Ten Consequences of Women’s Financial Independence

Men need women.  Women (at least in western societies) no longer need men.  This imbalance has many interesting consequences:

  1. Women see men as entertainment.  Men invest far more in entertaining women than in other worthwhile pursuits which traditionally would have guaranteed them a good woman.  Bars, fine dining, high-end clubs, high-end stores, expensive jewelry, fashion, cosmetics are all consumed by women but mostly paid for by men to woo the women.  Wooing a modern woman is becoming really, really expensive.
  2.  For men to who this cost is too high and unfair, they drop out from the sexual marketplace and get their satisfaction from pornography and masturbation.  This was true even historically, but the epidemic of pornography indicates a severe economic crisis in sexuality.  Most men can no longer afford bangable women.
  3. Women no longer need a provider man, because the modern state has ensured that even if a woman makes mistakes, a man, or society as a collective, will come to her rescue.  The modern state is the ultimate white knight.
  4. Men still need sex and validation, however.  But since a working woman has taken the negotiating card away from her man, a man is at the mercy of his girlfriend or wife.  She can withhold sex.  A man cannot withhold provisions (that is called cruelty).  She can threaten to quit the marriage and take half his wealth.  He cannot threaten to quit the marriage and be guaranteed her sexual availability for 26 weeks every year.
  5. Women are being groomed not for homemaking but for becoming compettive professionals.  Men are not attracted to such women as long-term partners, though they may pay lip-service to liberal ideals.  Long-term relationships have a bleak future.
  6. Women entering the workforce increase the supply pool of employees, and drive wages lower.  Men can no longer afford to provide for their families with the mom staying at home.  It wasn’t always this way.
  7. Women spending most of their days outside home has catastrophic consequences for the future of the children and of the family unit.  For a modern urban family, since the mother is no longer willing to be at home, having a kid is an expensive proposition.  Modern urban women are not willing to have many kids.  Neither are modern urban men, because it is just too expensive.
  8. Men, not being motivated to be, or rewarded for being, providers, have no incentive to achieve anything worthwhile for themselves or for society.  They are happy playing video games, going to comic conventions, and watching increasingly fetishized porn.
  9. There is an epidemic of sexual confusion, promiscuity and divorces.  When marriage is based on “desire” and “tingles” but not on “need” or family honor, the foundation is shaky.
  10. Women are voting, earning, and moreover, are spending most of the money.  And therefore they need to be wooed by the media and the politicians.  The media and the political discourse is becoming feminized, anti-masculine and welfare-socialist.  “Rape-culture”, “Patriarchy”, “War on women” and related nonsense is becoming a cacophony when in reality the social and economic conditions have always been advantageous for women, and never more so than in the present times.



Man’s World – Gender Equality for Subpar Intelligence


About this series from The Indian Express:

Parineeti Chopra, Kalki Koechlin, Richa Chadha, Rhea Chakraborty, Bhumi Pednekar and Shweta Tripathi are among some names of the Hindi film industry who feature in a multi-starrer web-series “Man’s World”, made in support of UN Global Goals for Sustainable Development campaign.

Other names who will be seen in the series are Pritish Nandy, Soni Razdan, Shruti Seth, Aditi Singh Sharma, Cyrus Sahukar, Meiyang Chang, Anupama Chopra, Aditi Mittal, Naveen Kasturia, Miss Malini, RJ Malishka and Priyanka Bose.

An initiative by Y-Films, the youth division of Yash Raj Films, India’s leading movie studio, the series will go live on the Y-Films channel on YouTube on September 29. It has been made in association with British filmmaker Richard Curtis and his team at Project Everyone.

After watching the cringe-worthy trailer, we can only surmise that everyone associated with this web-series have never heard of Darwin or evolution and don’t know first thing about biology.

