

Bwec said...

Hello Hestia, I think much of the strife you receive is for very good reason.

Men don't have inherent value for the simple fact that we exist. Male value is heavily weighted in his usefulness and utility. This often means the expendability of his very life and welfare as well.

Men are simply not inherently valued as women and as such do not hold the same privileges as women.
Male value is something he earns and something that he must compete for and acquire.

Women have lied to us all along.

The truth is that women are more valuable and as such hold privileges because of this.

Males are not valued by females for the simple fact that we exist nor are we inherently worthy to mate with you as you are to men.

Male value comes by way of his external utility and how best he serves females..

Again, women have lied to us all along.

If viewed in terms of oppression it is women who oppress men and use their power over men.

If you have not noticed men's bodies and the fruits of it's labor are for the service of women and country by force of law. Men don't have the same rights and liberties that women have. We do not have exclusive choice over such things as women do.

Women want all the supposed "privileges" that men have (if you can call such male mandates to produce and associated drive a privilege) without the same responsibility men have when they obtain such a position.


Women's power over resources is self serving and gynocentric. Male power over resources is protective and provisional to women. This is also personified in government.

Women want to keep their inherent value and associated privileges while obtaining any and all power that men have.

Female independence is gained by forcing men and government to provide and protect them socially, politically and economically.
Again, when females obtain "male privilege" they do not have the same obligations or requirements toward men as men do toward women.


Females will not release men from our bondage to them while at the same time seeking to release themselves from bondage and obligation to men. This is called women's liberation.

Male institutional power comes by way of utility and the ability to garner and control the things that females find useful and valuable.

Male agency, status and institutional power both in the family and in society comes by way of his usefulness, his utility.

Women lied to us and told us all that male power was selfish, oppressive and self serving when in fact male power is overwhelmingly protective and provisional to women.

Male enfranchisement and power come from how much females need men and the things which men are able to serve them with...

I do not think women will liberate men from this as they have liberated themselves from needing men. They are independent not truly but exploitatively.

As a result females have more rights, choices, privileges, protections and provisions in society than men do. Such deference to females is so deeply rooted in us that we do not see it.

We do not realize that female well-being is more important than that of men. We do not realize that female value is inherent and sovereign while male value is earned and is not sovereign.

Again, men don't have exclusive sovereignty over our bodies and the fruits of it's labor where as women's bodies and the fruits of it's labors are that of women and women alone.....

Bwec said...

In essence, women want to maintain their own gender exclusive privileges while at the same time gaining control over what feminists term "male privilege"

Furthermore women do this by legislative discrimination against men along with the biological privileges women hold for the simply fact of being a woman. Female privilege in this respect can not be taken from them. Women do not seek equality with men, they seek superiority.

Men have always known that female privilege can not be taken from them. Men have always known that if women obtain the privileges of men, regardless of how they do it in actuality or exploitatively they will become our superiors.

I've found that throughout history men have discovered the tremendous power women hold over us. Men have known the oppression women will bear upon us should we seek to be so worthy of them that we sacrifice ourselves and the things of which we gain in order to serve them with.

Men have found that women, no matter how "independent" will not allow men to be equally so. Men have found as many do now that female "independence" is financed and enabled by male bondage.

"Recollect all the institutions respecting the sex, by which our forefathers restrained their profligacy and subjected them to their husbands; and yet, even with the help of all these restrictions, they can scarcely be kept within bounds. If, then, you suffer them to throw these off one by one, to tear them all asunder, and, at last, to be set on an equal footing with yourselves, can you imagine that they will be any longer tolerable? Suffer them once to arrive at an equality with you, and they will from that moment become your superiors."

-Cato the Censor (Rome 215 B.C.)
In Support of the Oppian Law

Discount said...

Hmmm it seems fitting to paste a comment from The-Spearhead here:
Jabber said: “We all seem to be in agreement then. Women feel entitled to Alpha cock.”

No, they are entitled to it. Not that they will get everything they want from him but women ALWAYS are able to obtain some sort of direct attention from males that are beyond their league and yes, even if this simply means sex. ALL women are hypergamous and able to obtain, even if only momentarily, what is beyond them. Even handicap women who are missing arms and legs get laid.

The modern woman has the resource constructs available from their government husband, their own independent career, and forced resource provision from Isolated Resource Producing Males. Marriage is not necessary to ensure the survival of offspring. Women don’t want men, marriage or family they want genes.

So in essence, Alpha is a relative term. All woman are able to mate with men who are beyond them. So I am in half agreement with you Jabber, “bitches feel entitled to Alpha cock” but they are also entitled in actuality relatively speaking. Now a days women are able to trade off a man’s willingness to commit for better genes simply because they can. If she feels all the other resource constructs available to her are not enough she may decide to have a beta commit and raise her offspring.

