More man-bashing in The Times – there’s been a lot of it recently


22 May 2007

Beware of the nanny


It is a strange fact of life that most women, no matter how high-achieving, beautiful or intelligent, have, at the back of their minds, a worm of anxiety about their nanny and her effect on their husband.

Or, to put it in another – more rational – way:

It is an obvious fact of life that most bitchy career women, no matter how fancy their job-title, how beautiful she thinks she is or how many worthless qualifications she has, have, at the back of their minds, a justified worm of anxiety about their attractive, pleasant and feminine nanny and her attracting effect on their husband.

This India Knight – arch-man-hater extraordinaire – is rambling and complaining about men in the usual manner, that just because of one or two recent cases, all us men are fiendish adulterers ready to elope with the nanny at a moment’s notice (how many fucking people have nannies anyway? It shows the tiny circles these pompous feminist columnists inhabit when they discuss having nannies in such a casual way, as if we all have them.)

One of the reasons a guy would probably fancy his nanny more than his wife is because (a) the nanny will probably be nice and young, (b) could be foreign, perhaps from one of the few counties in the world where women are not raised to compete with – and hate – men, and (c) in seeing a woman actually care for his children, a man may suddenly realise what a worthless, non-nurturing, unfeminine piece of shit his career-wife is, as seen as she ditched her kids with a stranger before they were even six-months old.

Most of the article is not worth reading, except for the last bit:

Men don’t fall in love with nannies but with the alternative world the nanny represents.

Perhaps. Or perhaps men just fall in love with the nanny’s really nice pert young arse.

Either way, surely it is women who are more likely to get all delusional and fall in love with an ideal alternative world a man may represent, rather than the individual himself, then naturally divorce the poor sod when it doesn’t turn out to be as perfect as she hoped.

Then there’s the final two sentences.

Men are stupid that way. Any attached woman ought to bear it in mind.

Strange how easily it comes to women to just conclude all us men are stupid in a national newspaper column, and probably be surprised and offended that any guy thinks ‘What? You fucking offensive man-hating cunt!’ Which was my reaction.

Still, it’s not as bad as last month, when the cunt was bragging how great women are with a variety of statistics to ‘support’ her argument, one of them being how men are five-times more likely to commit suicide in the West. Gee, what a compassionate woman, celebrating suicide.

I did get a comment published yesterday – pointing out how yawn-inspiring it was that all female columnists seem to do is endlessly slag off men and think they’re serious journalists – but it appears to have been deleted.

Here’s one from some woman that got published:

I’m sorry, but I completely agree with India. And I don’t have a nanny.Thankfully, my husband is a-typical of the male population-but the rest of them, I’m afraid, are very stupid. Apologies if the male population reading this are offended, but that’s life. It’s the way men are.

Anneliese Gordon, Altrincham, Cheshire

See, from the cunt above, just how easily insulting men comes to modern women? And how they fail to back their claims up, but just make them and claim ‘that’s life’ or ‘so there’?

So many women seem to sincerely think that us men are stupid, which probably explains why women are so angry all the time; they are sure us men are all stoopid, but then again they surely can’t help but notice that pretty much every single invention, discovery, and advancement in civilization is down to us men. If we’re stupid, what does that make women, who’ve done pretty much fuck all except moan and complain?

posted by Duncan Idaho @ 5:34 PM

At 6:21 PM, Darren said…

But if a wife went off with a young male au pair it would no doubt be because shes following her heart and shes a sassy independent empowered woman. :-/


At 6:25 PM, ChicagoMan said…

I will say the same thing that I have been saying for a while now.

If women are so smart, then why did a man invent the tampon.


At 7:47 PM, Duncan Idaho said…

Darren, that is exactly what I was thinking too.

When women ditch their husbands and run off with another guy – be it a young toyboy or whatever – then according to most of society, especially women, then the husband was clearly some sort of loser who wasn’t providing well enough for his wife, or satisfying her enough in bed, or both.

If a husband ditches his wife to run off with a younger woman, then he’s a cad, a piece of shit, an immature ‘stupid man’ worthy of nothing but scorn.