The series appears to be based on the assumption that gender differences are socially constructed, which is wrong. The differences in men and women are real, measurable biological differences. Men and women are different in their physical strength, emotional responses, sexual behavior, rational capacity, life preferences and on numerous other counts. Owing to the innate biological differences men and women fit different roles in the society and receive different treatment. Thus, gender is not socially constructed but is genetic, with only small behavioral variations across different cultures.

The series purports to show the gender role reversal, but we are sure that in that vein they will not show the following:

  • Women working in hazardous environment (mines and factories) and men staying at home.
  • Calamities wherein men and children are rescued first (by women rescuers), and women are left to die.
  • Women fighting wars on borders to protect their countries.
  • Women firefighters risking their lives saving people, mostly men and children.
  • Women cleaning gutters.
  • Women paying alimony and child support when their husbands divorced them to live with another woman.
  • Women travelling standing in public transport trains while men occupying seats despite having their own reserved compartments too.
  • Women working 9 to 5 jobs day in and day out while men at home played with children and cooked.

The list can go on. That is a man’s life. Men have taken upon themselves all those responsibilities since the dawn of civilization without crying oppression.

As is typical of the herd with feminist leanings, what they would selectively focus on is only women’s problems and men’s privileges, and would completely ignore many a privilege enjoyed by women and the problems of men. The gender role reversal can’t be complete without incorporating all of the above challenges of being man and much more that men go through.

What Man’s World is showing is not gender role reversal but exchange of cherry-picked men’s privileges and women’s problems. And it is fundamentally flawed at that too, since those “men’s privileges” and “women’s problems” are hardly socially constructed. The series is a pathetic attempt to sell gender equality to the masses with subpar intelligence.

Genders are not equal, and can never be. We can force the equality but with a cost.

Follow Max Newman on Twitter or WordPress.

Why PUA tactics or Game is a Double-Edged Sword

PUA tactics and game are aimed at making you more attractive to women.  There are in general, two kinds of advice available: short-term manipulation (“Game”), and long-term evolution (“Self-improvement”).

Short-term manipulation is to “act alpha” and modulate your self to appear more interesting, social, attractive, “high-value” than you really are.  This kind of advice usually goes something like this: it is foolish to “just be what you are” with women, that won’t get you laid; you need to dress sharp, be witty and cocky, show high-value in a non-obvious way, exhibit “abundance mentality”, neg the woman, “flip the script”, act a bit aloof after building attraction (push-pull), be “fun” and outgoing, be the man she desires by emotionally connecting with her, etc.

Most of these are captured in the “sixteen commandments of poon” published at Chateau Heartiste.

Long-term evolution is to evolve your body, mind and spirit so that you are established and anchored in the strength of your personality and do not seek validation from women (or even from the vast majority of men).  It is to regard your body as a temple (eat healthy, exercise, stay away from dissipating habits), cultivate your intellect and skill-set, develop passions and hobbies in keeping with your personality.  Become actually affluent and socially respected.  And then … wait for the right woman to be attracted to you as matter of course.

Both of these strategies assume that having a sexual partner is the aim.  Only the means differ.

Which of these strategies is worthy of a man who respects himself and wants to live in the world with his head held high?

We believe that short-term manipulation in order to bed a woman is fun, but meaningless and psychologically dangerous.  It is like a drug which can get you addicted or make you feel exhausted and alienated  You will feel satisfied and disappointed in waves.  Each disappointment will have to be culled with another manipulation-fueled-conquest.

We encourage you to interact with women and to learn how their minds work, but beware of losing yourself in this game.  Ensure that you continue to cultivate your inner self.  Ensure that being a player in some situations does not diminish your ability to be authentic in other situations.

If you manipulate a woman into bed, the woman is having sex with a persona that you have managed to project.  Like it or not, a primary reason men want to have sex with women (instead of just masturbating) is because of the feeling of validation it provides.  But short-term manipulation defeats that purpose.  At the end of the encounter, you do not feel validated, just clever.  You pat yourself on the back for another “notch” and revel in the admiration of other men.

It is not very different from masturbation, though obviously it requires more skill and artistry and will win you others’ envy.

