Dec 202013

While Code Bronze shaming language covers personal calamities, it doesn’t cover related shaming language that exists at a larger level.   For example, one piece of shaming language I have seen used is “if you don’t have kids, medicare and social security will collapse”.  That shaming language isn’t about a failure to have a legacy, but a failure to do a (supposed) duty which can be about more than just having children.  It’s the charge of being a leech on society.  This I’m calling Code Olive since leeches can be the color of olive.

Charge Of Being A Leech On Society (Code Olive)

Discussion: The target is accused of failing to do his duty to society or is accused of being a leech on society.  Examples:

  • If you don’t have children, medicare and social security will collapse.
  • We all have to contribute to society.
  • Women are weaker than men so men must lead women.
  • How dare you choose to work as little as possible?  You’re no different than a welfare bum.
  • You’re a leech on society and/or the government.

Response: Men have to freedom to choose how they live their lives.  Men are not required to work just to produce maximum tax revenue for the government or to ensure the stability of government programs.  Since society has become hostile to men, there is no reason for a man to support such a society.  If society wants men to do things for it, then society has a reciprocal duty to men. Duty can not be one sided. It is a logical choice for a man to remove his productive capacity for a society that doesn’t value him and is hostile to him.

  11 Responses to “Code Olive”

  1. Amen to that ….

  2. The interesting thing is that a majority of those attempting to shame men are women or the mouthpieces of women (TradCon men married to bossy feminists in skirts who just happen to be against abortion). I’ve never had a man ask me why I’m single, tell me to start a family, work harder for society, anything like that. But when I bought a new motorcycle, a half dozen women piped in with some variation of “You already have a car for transportation. You need to get married and have kids instead of spending your money on toys.” during the first week. My labor, my money, but it’s clear I need to be straightened out by a woman’s advice. I expect some advice on getting serious with my life when I go to the office Christmas party with a girl 8 years younger than me – all the women there like me, but hate my happiness or freedom, probably both.

    Just like Hitler’s armies in Russia, feminists have gotten so close to winning the prize of complete domination(scholastically/economically/judicially) that they can almost taste it, but men are bucking at the worst possible moment and if it doesn’t stop, or keeps increasing it will be the equivalent of a Russian winter for their armies.

    It would be refreshing to see the ‘man up’ articles by TradCon or the under-performing men articles by feminists just come out and admit they need the productivity of men to keep them from starving, but instead we get weekly ‘A woman can do anything a man can do, and better!’ articles. You’d think the gov bureaucrats would know which side their bread is buttered on and use judicial activism to incentivize men. Instead they’re going to go down in flames, women along with them.

  3. […] and read Code Olive by AFT.  It seems to fit the […]

  4. Entirely agree. Would point out though, that it is a valid critique of Feminism that the ideology promotes women not having children, in fact, its survival requires that women not have children in any great quantity. The demographic collapse of the society is, as a result, inevitable.
    That they shame the men they have rejected for not “Manning Up” and providing the one or two children some women discover they want after all, on demand when the women decide they want them is despicable, and a bit laughable. Especially when chances are better than even that the woman will confiscate the children from the man as soon as she can. Once again, its never about the children, or our biological duty to produce and nurture children, its about answering the call of Feminist privilege.
    The general feminist demand that we, as a cohort “Man up” and underwrite single motherhood, and the feminist state, absent any rights concerning the pair bond, fatherhood, civil rights in the courts, and many other abuses reveals their desperation. They understand the weakness at the heart of their ideology, they understand that the traditional human society they call Patriarchy provided the most rational method for sustaining society and the happiness of men, women and children. They fear that without our passive compliance with their agenda, that the those realities will become apparent to most women.
    Our message has to be, we would love to have children and fully participate in raising them. We would love a stable relationship with a women for that and other reasons that bring happiness and prosperity. We will not do those things with feminist women. We will not do those things in a feminist society.
    We may bear some unhappiness, but relationships with you and children with you promises far more unhappiness. We can easily find other happiness that does not require us to conspire in our own misery and enslavement.
    To the supposed “non-feminist” woman, including all those church women, we understand now that almost all of you are lying. Maybe to yourself as well, but it is still a lie. To the real non-feminist woman, we say, too many of you lie for us to trust you, Since the mental, financial, and legal risk is so great, and since the feminist legal system gives you so much power over us, we simply cannot take the chance. Look to your feminist sisters to blame, not us, we are just making a rational choice in an irrational world.
    We are not rejecting women, we are just rejecting you. We are not rejecting children, we are just rejecting your children. We are not rejecting our responsibility to build and maintain civilization, we are just rejecting the civilization you are building. When feminism ends, in the minds of women and in our society, we’ll talk about relationships and children. But not before. Your move cupcake.

  5. The color olive reminds me of military drab. Maybe that’s an even more direct way that “code olive” is appropriate for the shaming tactic than men must do their duty to society, regardless of any personal cost.

    • Oh, and with respect to the reply to a code olive, another reply is that these duties must be reciprocal. If man owe society a duty, then society owes a duty to men. A duty that, in the current environment, it is neglecting.

      • That’s a good point about duties being reciprocal. I’m going to add that.

        • It’s always been the case. Even back in feudal times, the serfs swore service and the lords swore to protect and defend. I mean – often those promises were broken, but that’s the point. It’s these broken promises that justify revolution. Check out the american declaration of independence for parallels – a person does not have a duty to an oppressive, cruel, arbitrary ruler, or system of laws.

        • When it comes to reciprocal responsibility to men, remember that this administration and congress have gutted the government’s responsibility to its veterans, in lieu of moar moniez for women who make irresponsible decisions.

  6. Code Olive should be named “Shit Brown”.

Leave a Comment. (Remember the comment policy is in force.)

Translate »
%d bloggers like this: