Let Men Beat Each Other Up Again.

It’s the only way to stop these whiners from blaming women for everything.

Wherein I Choose a Worthy Punching Bag

This one may be a little incoherent because I’m writing while in what some might call an “autistic” meltdown, but I just deem a fervent mood (Furiously Engaged Rabidly Vehement Evil Nasty Tirade). Which, is seemingly the only reason I come to Substack. Gotta get those neurons firing with some tasty delicious rage, and the dummies over at the other sites aren’t up to the task of provoking me.

So who is the culprit?

Some Vicious Mole

. Who I strongly suspect has never been beaten up by another man, which is a terrible shame. Because on all other measures, he seems to be a brilliant, funny, interesting, and all-around attractive person, except for this one serious deficit. Which he shares with so many of the other fascinating and loveable nerds on this site. Not enough smack-downs.

How is it that I know that none of them have ever been beaten up, or even hit by another man? Because if they had been, they would not be carrying on developing whole theories that blame women for everything, when mostly all women did was help usher in a world where they’ve never been punched.

But I just want to make it perfectly clear, before I write a whole essay about how

Some Vicious Mole

should have been punched more, that I actually like him and admire his writing and would never boost him in this manner if I didn’t, and you should go read his poetry that he’s always crying no one reads. HAHAHA just kidding about the last part, you should go read his spicy polemics, not his poetry. (You’re welcome, you venomous underground-dwelling blind rat).

The Only Crisis With Boys Is They No Longer Have Any Fear of Getting Hit

Alright, let’s begin. There’s a whole bunch of talk lately about the “crisis with boys and men.” See, e.g. Richard Reeves,

Rob Henderson

, and many other articles on this site and other outlets. This topic takes both left and right forms, and I’m not particularly interested in the different versions because I think they’re both ultimately avoiding the true source.

On the left, they worry about toxic patriarchy, and bullying, and the worrying trend of young men increasingly turning towards the right and misogyny. On the right, they worry about soyboys and the feminization of society, the lack of strong masculine role models and the longhouse. They both worry about boys falling behind in school, and fatherless households, though they both spin it a bit differently, and certainly use different language and emotional appeals.

The problem is, neither side offers much that’s concrete or actionable to do about it. They either offer vague expressions of concern and urge everyone to care more about boys, or on the other side, they skip the solutions and just go straight to talking about how all the fat ugly HR cat ladies are to blame.

Okay, that’s not fair. Some do offer solutions:

• Richard Reeves recommends holding boys back a year before starting school. This is a good idea, though I’d say doesn’t go far enough because really age-segregated compulsory academic schooling for 12 years straight for all children needs to end entirely, but that’s another topic.

• Rob Henderson
  often strongly implies, but doesn’t quite come out and say, that more boys should join the military. I’ll just say it: the professional UMC should get over its military phobia and stop viewing it as an exploitive torture chamber for proles. It in fact has an unparalleled track record of shaping up aimless slackers and setting them on a better path in life. Everyone should follow
  Rob Henderson
  because he knows what he’s talking about, he just has to be more polite about it because he’s a respectable person using his real name.

• A bunch of right-wingers recommend taking away women’s right to vote, getting them barefoot, pregnant, and in the kitchen again, or generally going back to the 15^th century when men could be men. All I’ll say here is that you can take my modern freedoms over my dead body, mofos, and I’ve trained on using poison-dart blow-guns and will not hesitate to slit your throat the second you fall asleep.

But other than that, you mostly get a lot of amorphous ideas about more male bonding or men’s-only groups, or more sympathy for boys, or women keep their noses out of their cartoons, or something. Not a lot of detail.

Let me supply some detail: boys need to grow up being afraid of real physical consequences from other men if they don’t act right. The reason some boys are “falling behind” is because they are not afraid of any actual men in their life, there’s no true adult “authority” when there’s no real consequential disincentives, so there’s no one to stop them from being useless slackers who jerk off and play video games all day and expect life to hand them everything they want without inconvenience, anxiety, or struggle. Here’s why they do that:

1. They’re not afraid of their dads, uncles, or grandads. They either don’t have a dad who’s around in the first place, or if he is, he’s a nice cuddly guy who would NEVER smack him across the room for talking back, or threaten to knock him into next week for being disrespectful. If any of them DID so much as lay a finger on them, they can call CPS.

2. They’re not afraid of their moms, because why would they be?

3. They’re not afraid of teachers, the worst they can do to them is suspend them, AKA give them a vacation from school.

4. They’re not afraid of other men in their community, because they don’t go to church, aren’t in boy scouts, don’t play sports, and don’t join the military, so who exactly is going to keep their ass in line? Even cops have bodycams.

Am I saying every boy needs to be beaten? No. Some are just fine and dandy and will be wonderful, sociable fellows without being beaten into it.

But plenty are not. Puberty hits, their testosterone increases almost overnight by 800%, and they turn into savage beasts who honestly do not respect anything but an actual hard smack.

I have read some hilarious articles recently talking about how schools are now discriminating against boys, or have changed to become less enjoyable and suited for them. Really?? When was school ever enjoyable for any but the nerdiest top 20% of boys, the ones who already liked reading and had talent for academics and thinking thoughts? When did we have these boy-paradise schools where they were allowed to run about like maniacs and never sit still and shut their mouths? What fantasy past is imagined?

Boys have always hated school! And they always sucked at it too, compared to girls, at least til they were older. Other than the nerdy cerebral types, boys have never liked sitting in a seat and listening to some boring teacher make them sound out words and read books. The only difference now is that adults for some reason expect boys to enjoy school, even though they now have infinite-entertainment devices as an alternative, and forgot that in the past people just used to beat their asses into compliance.

Go back and read some educational pedagogy from the 18^th and 19^th centuries…it is filled with exhortations on the crucial necessity of frequent and swift discipline, specifically for boys. Teachers used to universally have a hickory stick or paddle that they just walked around with or that hung next to their desks. Boys were regularly made to pull down their drawers and caned. Or if they were too slow on the uptake, they would just stick them in the corner and make them wear a giant hat pronouncing them a dunce. Or made to kneel on the ground holding books on outstretched arms. Or stand with their nose in a circle drawn on the chalkboard, for hours. This was all standard pedagogical practice up til roughly the middle of the 20^th century, and some forms of corporal punishment were still legal and practiced in some places up through the 80s and 90s. And it was always the boys who were the targets of 90% of the discipline because they’ve always been the ones doing 90% of the rule-breaking.

If you go back and read that stuff, you will see that it was basically universally acknowledged that boys are monsters and need to be beaten into becoming civilized – this stuff was not subtle. I was actually surprised by how anti-boys our society used to be. Most of the educational reformers and leaders did NOT think that girls ever required corporal punishment, and that their constitutions could not handle such rough treatment. Girls were simply assumed to be moral and sociable, and easy to teach. This was everyday common knowledge, up til the past 70ish years. It was only boys that people understood were insane, impulsive, amoral little maniacs that needed the devil knocked out of them, physically.

The typical education up til mid-20^th century involved rote memorization and getting hit with a stick if you didn’t comply, and then when you went home, if your parents found out you got in trouble by the teacher, you got hit all over again. Now we have education that is stimulating and engaging, and teachers that don’t hit, who care about the kids’ emotional learning, and who strongly discourage bullying…and somehow there are people all over the internet who think boys are failing because we aren’t nice enough to them.

The only way schools discriminate against boys is because they no longer impose any physical consequences on misbehavior, and some portion of boys simply WILL NOT behave and have no interest in doing so, absent such consequences. I guess you can call that discrimination??

Vicious Mole provided this image in his piece:

Fair enough. But let’s just remember that the world existed prior to the 1990s. So I would rebut as follows:

WTF Does Any of This Have to Do with Some Vicious Mole?

Okay, sorry for the school tangent. And it is really not nice of me to single him out, when this whole piece applies to almost of us on this site. We are all nerds. No one who isn’t a nerd is capable of reading this many paragraphs to even get this far down, so if you’re still reading, you’re a nerd. And Vicious Mole was a nice little nerd who read at a college level when he was seven months old and dictated encyclopedias by age nine.