No matter what the PUA literature says, this behavior implicitly puts “pussy on the pedestal” and demeans yourself by following the rules-of-the-game as set by the target woman.  No matter what you tell yourself, you have lost “frame” as soon as you enter a bar or a room with the aim to seduce a woman.  As a rule, no emotional connection is possible in such encounters because you are carefully hiding your real self.  It is almost a purely physical culmination of an orchestrated attempt to woo the woman.

After many such encounters, the pick-up-artist might feel proud of his cleverness and others may feel envious of him, but he is no closer to feeling validated and respected as a man.  He has managed to orchestrate the woman into his bed, and he knows it.  All his notches have been due to his tactics, not his being.  Any self-aware pick-up-artist realizes this quandary but is unable to fully admit to himself, or to others, the self-defeating nature of his pursuit.

The only benefit of such encounters is to get experience with women and to develop certain skills: social intelligence, fashion sense, fitness, …) which are easy to exhibit.  Once again, be wary of letting this superficial persona define all of you.

What about long-term evolution?  We believe that there are very few women left who really gravitate toward a deep-thinking, intellectual, truly courageous, non-flippant, restrained man.  Such men were the heroes of yesteryears but today they would be relegated to involuntary celibacy, watching clowns and jocks get pussy left and right while they publish the next Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus (Wittgenstein published his grave philosophical opus at the age of 29).

The strategy of long-term evolution might seem better to a man with dignity than PUA-like manipulation, but this too has two fatal flaws:

  1. Women are just not turned on by deep thinkers any more.  An evolved man can continue to wait, and he will continue to wait.  Women of all kinds are just looking for fun, and not depth.  The only long-term evolution that will get you laid is to get rich and famous.
  2. You will spend your youth in celibacy or manipulating bimbos into bed, because true inner evolution isn’t instant; it takes a decade or two.

We believe that in current times, an intense focus on women is going to be the downfall of a man with potential.  Women are more than ever the gatekeepers of sex, and they are not interested in commitment except after riding the cock-carousel.  At that time, they are unworthy of a relationship with any man, what to say of an evolved man.

MGTOW, or men-going-their-own-way, movement is the most prominent articulation of the thought that modern women are just not worth the effort.  Short-term seduction is psychologically self-defeating, and long-term effort is not worth it (if the aim is a long-term-relationship) because of the quality of the women available at that stage.

We don’t advocate an MGTOW lifestyle, but we can see their point.  Most women these days are not worth more than a pump-and-dump, and they themselves want to be treated that way.  Treat them with love and respect, and they hate you.

Is there still a possibility of a fulfilling long-term-relationship in these times?  The only theoretical way is for an evolved man in his late thirties to attract a woman in her early twenties, from a traditional culture, and then domesticate her.  This is easier said than done.  Traditional cultures are becoming rarer by the day, and it is not easy to attune to a long-term partner from another culture.  Moreover, unless the man moves to that culture, the migration of the woman to the decadent western culture will make his relationship a battle against the toxic influences on his new, young wife.

What is our advice to men who value themselves?  Do not spend too much effort on pursuing women.  Be a fashionable man, be a suave, intelligent man, be a man in control of himself, cultivate your personality according to what you want.  Attract women passively, because that is not too big a waste of your energies.  If a woman is attracted to you, open yourself to her and let her charm you.  If no such women is forthcoming, continue your life’s work.

If you are too hungry for sex, learn game and take a woman (or ten of them) to bed.  But remember that those encounters are just entertainment, like going to a movie.  If you have to work twelve hours to watch a two hour movie, think about whether it is worth it.  If you find it fun to woo a woman, by all means go ahead.  If you find it a chore (as most deep-thinking men do), develop your skills and game to an extent (and that takes practice!) so that you can find a woman without much effort.

Don’t make women your life’s mission.  Nature never intended you to.

Jasleen Kaur Exposé: Modern Women are Bitches and Media is their Pimp

For the last two weeks we have been observing the case of Delhi’s Jasleen Kaur who accused Sarvjeet Singh, another Delhi resident, of eve-teasing and verbal abuse on a traffic junction. It has been the story of rise and fall of Jasleen Kaur. Within a week she has gone from being a “braveheart” to publicity-monger and false-accuser. We thank God for that.

Sarvjeet Singh (left) who was falsely accused of eve-teasing and verbal abuse by Jasleen Kaur (right). He was vilified by media who on national television called him “pervert”, “lout” and even “potential rapist” without any evidence or investigation into the incident while the woman was being congratulated and praised as “braveheart”, before the eye-witness overturned the women’s story exposing her of lies and malintentions

For those who are not aware of the case of Jasleen Kaur, here is our detailed coverage.

On the evening of August 23, 2015, Jasleen Kaur clicked a picture of the man named Sarvjeet Singh on a traffic junction in Delhi and posted it on Facebook, writing in her post that the man verbally abused her and passed obscene remarks at her. The post quickly went viral on social media. Meanwhile, she had also lodged a complaint with Delhi police about the incident.

Jasleen Kaur’s original Facebook post that went viral and invited public fury and media-trial of Sarvjeet Singh

On the next day, August 24, the media went crazy over it. The Times of India reported the incident with the following headline: ‘Pervert’ held after Delhi University girl ‘exposes’ him on Facebook.

Jasleen Kaur, a resident of Tilak Nagar in west Delhi, told police that Sarabjeet Singh (28) had made lewd remarks after stopping his bike as she was crossing the road near the Tilak Nagar Metro station and had mischievously offered to drop her at her destination. When she clicked his photo on her mobile phone, she said he had posed defiantly and threatened her, saying, “Jo kar sakti hai kar le. Complaint karke dikha, fir dekhiyo kya karta hun main (File a complaint and see what I’m capable of).”

Notice that ToI already assumed that the man was pervert and that the woman was the victim despite there being no investigation, no evidence, nor any eye-witness in favor of the reported eve-teasing and abuse. A shitty piece of journalism by The Times of India. But this was just the beginning of the ugly media-trial of Sarvjeet Singh.

While the accused Sarvjeet Singh who was being publicly defamed on social media and was arrested from his residence, the Aam Aadmi Party leader and the CM of Delhi, Arvind Kejriwal (@ArvindKejriwal) tweeted the following on August 24:

Congratulate @jasleenkaur89 for her bravery. Girls of Delhi should follow her & speak up against such unacceptable acts

Times Now, another media outlet of the psychopathic Times Group who also own The Times of India held a “debate” with their infamous clown journalist Arnab Goswami. Below is the full video of The Newshour debate followed by our observations.

Our observations:

  • First of all, we are happy to see that the video has over two thousand “dislikes” against less than a hundred “likes”. It sort-of restores our faith in the educated public in this godforsaken land. Go ahead and give “thumbs-down” to it after reading this post.
  • How this circus of a show by Arnab Clown Goswami is called debate is beyond us. He already has his mind made up about which side is right. He in his loudmouth fashion calls Jasleen Kaur the “braveheart” and congratulates her right at the outset, and the entire show is about him and those on his side silencing the other side. It is anything but debate.
  • We couldn’t help but observe Jasleen Kaur, who was all decked up to garner attention. Red dress, untied hair, face brimming with smiles like she could not contain her excitement. An astute observer of human nature and body language would not fail to see a woman who was living her dream on that show.
  • Too much eye-blinking on part of Jasleen Kaur is a strong tell of lying.
  • At 15:35 Jasleen Kaur says “Why did he comment on my genitals and what he would do to me tonight.” On no other channel, and in no other interview has she mentioned about the man commenting on her genitals. It makes one wonder what prompted her to come up with that accusation about the man only on this particular show. We are of the strong opinion that the idea about the man commenting on her genitals is put in her head by the penalist Aditi Mittal who first mentioned “sexual organs” at 6:06, and Arnab Clown Goswami who mentions “threats in sexual manner with innuendoes” at 14:36. Jasleen Kaur just seems to pick up on everything they are saying.
  • When Clown Arnab asks his opponent Deepika Bhardwaj to speak he also says, “anyone feel free to come in, by the way”, thus encouraging others to interrupt her. Why? Because she is going to talk sense which might weaken his position in the so-called debate.
  • Look at Jesleen Kaur’s facial expression and eye movement at 25:15 when Clown Arnab is saying “when a woman who has faced a physical threat, and she has, Jasleen has faced a physical threat..” She herself is surprised by Clown Arnab’s account of what she has faced and her body language thoroughly betrays her. We have made a GIF image of the clip below, observe her eyes closely.
  • Favoring the media-trial, at 51:15 Sofia Ashraf says: “If a man is being raped, if a man is being abused, we would still come up with a same kind of approach.” Really? So where are you hiding now that the whole world knows that Jasleen Kaur was lying? Why has Times Now not held another “debate” with the eye-witness involved in the case?
  • Towards the end Clown Arnab mocks the Delhi police commissioner’s statement on the increasing number of rape cases (July 2011), that said: “You can not drive alone at 2 o’clock in the morning on Delhi’s roads and then claim that the capital is unsafe. You should always take your brother or your male driver with you. These are reasonable precautions that are expected to be by all citizens of the city.” At one point in the discussion Arnab Clown Goswami called Ritwik Bisaria to be living in Alice-In-Wonderland world for not seeing the “plight” of women. We think if Clown Arnab can’t see the soundness of this advice, which basically says “do not play with fire if you don’t want to get burned” then it is he who is living in Alice-In-Wonderland world. One must be living in a utopia to expect a world where women (or men for that matter) can roam around alone at night without fear of being robbed/assaulted/raped.
  • The most hilarious part of the show is this: At 35:20 Kamal Faruqui comes in and says: “First of all, hats off to my daughter Jasleen… She is a proud daughter of all of us…” And guess what, he is lashed out by Aditi Mittal and then insulted by Arnab Clown Goswami for addressing Jasleen Kaur as daughter! They did not hear what the man was actually saying. He was on their side, for God’s sake! The old man is shocked and dithers saying: “You are objecting to my wording… What is wrong with you?” We feel sorry for the poor old man.

Below is the GIF image of the clipping we mentioned above. Jasleen Kaur herself is surprised by Clown Arnab’s account of what she has faced and her body language thoroughly betrays her. Look at her facial expression and eye-movement as Clown Arnab is saying “Jasleen has faced a physical threat..”

A clip (25:12 to 25:22) from the official Newshour video in which Jasleen Kaur’s body language betrayed her

When the accused Sarvjeet Singh got bail, Times Now showered more insults on him by calling him names while praising Jasleen Kaur using adjectives like “braveheart”.





The following video of a Times Now reporter talking to Sarvjeet Singh is an epitome of shitty journalism. It reveals how abysmal is the quality of journalism in the mainstream Indian media.

The woman journalist, whose name is Pooja Shali from Times Now, is clearly a stupid feminist bitch with a mountain of prejudice in her head in place of brains. She constantly keeps repeating “there is evidence”, referring to the photograph Jasleen Kaur has taken. How in the hell is the photograph in which the man is nicely posing for it an evidence that he eve-teased and abused Jasleen Kaur who took the photo? The stupid journalist Pooja Shali is hellbent on extracting an apology from Sarvjeet Singh, and when Sarvjeet refuses to apologize she calls it shameful.

On August 25, an eye-witness came forward who gave a completely different account of the incident, overturning Jasleen Kaur’s story. Zee News later aired a show where the channel invited Jasleen Kaur, Sarvjeet’s mother and the eye-witness Vishwajeet for a discussion. Below is the official video of that discussion.

This video is a nail on the coffin of Jasleen Kaur’s badly-earned, short-lived fame.

