31 votes

Men Are Being Systematically Emasculated In America Today

In addition to all the other problems Americans face today, the following article highlights 32 staggering statistics about the systematic demoralization of our culture: specifically the emasculation of our men. The article did not even mention the recent study that found 40% of all households now have a female as the primary breadwinner or that the wage gap between men and women is still widening and at a shocking 75.5 cents on the dollar. In other words, women not only are bringing home the bacon, but they are having to work excessively more hours to do it. Not to mention the fact that they still have the main burden of childbearing, childcare, and housework to tend with.

What is wrong with men in America? Why isn't our country producing lots of strong, independent, hard working men of character like it once did? Well, many believe that it starts at a very young age. Society has told them that it is okay to be a "slacker". Today, far too many of our young men are far more interested in their various addictions (beer, drugs, sex, video games, gambling, etc.) than they are in starting a family. In America today, the percentage of men in prison is at an all-time high, the percentage of men with a job is near an all-time low and the percentage of children living without a father is at an all-time high. Do we have a crisis on our hands?

Continue reading...

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

old_man_melchiori on marriage

"The screwing you get
ain't worth the screwing
you get."



In Japan this trend was noticed some time back, as boys seem more interested in their gadgets than in girls. I believe the gov't was studying ways to reverse this trend but in vain.


Couple things

The relationship between men and women is money for sex.

Men had the power to get sex when they were the sole source of money, but now the women can get their own money.

Women are still in control of sex, so men get it only when allowed. After marriage, a woman can deny sex, and if the husband strays, she can divorce and win big in court. And this is supposed to motivate young men to get trapped in marriage?

I've read a story of a guy whose wife has denied sex for 18 years. She is a stalwart member of their church, and there is no preaching in favor of sex - all against - sex is dirty, and needs to be controlled. All this benefits the woman and increases her power. I know guys who are in counseling for their "pornography problem" because their wives reported them to their pastor. I know of no women who have been chastised for denying sex.

Everything favors the woman's monopoly power over a man's sex.

In addition, the goal of technology is to make manual labor obsolete - which manual labor favored the men. Now we expect boys to sit still in classrooms and offices and do more detail oriented work which favors women. If the boys can't comply, we drug them or make them feel worthless because they aren't able to do girl stuff.

All in all, I see less purpose for men all the time. Like I do with my cattle, might as well have the good males do the breeding, and get rid of the rest. Just think - women wouldn't then complain about picking up dirty socks and other disgusting things associated with men.

Gilligan's picture

In addition, men have been made an actual LIABILITY ...

... by AFDC ("welfare").

Our tax dollars are helping to rip apart the family.

Google is government.

And all part of a plot, scam, lie, cheat. by Rothschild zionts

Thru Rockerfeller crime family. See AARON RUSSO and what he says Nick Rockerfeller told him about the whole American womans revolution.

Lived in many countries and mostly only the countries that are on lockdown by the zionist, europe and USA, that a woman is the same as a man, equality. stupidity was hatched and planned against humanity just one more control method.

That said I do want to clarify, I do not want to be a woman nor act like one and I sure do not want to be equal for its impossible. I respect most women.

Woman are from Venus and I do not disrespect woman by claiming not to be equal to them or them equal to my gender. Its like saying a pig is equal to a cow then if anyone disagrees making a big fuss about equality. Just another lie argument put on by the usurpers who have enslaved humanity into a false national debt system of slavery, Collections identify opposition which then can be squalched. Always justifyed by claims of debt collection.


It's a rational choice...

Being a "strong, independent, hard working m(a)n of character" doesn't pay like it once did. You get out-voted, stripped of your right to defend yourself, told you can't be near children because you are potential predator, and that you are by your nature a rapist. Men have quit trying because they cannot fight the lesbianification of American. Or at least that what they tell me.

I think I tend to agree with

I think I tend to agree with the sentiment here.

But, as I read, I kept wondering...why all the passive verbs?

--Men ARE BEING...

When we do get an active verb, it's "society." Society is doing men in. The article even asserts that society is exerting this influence at a "very young age."

So two, three, four-year-olds are being emasculated by society?

Whenever I see a writer ducking active voice, I'm suspect. The article dducks refers to seems to blame society. Not individuals, groups, ideologies, policies. Just society.

That's nice. As "society" has no reigns to pull up short or to guide right or left.

That's nice. We, both sexes can blame "society." We don't have to blame ourselves, shame ourselves.

It's just "society."

Somehow "society" reaches into our homes and perverts our toddlers -- our "very young."