Here is his piece which caused me to go on this rant: I Get It

In this piece, he argues that “autism” as understood nowadays is fake, and that being interested in facts and liking nerdy topics that annoy women doesn’t mean you have a mental disorder.

I agree! And in the first half, I was thinking to myself “holy shit, is it possible we are related or like twins separated at birth or something??” Because I ALSO was entirely obsessed with sharks from ages 8-10 and did nothing but read about them, and I ALSO was obsessed with the Beatles from ages 11-14, and the only difference is that from ages 3-7 I was obsessed with Star Wars, not dinosaurs. And I don’t necessarily want to argue all night about which progressive rock songs comprise the top 25, but I definitely want to argue for five hours about the top ten song intros in music history, or stay up all night ranking SNL by who was funniest. Or annoy the hell out of my friend by derailing a nice dinner by goading the other men into talking about the varying speeds of each land animal and who would win in a race for 90 minutes. So I recognized myself in all of it.

And yes, I think we can all agree that “autism” as used in common parlance today, and even diagnoses, is a joke. The DSM criteria for autism nowadays could consist of a sole measure: whether or not you like to argue with strangers on the internet. That could be the sole criteria and it would identify all the supposed autistes.

Really all I take autistic to mean these days when I hear it is “smart and discerning person with extreme cognitive confidence in their tastes, enjoyment of facts, and unwillingness to intellectually submit”. Of course, there’s also the real autism, and I have no idea why these things are even called by the same name.

But where my enjoyment of his article morphed into me being provoked, and thus going on this tirade, is where he spends the second half of it blaming all of this on women and fat ugly crying zookeepers (

Some Vicious Mole

is clearly terrified that one day he is going to be euthanized by crying fat ladies telling everyone how sad it is that he has to go. Don’t worry Moleypants, if I ever give you the poison dart there will be no crying and I will look fabulous and skinny while doing it).

Because here’s the thing – and I know this will be shocking information – normal, non-nerdy men ALSO frequently do not like nerds who enjoy arguing about facts – including nerdy women. And women not only get annoyed by nerdy men who are not Rico Suave, they ALSO get annoyed by nerdy women who argue facts – moreso, in fact. They really can’t stand us, unless we learn to govern our behavior, which we do, while wishing we didn’t have to. Crazy, I know. Non-nerds find nerds annoying!

Though one difference is that when non-nerd men get pissed off by a nerd who told them a fact they didn’t know and made them feel stupid, they don’t just sigh and roll their eyes, they throw your dinner across the room, or slam the door so hard it splits in two, or demand you meet them outside in the parking lot. Sometimes. And if they don’t, it’s mostly because women and nerdy men have convinced them not to and put them in jail when they do.

I can understand that Vicious Mole and all the other male nerds on Substack are frustrated at the fact that there is a very bad male to female nerd ratio. I lament this fact as well. Nothing to be done about it, it seems hard-wired. I am sympathetic on this point. I think.

But here is what has happened. Instead of the natural order of things where non-nerd men just beat up nerds, we have created a society where this is no longer allowed to happen: for the benefit of nerds! And yes, women have primarily promoted and supported this. Because we don’t like being beaten up, or other people being beaten up, and we think it’s mean and bad, and all the moms out there will always view their semi-sociopath teenage boys as the sweet little innocent toddlers they used to be. So we banned bullying, and corporal punishment, and fist-fights, and encouraged playing nice and using your words.

WITH THE FULL-THROATED SUPPORT AND ENDORSEMENT OF THE MALE NERDS. Don’t you forget that part, wussies! You didn’t want to be beat up either. You aligned with us, you were on team non-violence. I’m old enough to remember when the dungeons and dragons guys were on team women, not team misogyny. You nerds wrote a hundred books and made a bunch of movies in the 80s and 90s about how you had hearts of gold and those big chuds were a bunch of evil rapists (lies, all lies). You all were perfectly happy to develop and promote the play-nice environments that heralded sitting on your butt and reading books and thinking thoughts as the highest value and economically useful thing you could do, where war was fought via intellect rather than muscles. You were happy to look down on the guys who needed grip strength for their jobs. You wanted it and you liked it.