  • At 3:00, the eye-witness Vishwajeet says that Jasleen Kaur was controlling traffic at the junction, and it was Jasleen who stopped Sarvjeet. He can’t use the words that she used at Sarvjeet when the scuffle took place between them.
  • At 8:40, when Jasleen is describing the conversation that was exchanged between herself and Sarvjeet, she says that by having to repeat it again and again she forgets what was exchanged. How dumb! Having to repeat the conversation, if anything, would make one remember everything word for word. Her saying that repetition is making her forget the conversation is nothing but her attempted justification for inconsistencies in her account which she is making up in her mind. And let us state again, apart from The Newshour on Times Now where Aditi Mittal and Arnab Clown Goswami planted ideas in her mind and words in her mouth she has never mentioned that the man remarked about her genitals.
  • At 9:10 as the eye-witness Vishwajeet starts speaking, Jasleen Kaur is getting ready to run away and the anchor has to tell her that if she is right she must face the questions.
  • Upon this Jasleen Kaur gets hyper and starts with her dramatics and accuses the channel of shoddy journalism. A show where an eye-witness is present and both sides are being allowed to speak is unfair. But just a day before where only one side was passing verdicts on Sarvjeet Singh and publicly shaming the man without a shred of evidence against him was fine!
  • At 10:52, agitated Jasleen Kaur says: “You can’t do a media-trial. Let the courts decide..” Wow! This is fucking A! This was exactly the plea of the other side on The Newshour where the man was being vilified through media-trial. But it was alright then. Jasleen Kaur in her agitation has acted so dumb that anyone with slightest common sense can see through her inconsistencies and self-contradictions to figure out that she is a conniving liar.
  • Turns out, Jasleen Kaur had agreed to appear on the show on a condition that she will not face the eye-witness, Sarvjeet or his family members. Why? Because it scares the shit out of her, facing the truth. That’s why.

So why did Jasleen Kaur lie?

Sarvjeet Singh and his family members have alleged that she did it for political mileage as she is an Aam Aadmi Party activist. While we don’t completely support this theory, we think it can’t be ruled out. Here is why:


Jasleen Kaur does have connection with Arvind Kejriwal.


Jasleen Kaur is a member of Aap Youth Wing (AYW). And when the incident with Sarvjeet took place she was volunteering for controlling traffic, not going home from the metro station as she claimed.


Jasleen Kaur has appeared on national television, on NDTV show with Ravish Kumar.


Jasleen Kaur has also been an intern with NDTV, another psychopathic media outlet that supported her in this case.


Jasleen Kaur (bottom left) is appearing on the hoarding of a political party.

All the above facts combined make a strong basis for the suspicion that she pulled this stunt for publicity and political gain. However, in conclusion we would be generous and say that we don’t really know whether she lied to gain political mileage.

Our view is that she was volunteering for controlling traffic at Delhi’s Tilak Nagar traffic junction (as evidenced by the above screenshots) when she had a scuffle with Sarvjeet Singh over him trying to jump the red light. She tried to stop him, he did not listen (which happens every day with men). In her frustration she thought of using her woman power by giving it eve-teasing and sexual harassment angle. With her political and media connections and her social media savviness she knew exactly what kind of power she held.

That is why, in our considered opinion, Jasleen Kaur lied.

And she is not the first. We have written about Rohtak Sisters and Delhi’s Ramanjeet Kaur cases, both of which are quite similar in that the media went crazy showering praises on the supposed victims (women), the men’s lives were ruined, and then the women were found to be lying.

Thus, we conclude that modern women are bitches and media is their pimp.


  1. Times Now Punished For Shoddy Reporting In Jasleen Kaur Case
  2. Times Now seems to have removed from their YouTube channel the shameful video of The Newshour show hosted by their clown Arnab Goswami on which they conducted the brutal media-trial of Sarvjeet Singh

Follow Max Newman on Twitter or WordPress.