Does anyone else call foul on such logic? Does anyone else think that "society" doesn't get ahold of our children until they're not so "very young," until they're set to go off into the sheltered world of kindergarten?

Does anyone else think that if a parent allows "society" to superseded his or her values for a "very young" child...um maybe it's not about "society" but about the values of the parent?

I'n not so sure that boys are being emasculated by society. Young boys are being coddled by their parents. Not society. Young boys enter the wider world of "society" after a firm foundation in their own households.

If those households are crappy, if neither the mother nor the father are discerning and train themselves for the role, we can't really blame society. Right? It's just that crappy mother and father. Because there are plenty of great mothers and fathers embedded in that same society who churn out masculine men, ready, eager, and able to spawn and safeguard their children.

The least common denominator isn't "society." It's whatever underlies crappy parents from good parents. It's character. Boys are emasculated because they've got a crappy mother who was so father-deficient herself as to hook up with a boy who couldn't even pretend to be a father. Just lame people, making lame choice. Society takes a pass.


People used to keep each other in line.

If you saw something, you'd say something... directly to the face of the person you observed (not Janet Napolitano).

Everyone has become afraid of offending everyone else and the society has become a bunch of back-stabbing rats that talk about everyone behind their backs while smiling and waving in public.

As Dr. Paul has often remarked, we get the politicians who reflect our society. He is quite right. When people begin to remember the value of honor by choice or necessity, then we'll have honorable public servants again.


and there isn't a baby born without his/her body containing hundreds of toxic chemicals--

I used to talk about this; used to read about it. I can see examples of it, but I think it's not limited to men--

I think all of humanity is being attacked: psychologically, spiritually, physically, etc.--

it's hard to be awake; it's easier to dream--

Men are going on strike...

..tactically, that should be the libertarian angle and within a Ayn Rand's angle.

It is women who are 'masculated'--now that would be a non-dog bites man article.

Have you seen the women who run this country? Nap, Hillary, Powers, Rice, the gal at IRS?

Longtime Internet Poster

Nation of Wimps

Our bodies were designed to move, to work. Testosterone levels have been dropping for the last two generations. Why? Because we are not using our bodies the way they were designed.


Furthermore, we are raising a nation of entitled wimps by a generation of afraid & hyper-vigilant parents who don't allow their children to fail, make mistakes, get hurt, learn what the world is about. These priviledged little p*ssies turn into fragile adults. And if they are male... they not only have no backbone they barely have any testosterone which means they have will never grow any balls (figuratively and eventually literally).


"One resists the invasion of armies; one does not resist the invasion of ideas" Victor Hugo

that's totally true

when I work out and ride my mountain bike regularly, I am happy, engaged, relaxed, and much overall healthy. All kinds of bad stuff happens when we don't work the body hard, which is what it is designed for.

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."-- Albert Einstein

The body was designed for

The body was designed for daily manual labor (farming, property maintenance), not going ape shit for a few hours a week, commonly called exercise. Along with not being vegetarians, you never see people living into their 100s who say they took time to exercise. Nope. They are always meat-eating workers. Staying constantly active until the day they die.

Please come join my forum if you're not a trendy and agree with my points of view.


But I feel like cycling has great health benefits. Ymmv. So does good sex and quality micro brew.

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."-- Albert Einstein

Farming culture is rather new to humanity

Farming culture destroys humanity we are and have been for a very very long hunter gathers not destroyers of the land not possesors of the land. This farming thing is new and very destructive to nature. That said farming is a whole lot better than sewer rat ciy life, corporate culture, false debt/debt slave money and the company store that keeps you full of poisned foood products that one can buy with the slave money.

So I see where ur going I just think we need to go a little further and be more respectful of mother naturs ability for feed us. She has successfully provided for a long long time before the farm and corporate scourge.


"this farming thing is new

"this farming thing is new and very destructive to nature."

You have never heard of Joel Salatin have you?


Texas Liberty Talk Radio http://www.ragingelephantsradio.com/

Ron Paul on his son Rand Paul:
"he does a lot of things similarly, but I think he does everything better. Than I have done over the years,"

Uhh, wrong. We aren't from

Uhh, wrong. We aren't from monkeys, so we weren't some cavemen just going around hunting like beasts. Where do people get this crap that farming is bad for nature? You need to wake up and realize we can fit MANY times the current population of this planet on it. I don't respect "mother nature" because I don't worship the creation. She? The only thing I will agree with you on is the corporate scourge thing, but if I could guess, you are likely anyone who thinks all business is evil, so is money, and that we should all just be a bunch of hippies with communes where everyone just worksth together and everything would be rainbowsth, marshmallowsth, and poniesth.