But then what did you do as soon as you got your safe environment where no one’s allowed to punch you or stuff you into a locker?? You turned around and started blaming women for everything.

I mean, you don’t actually want to go back to that part where instead of arguing online across distances with strangers, an argument means you might get knocked flat on your ass, or that a guy who doesn’t like your look might just punch you and walk away free. But now that you don’t have to worry about that anymore, well, geez, these women and their opinions and insistence on manners and social rules, god, they really are ANNOYING, aren’t they? Always with their sighing and their eye-rolling and their gossip and giggling at your expense. They’re really kind of bitches, when you think about it. GOD, why are they ruining everything?? It’s like they’re controlling all of society and there’s literally nothing you can do about it!

I’m just saying. You only think this way because you live in a bubble that excludes all men with “steel-toed boots and/or nametags at their jobs”. You have surrounded yourself with fellow nerds, with men in soft shoes with soft hands, and have forgotten that compared to a punch in the face, some gossiping women is really not a big problem. You aim your grievances at women because they’re soft targets, and they’ll take it while remaining pretty cheerful, and they’re not going to do much besides gossip or look disapproving. That’s not really that bad. You know how dudes react to whining and grievances, in person? It’s worse than a disapproving look.

This is too long and I’m running out of steam, so let me just lay out my irrefutable evidence for why not being beat up by men leads to men who complain and blame women for everything:

1. I’ve never met a man who’s been punched in the face by another grown man who whines and complains about women.

2. All the female-blamers had either wimpy or absent fathers and none of them have ever been in a fight with a man or been punched.

See, it’s right there, a 100% correlation!

And don’t even start commenting about how many fights y’all nerds have been in and all the beat-downs you’ve taken, because I already know you’re lying. I’m making a list in my head right now of those of you that I know HAVE been hit, and none of you are the women-blamers.

Oh, that’s just anecdotal, you want real evidence. Fine, nerds, here’s a chart, I know you love charts:

See? Case closed.

Women, I Implore You, Stop Thinking Men Will Be Nice Just Because You Are.

It doesn’t work. How much more obvious does this need to be? You gave them their self esteem and their compliments and their ability to express themselves and advocated for their freedom from being beaten up in boyhood, and it did not help one bit to make them want to be nice to you, it made them resent you for how annoying you are. It’s a human failure that everyone takes everything for granted, so the second they got done sighing a breath of relief at no longer having to fear beat-downs, they looked around to see who they could take out their grievances on with the barest of push-back, and settled on a nice soft, jiggly, smushy, warm, smooth target: you.

It's your fault, it’s your fault, it’s your fault. They are powerless to do anything whatsoever about plump women in an office who send emails, or wives who disapprove of things. Powerless!

Moral exhortations do nothing but annoy them. They can appreciate the softer and finer things in life, but their respect for such things quickly erodes, because ultimately the only thing they respect is a punching fist, and you don’t have one. You can try and be kind, but someone else better be mean. Otherwise you don’t get kind boys, you get resentful men.

If you don’t believe me, I’ll just note the obvious: the are nicer to you when you’re meaner to them. They like it. They won’t admit it, but it’s obvious in their actions. Don’t ask me to explain why, they’re sick bastards. But you can try to civilly and politely disagreeing with a man online and you will just get called names and dismissed as a longhouse harridan. Or you can just skip that and tell him he should be put through a wood-chipper, and suddenly he’ll start liking your comments. Don’t try to understand it.

My final piece of evidence is that I just wrote a whole essay picking on a writer I like for no reason and saying he should have been beaten more and semi-implying I might kill him, and I bet he will still like me okay after I’ve done that.

*But if I’m wrong, sorry Vicious Mole. But reading a piece feeling total simpatico alignment with the writer only to be hit half-way through by him turning around and blaming me and my ilk – that was rude.

**Vicious Mole is not a misogynist, nor woman-blamer most of the time, please don’t get the wrong idea here, but he went off on an autistic meltdown while insisting he isn’t autistic, so I decided to go off on my own.