Marriage has and always will be a commitment from a man to a woman and not the other way around. Offering marriage and commitment is the only way a male can accomplish the same task women are able to simply by being female. Though marriage rates have been on the decline (about a 40 degree angle decline last I checked) to many men are still willing to get on their knees and offer gold and jewels to women in order to mate and reproduce. Marriage is not about out men AT ALL, it is about women and “their” children. Males are simply a means to an end.

Males in the animal kingdom are willing to die in order to reproduce. The goal of females and feminism in general is to extract from and drive males to our absolute limit for their benefit and that of “their” offspring. Strangely males will go along with female demands. Shaming, complaining, bitching etc etc are only something women can do.

Men are to afraid to create a “Men’s Liberation” “Masculism” or “Men’s Rights” movement as there are strong forces at play that preclude males from deliberately seeking to remove ourselves from female approval and the opportunity to mate by making equivalent unjust demands of women.

Men simply will not do it. I believe in the minds of men we don’t exist for our own well-being (i.e. we are willing to sacrifice for the well being of women more than they are for us) Men have even been willing to die in order to provide this to them.

You see, women have always had equivalent if not superior power over men. Men, being so blinded by our biology of bondage and servitude to the goal of being worthy to reproduce are unable to see that it is men who are oppressed by women. Women are always able to mate up. Men unless we meet female demands are stuck with mating down.


continued.....

Discount said...

Women simply do not care about the sacrifices of men, in fact male sacrifice is expected in order to be worthy of her. This could be in the form of gifts, flowers, dinner, dating and willingness to get on ones knees and offer gold and jewels. Women hold ultimate favor and privilege. Women have all the rights and choices. Women are entitled to provision and protection from men and government. Women hold more power than men do.

It is simply that men are so enslaved by women and our biology we can not see that they were lying to us all along. You see, they convinced us that we were oppressing them in the manner of servitude of working to make money to give them so they simply passed laws that made them directly entitled to the the things for which they wanted and needed from men. Now they owe us nothing, now we are their slaves.

I’ve learned that the human female and females in nature are demanding, inherently valued and entitled and behave as such. Female privilege is something taboo to talk about. The female ego which extends from her inherent value and thus her tendency of self pampering narcissism and entitlement complex is taboo to talk about…

What females mean by “male privilege” is simply that they want for themselves the things that males compete for and work to give them. This does not mean that they are necessarily willing to work as hard to get these things but they want pro female \ anti male policies to get it should they choose to. Otherwise they are comfortable with Isolated Resource Producing Males who provide the fruits of their labor to her and “her” offspring from a comfortable distance, usually an empty apartment if they are lucky. Also, don’t forget dating where you must court, produce, pay and provide to her as well…..

Simply put, it is women who oppress men where as before “Women’s Liberation” the sexes and our respective assets were equally exchanged. Women seek to remove males from agency in having control over the things they want from us…. They best thing for men to do now is withdraw from women and commitment to them, marriage and family. Men have no respected place as husband or father.

Men must now withdraw chivalry to women in general as well and start thinking about them as what they are…..our competition and adversary politically, economically and socially. The genders no longer operate in symbiosis.

Hestia said...

Bwec, what you say makes much sense, even if it is deeply depressing.

Male value comes by way of his external utility and how best he serves females..
This reality is especially disgusting, though looking around it is true in the vast majority of instances. Shouldn't a male's value come simply from the dignity and worth of being a human, a fellow traveler? Haven't we reached a point where we, as a species, are more evolved than that? Both asked rhetorically of course as I can't see women giving up gifts and niceties en masse and taking up the "Art of Loving" as described well in Erich Fromm's book as just one example. Why have a truly rich life in which you can give freely to others and practice love as a verb when you can take, take, take, and take some more.

Men have always known that if women obtain the privileges of men, regardless of how they do it in actuality or exploitatively they will become our superiors.
In law and other areas perhaps, but at the end of the day, men are still superior to women in numerous ways. Masculinity is a more powerful force than femininity. Men are physically stronger, intellectually superior in all but a very few instances, and more creative. No matter what feminism and women have collectively taken away from men, such things cannot be stolen from men. They can be denigrated and spit on to the point such assets are seen as evil, but they can't be taken away.

Anonymous said...

These sort of offers may reflect some sort of female privileged. I suspect a larger part of the reason is this. Clubs try to entice women onto their premises as if they do this then men will also go to these clubs in order to be with the women. Clubs use the women as bait for the men. If men where repelled by women, as they ought to be, then this sort of trick would end and in fact women would then be discouraged from going into clubs.

Bwec said...

Hestia, You say: "Both asked rhetorically of course as I can't see women giving up gifts and niceties en masse and taking up the "Art of Loving" as described well in Erich Fromm's book as just one example."

Yes, I believe that we as humans have a unique ability to see ourselves in relation to what can be termed the human animal.