Please come join my forum if you're not a trendy and agree with my points of view.

Evidence dont matter to you

If you say its so its so right. Where do you get this crap are you from a monkey?
You make huge asumptions. You do no research have no understanding of real history and come up with some bs about creation or god or whatever, mental illness of city life or the chem of farming? If you dont think money is evil your real simple minded. And not becuase its money. BUt hey I waste my time on a mental giant. Money created as compounding debt is evil, not money but the Rothschild zionsit debt issue counterfeit money. But hey to you its just business as usual. Your so smart and superior but to me looks like the thinking of a monkey. Comunes wtf. You have a warped mind. How to do get comunes from historic humanity hunting and gathering its only been five or six hundred years that intensive farming and your so called business has come about. I got to block you for stupidity.


"some bs about creation or

"some bs about creation or god or whatever, mental illness of city life or the chem of farming?"

That's where you lose.

Please come join my forum if you're not a trendy and agree with my points of view.

Huge list of consequences

Premature aging
Physical ailments
Heart disease

Just a short list. But think about it. You also lose your full life and liberty. Your body is the vehicle with which you travel through life. When it is not running at peak performance and is breaking down from lack of use your life is compromised. I argue so is your liberty & freedom.

I think some of it is reversing. It is really encouraging to see a group of 20 & 30 somethings once again attracted to farming and crafts. To be healthy the best & most gratifying work employs your brain and your body... IMO.

"One resists the invasion of armies; one does not resist the invasion of ideas" Victor Hugo

Kermit the frog said what i got extra toes and a tail.

Enlarged prostate everyone, how about some pharma to help out, oh btw u will grow big honkers men. NO problem?

GMO, pharma, and gov all want to make a man into a girlie boy at the behest of their overlord Ratchild Zio-ganster Debt counterfeiters and their depopulation plan.


Actually, I would expect that

Actually, I would expect that if all things were even/equal, it would be 50/50 for who brings home the money. None of this male/female classification crap. Half the time it would be the man, half the time it would be the woman.
Yes, men and women are different, but if they can do the job, they can do the job regardless.
This is exactly the kind of thing Ron Paul preaches against, classifying people as whatever.(beyond health needs, etc)

I am of the opinion that this hold over that its the guys job to do everything is one of the problems of today's world. I am not saying that we should force men to be girly or women to be manly, just that we shouldnt be having stereotypes to begin with.
I suppose sex identity is something many people feel strongly about though as evidenced by that one case where people were in an uproar because a couple decided to raise a child gender neutral and not say it was boy or girl. I mean by a few years old, the child would figure out anyway making the whole issue moot.

To climb the mountain, you must believe you can.

Maybe if people didn't have

Maybe if people didn't have the need to acquire junk to be happy, the woman (if she wished) could stay home and take care of her family and the home. Instead, she needs to work to maintain the lifestyle she has been encouraged by the media and her peers to believe is the norm.

Not only that. With the decline of the family structure, women, and now men, tend to think that the govt should take care of her family. This mindset is also encouraged by the media. That's why women tend to be democrats.

I don't get the whole "buy a

I don't get the whole "buy a huge rock" for an engagement. People try to tell me that it's to prove that you're financially stable. I challenge that notion with "no, it just shows you how stupid you are spending thousands of dollars on vanity." A person who can provide saves. In my opinion, functional couples aren't women adorned with jewelry from every anniversary. Why does material crap like that have to be a foundation of a relationship? Yet another reason why I don't even date. A roof over the head, food, and plenty of savings. That's all I feel I'd need to provide. Unfortunately, TV and magazines tells females they need to play constant mind games and that they need a career and jewelry to be fulfilled. If my wife wanted jewelry, then she should indeed get a job. That's when I get some divorce papers. There's a time for being vain socialites. It's called after the kids move out and retirement.

Please come join my forum if you're not a trendy and agree with my points of view.

You make an excellent case

You make an excellent case for 2 people knowing what each other expects out of marriage. I think we would have stronger families and better examples of personal responsibility for children if people picked their spouses more carefully. If men and women see any sign that the other will be a poor wife or husband or parent, get out immediately.

We stop being men when we

We stop being men when we stop being entrepreneurs.

We are a country built by entrpreneurs that is now trying to survive on the backs of employees.

All you hear about is "Jobs, jobs, jobs".
"You have to go to school so you can get a job!"
"We have to make college more affordable so people can get better jobs"

When is the last time you heard or saw an ad for a new government initiative to get people to start a business instead of go to school?
Compare how often you hear about employment/unemployment numbers to how many times you hear about new start-ups/business closure numbers. The frequency will inform you of our national priority.