At 7:49 PM, Male Samizdat said…

Just more evidence that Western women are to be avoided at all costs. This nag is surely threatened by a feminine, nurturing, caring woman. She knows men want this, but she would never do that herself because it would be slavery!

I went to the article myself and the sidebar indicates the author lives with her three children. No mention of a man in the house. She might have been happier if she had learned to be submissive and obedient (hee hee).


At 7:56 PM, Anti Misandry said…

It’s quite pitiful isn’t it? Men constantly endure hypocrisy & double standards from women, be it at a political level, national via the media or individual through their wife or girlfriend.


At 8:12 PM, publius said…

Fems will use any excuse they can to call men stupid. It’s ironic that since women have taken over the universities, as in the U.S., we now import much of our brains from those places that are not so feminized.


At 9:28 PM, Anonymous said…

“For the hand that rocks the cradle, is the hand that rules the world”

Enjoy your cats, careers, and dildoes as you waste away your child bearing years bitches. We’ll find the mothers of our future children somewhere else since you are no longer suitable or desirable for marriage or motherhood.


At 10:47 PM, Anonymous said…

Check this out

The relevant section(for those can’t be bothered to read it all) is called Observations on modern society (its a very long essay but I found all of it very interesting)

This the best quote i think:

If women really do want to become the equal of men, then they do their cause no good at all by presenting themselves as “powerless victims” of an oppressive male society. For there are only two alternative conclusions that can be drawn from this assertion, if it be true, and neither of them is flattering to women.

Either it is the case that women really are powerless victims of male domination, in which case they are by definition inferior to men; or else they are the equal of men but have allowed themselves to be subordinated, in which case their character could only be regarded as highly suspect.


At 11:07 PM, Anonymous said…

They talk about us with the same bored,arrogant disdain that Nazis used when talking about non-Aryans. They are now the officer class, and they control the newspapers and televised media.

You remember that poor unfortunate man Daniel Pearl? The American man captured in Iraq, terrified, humiliated and then be-headed? Not only beheaded (with a knife I heard), but the whole process taped and shown on the internet for all to see? Well, Hollywood has finally made a movie about it all, but it’s not actually about him. You guessed it – it’s about his wife. Starring Angelina Jolie. A must see. Not.

Even men as victims in the most horrible and obvious way can’t be acknowledged if there’s a woman in close proximity to be sympathized with.


At 11:13 PM, Anonymous said…

anon 9:28,

There are women who like large male dogs over cats. Never forget that.


At 12:11 AM, dan said…

Feminism is a cancer that has spread to other places besides W. Europe and North America. It is now creeping into South America (at least when they come to the USA, they seem to fall in love with feminism and start acting like their North American counterparts), India, Japan. Brothers we must exercise extreme caution should we pursue brides from foreign lands afar: Some of them may only want you to gain citizenship. Some may be brainwashed by westernized bitches telling them we’re oppressing them. Most importantly, we must continue to expose the lies of feminism and show them just how hateful and stupid feminazis are.


At 12:45 AM, Anonymous said…

Ok, it’s obvious that this harpy is threatened by femininity. In the back of her mind, she probably believes that men are strongly attracted to this type of woman, and she’s spot on. So instead of male bashing and ridiculing women like the “nanny”, why doesn’t she become more feminine to attract the likes of similar men?

Oh wait, that’s oppression.

My mistake.


At 2:08 AM, phoenix said…

She’s wrong about her husband, clearly he’s even more stupid than most males, after all, he married her.

Men ARE stupid though, every man that isn’t on the marriage strike, which is still 75% or so of the male population, is stupid.


At 4:21 AM, Anonymous said…

publius said…

“Fems will use any excuse they can to call men stupid. It’s ironic that since women have taken over the universities, as in the U.S., we now import much of our brains from those places that are not so feminized.”

Publius, women wouldn’t need to look far for an excuse to call you stupid. You import “much of your brains”? You prefer places that “are not so feminized”? Aside from the issue that “feminized” is not a real word, I would think that you were advocating more “feminized” women.


At 4:26 AM, Anonymous said…

Why does it have to be “the husband ran off with the nanny” anyhow? Why not an article complaining about all those wicked nannies that steal the hard-working husbands away from their families?

Why is it, once again, all the man’s fault?

For every husband that cheats, there is a woman cheating with him.


At 6:09 AM, phoenix said…

The backlash is pretty strong right now, and it’ll only get worse with the next generation. The current fembots are truly stupid because they seemingly don’t realize that while they waste away their prime, new women will appear that are in their prime that don’t share the same femcunt ideals.

Men bring resources to the table, so we are never too old. A man in his 40s can easily get a woman in her early 20s. But a woman in her late 20s, since all she has is her looks, has nothing. Despite the media campaign against older men with younger women, older men will follow nature as will these younger women. Feminism has liberated someone alright, it just happened to not be women. Women managed to fuck up a good deal for them, and now they get to die alone with their cats and dildoes. The femcunts will probably campaign HARD to raise the age of consent to 21, and make younger girls even sluttier, but it’s doubtful they realize they need to do that, and can actually manage it. Eventually the marriage laws will be fixed, and men will go back to marrying these women at younger ages, but until then, we can cohabit or date them, while the old femcunts are on their own.


At 6:44 AM, Anonymous said…

Well. I am enraged because of the sentence “Men are stupid”. I tried to repeatedly send a message to the Times using the “Have your say” button.

But my message doesn’t seem to appear. Does anybody know if there is a delay or how can I get my message to be shown at the Time webpage.

Thank you.


At 8:23 AM, Anonymous said…

It is pretty unbelievable that such offensive language about men is published in a major newspaper. It shows how ill society is.

Obviously most inventions have been done by men.


At 8:42 AM, Hmh said…

After reading Mzzzz India’s article all I can say is… I’m off to find me a nanny! YEAH!!

If I’m really lucky she’ll be an ex pole-dancer.


At 11:17 AM, Kumogakure said…


Interesting topic!

I would respond thusly: It’s natural for a man to desire to add to his “herd.”

Consider that most of the cultures of the world are Polygamous, and Polyandry is in no way outlawed by the big three Monotheistic religions of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam.

Why not?

Because it is natural for some men to want more than one woman at one time. Monogamy is a social construct of Greece and Rome, and was greatly at odds with the rest of the ancient world. To compensate, it was expected that men would seek mistresses outside of the marriage, and men of the period were not shy in exercising that right.

So the fact that many a man strives to be completely monogamous in their relationship signifies his loyalty to this woman; that he would quash his natural desires to please her.

India should be thankful, but it doesn’t appear that way to me!

So… if a man desires his nanny over his bitchy, no-sex having wife, it would be be expected, in many times and places, that a man would take her and do that voodoo!

Excellent writeup.


At 1:22 PM, Anonymous said…

Duncan, when you get a chance, check out this site:

I can’t decide if men in the USA or UK have it worse. Unbelievable misandry and feminist crap going on these days.

Love your blog, BTW.


At 3:15 PM, byrdeye said…

A young, hot, fun, nurturing, caring, feminine woman – what’s not to like? Men aren’t that hard to please – it’s really that simple.

Your overpriced soft college degrees and feminist attitudes don’t impress us as much as a kind heart and free mind.


At 6:21 PM, Anonymous said…

These old bag columnists aren’t worth 1 second’s reading.Please,lads,don’t waste a single millisecond of your life reading their worthless,senseless prattling. As soon as you thumb through the paper and see some silly cow’s column, shudder and quickly turn the page.None of them, and I mean none, have anything worth saying that relates to important issues in today’s world. Real issues, mind: not some doctored up comment on trifling issues which ALWAYS (zzzzzzzzz) lead back to women and how it AFFECTS them. Bollocks. Read some guy’s column instead.You will always get a fair,educated take on real important issues from a man.Not some bullshit comments that backstab men.
I’m telling you, it’s really got to the stage, and I’m not kidding, that I wouldn’t piss on a modern feminist if she was on fire.I’d walk right by and snigger.