You are an intelligent woman Hestia and I think you are as cognizant of these things as I am. We would be stupid to believe we stand alone and have no relation what so ever to nature or the animal kingdom.

I've come to the conclusion that our base drives, directives and imperatives influence much more than we like to believe.

Let me just make one thing clear, I feel I understand how the sexes are supposed to compliment eachother and believe in a more natural state away from social, economic and political constructs
developed by reason and the hope for control, the hope and delusion of free will, that is free from these influences only results in our suffering.

To alter our complimentary relationship toward deference to females, the balance has been set a skew. I do love our essential natures but find it is hard to make them complimentary now a days.

Thank you so much for speaking here and sharing on my blog : )

Bwec said...

Hmmm just reading Cato again...

"Recollect all the institutions respecting the sex, by which our forefathers restrained their profligacy and subjected them to their husbands"

Cato was speaking of the inherent value and privilege females have and that social customs and societal institution was set up to restrain the proliferation of female privilege by subjecting this privilege to the terms on which men choose and had agency as to how they would serve females with male external utility.

He thought that even so, female advocation for protection and provision from men and government had no limits and thus "they can scarcely be kept within bounds."

He knew as men know now that if we let women decide the terms of which this protection and provision would take place and as to where and to what extent they will quickly destroy male agency to direct this to females to begin with, they will quickly become our superiors..

Cato's words are words of wisdom and something of which men are to politically correct to speak of or recognize today.

What Cato realized resonates with me. I realize that I am not alone.

To have someone of such stature from a different time, place and culture say something that is so timeless and so relevant to my own personal observations, my own contemplations upon women is invaluable to creating an understanding that points to the very heart of our human animal nature.

Marie said...

You know what else really grinds my gears?? Those restaurants that pander to children. "Kids eat free Tuesday night!" I hate that. I'm not a kid so I have to pay? That's not fair. And places that let all veterans eat for free? I hate them too. And handicap parking spaces? No fair!! Everywhere I look, stuff is being given away. But nothing is given to me. A regular, physically fit, non-military, adult male. Everyone hates us!!!!! We are the scum of the earth. It's enough to make me cry.


Do you realize how ridiculous you sound? Ladies night? Come on. Businesses have a right to make money and, like it or not, ladies night brings in more men who also tend to drink more thus bringing in more revenue. It's economics not a hate movement.
The most I can say for this is that men should be taught to value their sexuality more and stop jumping into bed with anything that looks their way. Men will do anything to get a little action. This makes them easy prey for all sorts of money-making schemes.
This is not the fault of feminism. Take some responsibility and start teaching your sons that they are "special" and their sexuality is a "gift" for that one special someone. If men value themselves like this they will stop flocking to ladies nights in droves, hoping to hook up with the kinds of skanks who drink $1 draft beer.

Marie said...

I worked at a bar when I was in college and I witnessed this ladies night phenomenon every tuesday night. 1$ draft beer and $2 well drinks. It was not a pretty sight. The dregs of the female world came to these "ladies" nights. And hundreds of men came sniffing hopefully after some tail. My boss was a fat greek bastard who did not hate men at all but knew he would make a fortune on ladies night because of all the men who came looking for an easy lay. And we all made a lot of money.
The men had to pay full price for drinks but they didn't mind at all. They considered it money well-spent because hooking up with one of the fine female specimens at this event was almost a certainty.
Men who value their sexuality are very very rare.
I see the points you are making but you have to admit that ladies night schemes are not a manisfestation of hate for men or a result of feminism. They are simply a great way to make money because it's a sure thing to get men to throw money at something if it means they might get sex. Sex with anyone or anything vaguely female.
YOu can call it biology or whatever you want. But I think men can control themselves. I just don't think enough men are taught that they are just as special as a woman and their sexuality is a gift.
Men's night would never make money. Because women are more selective sexually and are not likely to go to a bar and spend lots of money hoping to sleep with a man. They can sleep with any man pretty much any time they want. And most of them are taught that sex is something special you should only share with someone you love. There are the women who aren't taught this and have daddy issues or whatever. Those are the ones who take advantage of ladies night drink prices. Trust me. I've observed bar behaviour up close and personal.

Bwec said...

Marie says: "Do you realize how ridiculous you sound? Ladies night? Come on. Businesses have a right to make money"

Ohhhh ok so that's how it works. Is that why businesses are afraid to pay workers differently under the new fair pay laws? Is that why the labor force will become more stratified than ever before between actual workers and contingent, permanent temporary workers? What's the matter, equality not working for ya?

Hestia said...

We would be stupid to believe we stand alone and have no relation what so ever to nature or the animal kingdom.

I've come to the conclusion that our base drives, directives and imperatives influence much more than we like to believe.

They absolutely do and this is something more people need to accept to better understand what happens to us as individuals and how this plays out in society at large.

Game has fascinated me for this reason. There is still much I do not fully understand, but when you learn the basic principles and step back to observe social functioning around you, much of the biological drives described by game are true. The same with much of psychology. I'm quite the Jungian myself and have found studying and then observing to be fascinating. If we understand ourselves and how society functions, we have a special tool we'd be without otherwise.

To alter our complimentary relationship toward deference to females, the balance has been set a skew. I do love our essential natures but find it is hard to make them complimentary now a days.
It really is hard even coming from the strict religious upbringing I'm from. We were forever lectured about gender roles but that is not the same thing as the feminine being the complement to the masculine. To be a true complement requires a delicate balance and "learning on the job" that cannot be acquired from books or even spoken about in words to a certain extent.

Something else interesting I've found in my gender issues research is how different the West and East are when it comes to gender relations and how frank cultures are with acknowledging biological reality and finding ways to deal with reality. The West has a model that is atrocious for doing so with our courtly love model that makes the knight bow down to the lady. The Eastern model puts the man in charge, allowing him to pick, and thus requires a woman to have something to offer. When you look at how CRAZY feminism is in the West, especially the US, compared to the East, surely these two differing attitudes play a role. There is a reason women from much of the world are more pleasant than Western women and as women are destined by biology to be followers of the herd, the archetypes to which they aspire and the philosophy that permeates their culture must surely play a large role in how women eventually turn out wrt gender relations.

ScareCrow said...

The "ladies night" prices are designed to get more women into what I would call a "meat market".

The serious flaw with such promotions is - instead of attracting "ladies", they attract women that simply want cheap drinks, or in some cases free drinks.

It is wrong either way.

I have two solutions:

1. Get rid of "ladies nights".

2. Instead of calling it "ladies night", call it, "cheap drunken bimbos night".

:)

Anonymous said...

We would be stupid to believe we stand alone and have no relation what so ever to nature or the animal kingdom.

You know what else is natural?

Crapping on the floor.

Killing a rival for his food or woman or property.

Obeying no law that calls for decency or fairness.

We don't do these things precisely because we are not animals.

We rise above our animal or "natural" instincts, because nature is seldom just, seldom merciful, and seldom pretty. It's what makes us human.

God, do I tire of people who promote "natural" behavior as a better way to go.

I'll stick to having a soul, thank you.

Bwec said...

you say: "We rise above our animal or "natural" instincts"

But do we really? You do know that you are inadvertently agreeing with me right?

It is our essential nature compelling every decision behind what you purport to be "free will".

By the simple fact that you agree we rise above them you agree these influences are ubiquitous and there is no "free will" that is not influenced by these propensities.

Now that we are in agreement, we must debate in what proportion we rise or do not rise above them.

You seem to think that we can consciously remove our base natures from any influence and that reason and "free will" conquer all.

I contend that you are mistaken. You would be surprised at the forces that influence human behavior. You would be mistaken to believe that this is all a social construct that can be changed by reason and free will.

eincrouknight said...

Bwec, I appreciate your analysis of the interaction between male and female humans; it is topical and very likely to be accurate.

With that said, you may find it surprising to hear me say that I am perfectly satisfied with these circumstances.

The simplest way to explain why I am of this mindset is for you to imagine what it would be like if males were also inherently valuable, just as females are. Surely men would have then invented and created just as much as women have, which is to say not much at all.

The fact that men are doomed to proving their worth is actually a boon for humanity as a whole. It drives men to be better and better, while women have no incentive or reason to improve themselves other than their own whims. The old saying of "Necessity begets improvement" is so accurate. The inequity you describe in this blog post is exactly why men have been, and always will be the vanguard of humanity. Sure, it's unfair, but we live in a hostile universe where expecting fairness is folly. Our only course of action is to acknowledge the limits of reality and build through and beyond them.

The first step really ought to be removing the men and women who support feminism from power. They are crushing men, stopping them from producing and moving this species forward. Let women compete with men fairly, and they will either contribute or be forced to be amicable and friendly with men who would be willing to support them. As it stands now, there is zero reason for women to deal fairly with men, because they receive much of what they want by the force of big 'Man' government.

I am convinced that excising the injustices embedded in government that prop up women illegitimately and artificially will restore relations between the sexes. There are already vast numbers of people wanting to drastically reduce government influence, though they may not explicitly be aware of the issues we talk about on Men's sites. They are unintentional allies, and are working toward a goal that would effectively achieve ours as well. This false, parasitic version of "Women's Liberation" is completely dependent on the force of government acting in their favor.

eincrouknight said...

http://www.startribune.com/local/96108304.html?elr=KArksUUUycaEacyU

Here's an article for you, Bwec. At least one government is willing to use force to counteract female privilege, but it all seems absurd to me.

Bwec said...

Thank you sir I'll check it out : )