Entrepreneurs have a producers mindset.
Employees have a consumers mindset.

Entrpreneurs are leaders, difficult to control.
Employees are followers, easy to control.

Government, media, advertisers and snake oil salemen (anyone selling low quality goods or goods with no real value) all love the employee. The reasons should be obvious to anyone who spends time here.

We had two generations whos introduction to adulthood was though the most rigorus forms of subserviance. That of the military. World Wars 1 & 2 produced entire generations who went directly from living with their parents into organizations of structured order follower. Is it any wonder they came out of that and went looking for someone else to give them orders? I do not say this to diminish them in any way, but to point out how deep this recent transformation to consumer/employee/follower nation has set. We have to overcome generations of momentum.

You have to be willing to take the risk.
Be able to get kicked in the face over and over again and get back up.
You have to have the courage to lose everything and the will to fight to built it again.

A peice of land to call my own and the sweat of my brow to make it productive is how we came to be great.

At one point, working for someone else was a way to learn a trade, so you could make that trade your own. Now working for someone else is simply a way of life.

Every business is someone's dream. Maybe not their lifelong goal, but they have a vision it will make them more than they put into it or they would not start it.
The American dream started to die when we started spending our days building someone else's dream instead of our own.

Want to be a man again? Start a business.
Want to see other males become men? Encourage them to start a business.
Want to make as much as a man? Start a business.
Want to get your children off the couch? Encourage them to be their own boss!

This country will not be restored by people punching a clock for a pension or a 401k.

Your whole comment is just a collectivist rant.

I'm so glad you're the authority on what a man is. I guess no one should be different and everyone should want to be leaders. I guess I'm not a man for the simple fact that I'd rather be a worker for someone than to have my own dynasty. Who are leaders supposed to lead if all who exist are leaders? Since when do you ever see the wealthy and those heavily invested in their work have healthy families that get to spend time with their fathers? I want to do my 40 and that's it. People with [successful] businesses can't just put in 40 and call it quits.

Please come join my forum if you're not a trendy and agree with my points of view.

Thanks for taking the time to express your view

There are two words I specifically did not use in my entire "rant":
Money and Wealth.

The most powerful aspect of being an Entrepreneur is the ability to define your own measure of success. You can cultivate any resource you choose.

If you want to have more free time, than a successful business should be one that results in you having more free time.
If you want to have a quality relationship with a happy and healthy family, than a successful business for you would be one that provides that specific opportunity.

When you are an employee the definition of success is determined for you, by someone else. The resource you cultivate is chosen by your employer.

The saying "True leaders do not create followers, they create leaders" is something I truly believe. My goal with every single person I work with is for them to, at some point, not ever need me for anything again.

If self-determination and self-reliance are part of your definition of collectivist, I am completely guilty. I work as hard as I can to develop both qualities in myself and every single person I care about.

I don't know, LW, as much as

I don't know, LW, as much as ramico is a fruit loop, I do think you're giving too much man-cred to entrepreneurs, which, by the way, isn't capitalized.

Entrepreneurs aren't some special class of self-reliant men; they depend upon other folks as much as anyone else. (The case can even be made that the owner of a business has to cow-tow to every customer, while the employee only has to cow-tow to one guy. So who's the bigger cow-tower?) The employee of an entrepreneur can cultivate any resource he chooses. In fact -- survey says -- that lowly employee actually spends more time with his family than that "E"ntrepreneur.

On the self-defining front, hate to break it to you, but character determines how one measures success, not whether you are an employee or a boss. Come on, you know this. Zombie apocalypse. You've got time to go to two friends to prepare a battle front. Do you pick your apo-friends based on who's an entrepreneur or who's shown backbone, courage, smarts? (Not that those are mutually exclusive, but come on. We all know the seamy-side-up guy who'd we'd never hire, but we'd run to when the zombies come.) Character underlies business; not the other way around.

Also, the true-leaders-create-leaders bit is a fallacy. It denigrates the duty and value of followers. Followers have a crucial task -- it's not to be shoved into leadership. It's to be discerning, agile followers. That means followers judge leaders. Any leader who's saying, "Don't follow, lead," well that kind of cuts him off from being a leader. I know that whole true-leaders-create-leaders is all the rage, but it's also stupid. And no good follower buys it. It's really just a way for folks who want to be all leader-ish to forge ahead while still feeling all egalitarian. Idiocy. Leaders lead. If they are leading well, they attract discerning followers who judge, always and continuously, both the leader and the cause.