You’d think that the modern, wonderful, technological marvel that is today’s world wasn’t developed,invented and built by men.Rejoice in that fact and throw it back in any fembot’s face who dares question it.If she is on her mobile phone, watching television,surfing the net on her p.c. or running to the doctor for a dose of Penicillin at the time, then so much the better.Tip of the iceberg really, but it’s a start. Lol.


At 6:37 PM, Maelstrom said…

My antifeminist blog has been shut down by blogger. Some cunt has reported me for hate speech. This blog is danger too.

I have been forced to simply spend five minutes opening a new blog and pasting the code into it with a new email address. My blog has now been moved to another location on blogger that they don’t know about yet.

I plan on moving it whenever I am reported. I am investigating who it was.


At 6:47 PM, Anonymous said…

Jude Law fucked his nanny,


At 7:08 PM, publius said…

“Publius, women wouldn’t need to look far for an excuse to call you stupid. You import “much of your brains”? You prefer places that “are not so feminized”? Aside from the issue that “feminized” is not a real word,”

A verb
1 feminize, feminise, effeminize, erreminise, womanize

to give a (more) feminine, effeminate, or womanly quality or appearance to; “This hairdo feminizes the man”



At 8:43 PM, Anonymous said…

Anyone considered how we could keep the movement in action if all MRA sites were simultaneously shut down?

Anyone know of sites that have dealt with this?


At 8:50 PM, Jerkmenistan said…

The way you change the publications is to threaten their advertising revenue. Consequently, sending letters to the editor or commenting on articles is pointless. Send your e-mails and letters to the companies who advertise in their print editions and on their websites (and cc: the editor of the publication). Indicate that you will boycott their products (and have your friends do the same) because they advertise in a publication that bashes men. This is how women have done it for years. Take a page from their playbook and run with it.


At 10:40 PM, Anonymous said…

This India Knight – arch-man-hater extraordinaire

Yes, India Knight… She sure is a cunt.


At 10:46 PM, Anonymous said…

Phoenix is completely right. In some states of the U.S. they want to raise the age for participation in pron to 21 and then age of consent of 21 will soon follow. Most MRAs forget that the first goals of feminists in the 19th century was to raise age of consent (from ten to eighteen) and the prohibition of alcohol. There was some justice in this because ten is clearly way too low. On the other hand 18 is clearly too high, considering that women’s most marriageable and bond forming years are between 14 to 22. I personally believe age of consent of fourteen is fine, specially if both partners are under 30. High ages of consent was the first feminist law with prohibition of alcohol.


At 11:21 PM, Anonymous said…

“to give a (more) feminine, effeminate, or womanly quality or appearance to; “This hairdo feminizes the man”

Yes … and aren’t you and your ilk ADVOCATING more feminine women?

How typical to respond with aggression, too.


At 2:29 AM, Male Rights Network said…

Ireland votes in a General Election on Thursday, 24 May.

Pat Rabitte, leader of the Labour Party in Ireland said to the leader of another party (McDowell the PDs) on a televised debate:

“You’re like a menopausal Paris Hilton”

Because of some cackering from femcunts at Trinity College Dublin who cannot take a taste of their own medicine, he withdrew the remark on Monday.

The typically liberal/feminist Irish Independent said the remark “smacked of misogyny“.

All the while however, remarks like India Knight’s would be proudly printed in the Irish Independent, and by no means would they be considered “misandric”. In any event, the person who made the remarks would certainly not be forced to withdraw them.

Indeed, the Irish Independent (along with the rest of Ireland’s media including the Irish Times, RTE, Today FM) could not bring themselves to report a word about a landmark ruling on Divorce Law which truly makes Ireland a Feminist State.

A man who married in 1979, and divorced in 2000, had the terms of his Decree of Divorce ripped up and was forced to pay €2million to his ex-wife because he became wealthier.

Yes, an effective “man wealth tax”. He is being punished for his own financial success and being denied financial autonomy.

