The Sexual Oppression of Men by Women
Comedy Series Part 2 (Poe's Law and Applied Absurdism)

|| Lecture Notes from the 90th Diogenesis Lecture on 2021/9/12 ||



The sexual oppression of men by women is pointed to by key factors like the reduction and objectification of men 
by women qua the oldest artifacts we know of being dildos, that women are allowed to be aroused in public but if 
men are they're arrested (physiological repression), the preying on young boys by self-employed sex workers 
(disproportionate demographic of OnlyFans consumers are underage boys), and the malformed or disproportioned 
growth of impulse control to sexual impulse drivers in the brains of young men (biological oppression).

From a socio-economic perspective, taking the view of measurable power as a relation of resource distribution 
into account and how the vast majority of luxury goods and leisure services are being provided to and for women 
over men as a signifier that they hold the power and majority influence in society (middle-class white women 
also make up the largest demographic of voters in America).

Women also make up the largest consumer body in America, giving them the greatest buying power and financial 
influence in the country. The Median Male Income vs. Median Female Income (https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E-9OQSOVQAAqTij?format=jpg) 
is pretty damning. Medians are more useful and accurate than averages for various reasons; the average american 
makes a lot more than the average american. For example, pulling a random person off the street, their income 
will be marginally below the average income since the average is buffered by the ultra-wealthy billionaires, but 
their income will be pretty close to the median income since the median removes outliers like billionaires. With 
this in mind, women make less than men in america on average, but this is because way fewer women work. Of the 
women who are employed, they are likely to make more than men on average.

The wage gap myth can be further explained by the 27% gap occurring in 1970 when the narrative was started ("70 
cents on the Dollar"), but clearly doesn't continue to present day and even reverses, with employed men making 
approximately 25% less than employed women on average now.

For a regulatory perspective on this, we should also look the legal impact of making women a protected class of 
society and how this is institutional oppression of men, as it has resulted in women only serving 40% of the 
prison time that men do for the same crimes under the same circumstances and given women almost exclusive 
control over progeny in custody battles as well as the systemic stripping of men from their wealth under alimony 
(justified by the notion that the wealth was earned for the sake of the woman in the first place) and so on.

As a final nail in the coffin, I'd also like everyone to consider the very tired saying that men will never know 
the pain of child birth and women like totally have high pain tolerances, hear this whores, a kick to the 
balls is 9,000 dels of pain, which is equivalent to giving birth 120 times. Women are not strong or whatever 
bullshit their whispered lies tell you post-coitally. Women are all manipulative sociopaths who are 
fantastically weak and cowardly. Do not be fucking fooled, they cry and complain at the most mild of 
inconveniences, like childbirth. 

I'm tired of seeing my brothers get sniped by the feminist lies. I know too many men who have committed suicide 
and I believe women play the largest role in raising and socializing boys, so they are the most responsible for 
the emotional abuse of these boys and their psychopathalogical power fantasies have led to very negative 
consequences. We must rise up and seize the means of reproduction from the matriarchy.

How did we fall so low? What happened in 1971 that ended up reversing the power dynamic between men and women in 
America? What component of manhood makes us so easily controlled, manipulated, and abused? The very thing that 
has given us our power has given us our pain, those 9,000 Dels didn't come from nowhere. I'd like everyone to 
think for a minute, what is the very first known book to be written about the nature of love? Does anyone know? 
It's *The Symposium* by Plato. It literally has Simp in the name. This is a instance of dramatic cosmic irony 
the likes of which only God is capable of orchestrating.

It is at this point I should reveal the real lecture topic for today's discussion. This lecture is not 
about male sexual oppression by women, it is actually our second lecture in the Comedy Series, specifically 
about Poe's Law and Applied Absurdism. For those who don't know, Poe's Law states that without a clear indicator 
of an author's intent, it is impossible to create a parody of extreme views such that it cannot be mistaken by 
some readers for a sincere expression of the views being parodied. 

Everything I said during the lecture up to this point has been factually true, but I haven't been serious about 
any of it. The matriarchy I was describing was only as factual or absurd as fourth-wave feminists' descriptions 
of the patriarchy, yet if you got upset at one and not the other, then you have inconsistently applied your 
critical thinking skills and sense of humor. Feminists believe there is a conspiracy both economic and cultural 
against them perpetrated by few men with power at the top of our society, like a patriarchy, and the Nazis 
believed there was a conspiracy both economic and cultural against them perpetrated by few men with power at the 
top of their society, like a Judiarchy. Poe's Law and Applied Absurdism, is everyone starting to see it now?

It goes further, feminists complain about how pornography dehumanizes women, and the porn industry is 
majoritarily owned by Jews. Bad portrayal of women in the media? Most mainstream media is also Jewish owned. The 
distinction between contemporary feminists and neo-nazis is shrinking so rapidly that my head is spinning and I 
might need someone to help me get up. Does everyone understand how fucked the public narrative is? Do you see 
how both sides of the political spectrum are really the same people arguing about the same things but with 
slightly veiled terms used to obscure their targets? Example: 'woke' and 'red-pilled' are used to describe the 
same thing by supposedly opposite people (https://twitter.com/CathyYoung63/status/1436882494628970504). I am the 
one who knows how bad things really are.

Poe's Law and Applied Absurdism. This lecture has been a practical demonstration of both, and if you'll amuse me 
by going a little further with me, I'd like to add another layer here. In the book Likewar: The Weaponization 
of Social Media by defense experts P.W. Singer and Emerson Brooking, on page 174, they justify a concern that 
Poe's Law leads to nihilism, a situation where nothing matters and everything is a joke. But as many of the 
people in this table society are well-aware now, everything really is a joke, and further, *because* everything 
is a joke, everything matters. I'm going to outline a bit about Applied Absurdism now to try to develop a case 
for why everything being a joke would make the world deeply meaningful and why everything in this framework 
matters.

Absurdism is traditionally... example of comedian feeding puppet carrots, not this, instead absurdism in 
Nagelian sense, meta component of how absurdism fails its own epistemic tests - new conception of absurdism that 
is an explicit inclusion of irrationality justified by snaxian subjectivity inside of a complete and consistent 
epistemic framework