Making Men Gay and Women Unhappy

by Brad Nelson6/22/15

This is my personal reflection based upon anecdotal evidence and having eyes wide open. It’s either a primary purpose or the natural result, but the ideology of the Left is meant to produce Gay men (let’s just say “weak, effeminate, submissive, Eloi-like men”) and unhappy women.

As we see with the increasingly toxic black culture, keeping a simmering resentment in people can be very good politics. It seems to me, based upon anecdotal evidence, that women are another victim group, born and bred to the kind of simmering resentment (often of men) that can be very good politics.

Based, again, on anecdotal evidence, it is my opinion that many women have repeatedly stumbled upon Mr. Right only to reject him because he wasn’t Mr. Perfect. And none of these anecdotal stories have anything to do with me personally. I don’t think I’ve ever been Mr. Right, and certainly never Mr. Perfect.

It seems to be, again based upon anecdotal evidence and keeping my eyes wide open, that this is a phenomenon mostly among liberal women. They seem to have been sold a bill of goods. They can have it all, that they can be economically independent, have fulfilling careers, and be emotionally fulfilled as well — the first two negating the need for men and thus inflating the third expectation.

And many liberal women become chronically disappointed because the more they seem to achieve, the less happy they are. And the men — well, why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free? Men are increasingly not getting married and are extending the juvenile phase of their lives well into their thirties. This exacerbates the problem (particularly for many normal women not indoctrinated in the Cult of Progressivism) because it then becomes somewhat of a truism that “There are no more good men.”

So, my dear conservative brothers and sisters, you can reaffirm the idea that “Living well is the best revenge.” Do not get caught up in the drama of the liberals around you. They have built their own misery and it need not be yours. If asked for advice, do give it, but do not expect they’ll like the answer.


Brad is editor and chief disorganizer of StubbornThings.
About Author  Author Archive  Email

Have a blog post you want to share? Click here. • (620 views)

Share
Brad Nelson

About Brad Nelson

I like books, nature, politics, old movies, Ronald Reagan (you get sort of a three-fer with that one), and the founding ideals of this country. We are the Shining City on the Hill — or ought to be. However, our land has been poisoned by Utopian aspirations and feel-good bromides. Both have replaced wisdom and facts.
This entry was posted in Blog Post. Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to Making Men Gay and Women Unhappy

  1. Timothy Lane says:

    The whole point of liberalism is to be angry and dissatisfied even when you’re getting what you want, something I noticed in 1993 from an angry liberal caller denouncing Mitch McConnell (who was on a local radio station) even as the 1993 budget bill was being passed. McConnell wondered why someone whose side was winning was so angry about it, but we know now that liberals simply cannot tolerate opposition. So it’s impossible for liberals to be truly content even when winning. By contrast, we know that as important as policy is in the long run, for the most part it has little direct influence on our lives. This is why conservatives can be happier than liberals even when the latter are the ones who mostly get what they want politically.

    • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

      McConnell wondered why someone whose side was winning was so angry about it,

      Boy, doesn’t that just jibe with my experience, Timothy. This really hit home the very day after the election of B. Hussein Obama in 2007. A friend I’d known quite a while, and who couldn’t do anything but spit out the word, “Bush,” with double venom, was as angry as ever the day after The Anointed One’s immaculation.

      I, on the other hand, although disappointed, wasn’t going to let it ruin my day. And it didn’t.

      There’s a twisted relationship that the Left and Progressives have with their politicians. Somehow their politics and their office-holders carry much more importance than just elected officials. And this makes perfect sense under the paradigm of Leftism as a secular religion. A conservative or Christian might certainly decry the election of such ill-suited people as Obama, but life goes on. They do not — we do not — measure our lives and ourselves by whoever is in office.

      • Timothy Lane says:

        That event played a major role in the evolution of my politics, from being a conservative who disagrees strongly with liberals to seeing liberal ideologues as a hostile entity. It really started with the LA riots of 1992, and especially the liberal reaction, but that liberal in 1993 was also a lesson. Much of it also came from considering the letters we received from liberal fans for FOSFAX; indeed, it was one such letter in 1999 that led me to the theory of virulent liberalism, which has been confirmed repeatedly since then.

        • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

          Susan Harris posted here recently about some of the zealous comments she’s received at her site from liberals. Not all “Progressives” are as unhinged. But the people who are unhinged are overwhelmingly on the Left. I just don’t know many conservatives who believe “the ends justify the means” in that they are free to yell, scream, lie, and swear at liberals because their cause is supposedly so righteous.

          In some respects, this is their weakness. And one of the things I try to do here is to forward the message that you need to join the battle and at least playfully and with a sense of humor ridicule this nonsense coming from the Left.

          One of the main flaws of the Establishment Republicans is the belief that engaging the Left in a pitched battle is either ungentlemanly or (most likely) not the road to electoral success. We don’t need or want unhinged ravers (something that Establishment Republicans would call anyone with the least among of backbone or gusto). But we do need people who can forthrightly make an argument and aren’t afraid of mixing it up a bit.

          • Timothy Lane says:

            This attitude is exactly what I have in mind with the theory of virulent liberalism: extreme dextrophobia which results in paranoia about the consequences of a GOP victory (however squishy we think they are, most liberals think they’re a bunch of ultraconservatives), and thus to a conviction that they must do Whatever It Takes to stop them. I suspect most ideological liberals are at least latently virulent; the point at which the virulence turns active varies. Some did so after the 1994 elections, for example, both others needed a stronger shove.

            In theory there are also virulent conservatives, but I suspect fewer of them. If nothing else, they’re only a lunatic fringe, whereas virulent liberals are actually a lunatic mainstream. Then, too, most conservatives have a moral code that tends to preclude an ends-justify-the-means fanaticism, whereas most modern liberals have abandoned such moral standards.

Leave a Reply

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