Not a word from the media in Ireland however. Gerry Ryan brought the issue up on his radio show but that was it.

I have good reason to believe that the Independent’s Legal Affairs correspondent, a certain Derbhail McDonald fabricated a story but inverted all the facts so that it was a rich woman who was paying out to an ex-husband:

Woman must pay over €2m in ‘Irish divorce’

(Note the title: how the man is suggested to be parasitic and the woman is being robbed of her wealth. Would we see this headline if the genders were reversed? “Man must pay over €2m in ‘Irish divorce'”

Answer: No way.)

As all of these High Court cases relating to Divorce are confidential and non-public (probably one of the only legal actions that are allowed to be so), there’s no easy way of investigating the facts of any divorce case.

A newspaper which cannot bring themselves around to report a landmark High Court divorce ruling but yet makes off-the-cuff remarks “headline” and calls them “misogynistic” has no credibility with me.


“Men are stupid” — Perfectly acceptable

“Menopausal Paris Hilton” — Misogynistic

And, of course, the first remark is much more generalised, direct and abusive.


At 1:57 PM, tba said…

malestrom, it’s probably because you dared to show pics of aborted babies and some chick who had one couldn’t stand it (she felt guilty). Rather than acknowledge how much of a slut and murderer she was, she wanted to stifle FREE SPEECH.

I liked your blog cuz it was “in your face”. Hope you can get back on.


At 6:34 PM, publius said…

“Publius, women wouldn’t need to look far for an excuse to call you stupid. You import “much of your brains?”

“How typical to respond with aggression, too.”

you initiated with aggression.



At 6:54 PM, TH said…

I particularly like this guys comment to the article…

“Right on India.
As a middle aged man i can say that if i could escape the screeching ungrateful nagging wife for a sympathetic beauty ,i would!!”

…concise and straight to the point…one of a males many skills! .. shouldn’t have married her in the first place though mate!


At 4:23 AM, Anonymous said…

If your blog ever gets shut down in the UK for “hate speech” against cunts – I mean women – you should host it from the US, Duncan. America has awful divorce laws as well but we have almost absolute free speech.


At 6:52 PM, Anonymous said…


Great article, great blog. Read regularly but seldom comment. So sorry if I’m late to the party on this one, but I found Ms. India’s article absolutely amazing.

Let’s see if I get the facts straight.
1) Married 12 years, 3 kids
2) Wife works, appears uninterested in well-being of children – responsibility for that is passed to another woman
3) Wife described as tired, sour sullen and angry (mood)
4) Other woman is cheerful, kind, excellent at raising children.
5) Man prefers cheerful, kind, happy woman over tired, sour, sullen angry woman
Exactly what is is Ms. India pointing out?

If it was an article about dogs, would a conclusion that owners prefer dogs that wag their tails, chase balls, and sleep at their owners feed to those that bite, run away, and snarl be a surprise?

Shift the genders and the opening line might be, “Fiona came home after another 12 hour day and a flat tire on the car. As she walked in the flat, she saw her husband, Guy, asleep on the sofa surrounded by 8 empty beer cans and a bag of crips sat atop his huge belly. He burped and rolled over and started to snoar. But all was well in the house and she wasn’t worried– a hot bath was ready for Fiona and her favorite poached salmon was warm on the stove. Hector, the 23 year old live-in housekeeper, was pouring her a glass of Chablis.”

And if the tagline was — watch out for housekeepers — everyone would laugh.

The real takeaway from the article isn’t watch out for the nanny — it’s if the nanny is a better spouse and mother — wifey you’d better watch out.



At 5:16 PM, phoenix said…


Free speech doesn’t protect us from shrieking harpies in the US either mate. It doesn’t even protect against minorities, I still don’t really get why Imus lost his job, but he certainly didn’t get speech protection there either.

Duncan will have to stay anonymous here, and he can still get shut down. I’m fairly certain that is a US site, I think in San Francisco. So if his site gets shut down, in America, while he’s in the UK, how exactly is moving to America going to change that?


%d bloggers like this: