This will blow you away guys. Get the book in pdf and read it. This is a book which was a form of MGTOW even before it was a thing in order to awaken men to the scam.

Temp link to get the book https://cl.ly/3ab5c710a0fc

​

​

Here is the table of contents:

https://preview.redd.it/kxe0acrkqea21.png?width=798&format=png&auto=webp&s=9b5e2a18631fb6c020d70e82e98adf6ea9a83746

THE MANIPULATED MAN

the slave's happiness what is man?
what is woman?
a woman's horizon the fair sex

the universe is male
her stupidity makes woman divine breaking them in
manipulation by means of self-abasement a dictionary
women have no feelings
sex as reward
the female libido

manipulation through bluff commercialized prayers self-conditioning
children as hostages women's vices

the mask of femininity
the business world as a hunting ground the `emancipated' female
women's liberation
what is love?

------

AUTHOR'S INTRODUCTION

Over thirty-five years have passed since the first publication of my book The Manipulated Man - a pamphlet written in great anger against the women's movement's worldwide monopoly of opinion. The determination with which those women portrayed us as victims of men not only seemed humiliating but also unrealistic. If someone should want to change the destiny of our sex - a wish I had then as I have today - then that someone should attempt to do so with more honesty. And possibly also with a little humor.

I would like to take the opportunity presented by the reissue of my book to answer two questions which I am asked again and again in this context.

People often ask me if I would write this book again. Well, I find it right and proper to have done so. But seen from today's perspective, my courage in those days may only be attributable to a lack of imagination. Despite all I wrote, I could not really imagine the power I was up against. It seemed that one is only allowed to criticize women on the quiet - especially as a woman - and could only expect agreement behind closed doors. As we women have, thanks to our relatively stress-free life, a higher life-expectancy than men and consequently make up the majority of voters in Western industrial nations, no politician could afford to offend us. And the media is not interested in discussing the issues involved either. Their products are financed through the advertising of consumer goods, and should we women decide to stop reading a certain newspaper or magazine as its editorial policy displeases us, then the advertisements targeted at us will also disappear. After all, it is well established that women make the majority of purchasing decisions.

However, I had also underestimated men's fear of reevaluating their position. Yet the more sovereignty they are losing in their professional lives - the more automatic their work, the more controlled by computers they become, the more that increasing unemployment forces them to adopt obsequious behavior towards customers and superiors - then the more they have to be afraid of a recognition of their predicament. And the more essential it becomes to maintain their illusion that it is not they who are the slaves, but those on whose behalf they subject themselves to such an existence.

As absurd as it may sound: today's men need feminists much more than their wives do. Feminists are the last ones who still describe men the way they like to see themselves: as egocentric, power-obsessed, ruthless, and without inhibitions when it comes to satisfying their animalistic instincts. Therefore the most aggressive

Women's Libbers find themselves in the strange predicament of doing more to maintain the status quo than anyone else. Without their arrogant accusations the macho man would no longer exist, except perhaps in the movies. If the press didn't stylize men as rapacious wolves, the actual sacrificial lambs of this `men's society', men themselves, would no longer flock to the factories so obediently.

So I hadn't imagined broadly enough the isolation I would find myself in after writing this book. Nor had I envisaged the consequences which it would have for my subsequent writing and even for my private life - violent threats have not ceased to this date. A woman who defended the arch-enemy - who didn't equate domestic life with solitary confinement and who described the company of young children as a pleasure, not a burden - necessarily had to become a` misogynist', even a `reactionary' and `fascist' in the eyes of the public. Had not Karl Marx determined once and for all that in an industrial society it is us, the women, who are the most oppressed? It goes without saying, doesn't it, that someone who did not want to take part in the canonization of her own sex is also opposed to equal wages and equal opportunities?

In other words, if I had known then what I know today, I probably wouldn't have written this book. And that is precisely the reason why I am so glad to have written it. I would like to take this opportunity to thank the handful of people who have stood up for me and my work. Typically, most of them were women.

The second question I am often asked is about the topicality of the opinions I expressed then. To what extend is what I described over thirty-five years ago still relevant to the `new woman' and the `new man'?

Here is a list of issues which I recognized in the original book to be men's most significant disadvantages compared to women.

  1. Men are conscripted; women are not.
    1. Men are sent to fight in wars; women are not.
    2. Men retire later than women (even though, due to their lower life-expectancy,

they should have the right to have the right to retire earlier).
4. Men have almost no influence over their reproduction (for males, there is neither

a pill nor abortion - they can only get the children women want them to have).
5. Men support women; women never, or only temporarily, support men.
6. Men work all their lives; women work only temporarily or not at all.
7. Even though men work all their lives, and women work only temporarily or not at

all, on average, men are poorer than women.
8. Men only `borrow' their children; woman can keep them (as men work all their

lives and women do not, men are automatically robbed of their children in cases of separation - with the reasoning that they have to work).

As one can see, if anything, the female position of power has only consolidated. Today a career in the military is also open to women in many countries - but without conscription for all. Many achieved for themselves the right to practice their job for the same number of years as their male colleagues - however, the retirement age was not increased for all of us. And now as before, it does not occur to the underprivileged to fight against this grotesque state of affairs.

Only as far as the sixth point is concerned, has there been a significant change. In the more entertaining spheres of work, there are more and more women who happily and willingly work and still keep their jobs despite having the children they nevertheless desire. But only a few of these women would be prepared to offer a life of comfort not only to their children but also the children's fathers, supported by their often substantial salaries; and fewer would

further be prepared, in case of a separation, to give up their home and offspring and support the next admirer with what is left of her income. Also, men would not like it: emancipation may be fine, but to be `kept' by a woman is still not acceptable - housekeeping and raising children is not worthy of a `real' man.

Sadly women's manipulation of men is as topical today as it was back then, but so are the measures which could be used to end it - to the benefit of both sexes. In the meantime, however, there are already a few feminists who are talking also about men as human beings, so the continuation of this discussion may not have to be conducted quite so loudly.

Esther Vilar

THE SLAVE'S HAPPINESS

The lemon-colored MG skids across the road and the woman driver brings it to a somewhat uncertain halt. She gets out and finds her left front tire flat. Without wasting a moment she prepares to fix it: she looks towards the passing cars as if expecting someone. Recognizing this standard international sign of woman in distress ('weak female let down by male technology'), a station wagon draws up. The driver sees what is wrong at a glance and says comfortingly, `Don't worry. We'll fix that in a jiffy' To prove his determination, he asks for her jack. He does not ask if she is capable of changing the tire herself because he knows - she is about thirty, smartly dressed and made-up - that she is not. Since she cannot find a jack, he fetches his own, together with his other tools. Five minutes later the job is done and the punctured tire properly stowed. His hands are covered with grease. She offers him an embroidered handkerchief, which he politely refuses. He has a rag for such occasions in his tool box. The woman thanks him profusely, apologizing for her `typically feminine' helplessness. She might have been there till dusk, she says, had he not stopped. He makes no reply and, as she gets back into the car, gallantly shuts the door for her. Through the wound-down window he advises her to have her tire patched at once and she promises to get her garage man to see to it that very evening. Then she drives off.

As the man collects his tools and goes back to his own car, he wishes he could wash his hands. His shoes - he has been standing in the mud while changing the tire - are not as clean as they should be (he is a salesman). What is more, he will have to hurry to keep his next appointment. As he starts the engine he thinks, `Women! One's more stupid than the next'. He wonders what she would have done if he had not been there to help. He puts his foot on the accelerator and drives off - faster than usual. There is the delay to make up. After a while he starts to hum to himself. In a way, he is happy.

Almost any man would have behaved in the same manner - and so would most women. Without thinking, simply because men are men and women so different from them, a woman will make use of a man whenever there is an opportunity. What else could the woman have done when her car broke down? She has been taught to get a man to help. Thanks to his knowledge he was able to change the tire quickly - and at no cost to herself. True, he ruined his clothes, put his business in jeopardy, and endangered his own life by driving too fast afterwards. Had he found something else wrong with her car, however, he would have repaired that, too. That is what his

knowledge of cars is for. Why should a woman learn to change a flat when the opposite sex (half the world's population) is able and willing to do it for her?

Women let men work for them, think for them and take on their responsibilities - in fact, they exploit them. Yet, since men are strong, intelligent and imaginative, while women are weak, unimaginative, and stupid, why isn't it men who exploit women?

Could it be that strength, intelligence, and imagination are not prerequisites for power but merely qualifications for slavery? Could it be that the world is not being ruled by experts but by beings who are not fit for anything else - by women? And if this is so, how do

women manage it so that their victims do not feel themselves cheated and humiliated, but rather believe to be themselves what they are least of all - masters of the universe? How do women manage to instil in men this sense of pride and superiority that inspires them to ever greater achievements?

Why are women never unmasked?

WHAT IS MAN?

A man is a human being who works. By working, he supports himself, his wife, and his wife's children. A woman, on the other hand, is a human being who does not work - or at least only temporarily. Most of her life she supports neither herself nor her children, let alone her husband.

Any qualities in a man that a woman finds useful, she calls masculine; all others, of no use to her or to anyone else for that matter, she chooses to call efeminate. A man's appearance has to be masculine if he wants to have success with women, and that means it will have to be geared to his one and only raison d'etre - work. His appearance must conform to each and every task put to him, and he must always be able to fulfil it.

Except at night when the majority of men wear striped pajamas with at most two pairs of pockets, men wear a kind of uniform made of durable, stain-resistant material in brown, blue or gray These uniforms, or `suits,' have up to ten pockets, in which men carry instruments and tools indispensable for their work. Since a woman does not work, her night or day clothes rarely have pockets.

For social events men are permitted to wear black, a color that shows marks and stains, since on those occasions men are less likely to dirty themselves. Moreover, the bright colors worn by women show to advantage against it. The occasional red or green evening jackets worn by men are acceptable, since, by contrast, all the real men present seem so much more masculine.

The rest of a man's appearance is also adapted to his situation. His hair style requires only fifteen minutes at the barber every two or three weeks. Curls, waves, and tints are not encouraged as they might hinder his work. Men often work in the open air or spend a considerable amount of time in it, hence complicated styles would be a nuisance. Furthermore, it is improbable that such styles would make a hit with women since, unlike men, they never judge the opposite sex from an aesthetic point of view. So most men, after one or two attempts at individuality, realize that

women are indifferent to their efforts and revert to a standard style, short or long. The same is true of beards. Only oversensitive men - usually ones with intellectual pretensions - who want to appear mentally tough by letting their facial hair grow indiscriminately wear a full beard for any length of time. It will be tolerated by women, however, for a beard is an important indication of a man's character and therefore of the way in which he might be most easily exploited. (His field of work will usually be that of the neurotic intellectual.)

Generally a man uses an electric razor for about three minutes every morning to keep his beard in check. For his skin, soap and water are considered good enough. All that is required is cleanliness and an absence of make-up so that everyone can see what he is like. As for his
fingernails, they should be as short as possible for work.

Apart from a wedding ring - worn to show that he is being used by a particular woman for a particular purpose - a proper man wears no ornaments. His clumsy, functional watch, worn on the wrist, is hardly decorative. Heavy in design, waterproof, shock-resistant and showing the correct date, it cannot possibly be called an ornament. Usually it was given to him by the woman for whom he works.

Shirts, underwear, and socks for real men are so standardized that their only difference is one of size. They can be bought in any shop without difficulty or loss of time. Only as far as ties are concerned is there any degree of freedom - and then a man is usually so unused to choosing that he lets the woman buy them for him.

Anyone visiting this Earth from another planet would think it is each man's goal to look as much like the next as possible. Yet, to fulfill woman's purposes, masculinity and male usefulness vary to a considerable degree: necessarily, because women, who hardly ever work, need men for everything.

There are men who carefully manoeuvre a large limousine out of the garage at eight o'clock every morning. Others leave an hour earlier, traveling in a middle-class sedan. Still others leave when it is not yet light, wearing overalls and carrying lunch boxes, to catch buses, subways, or trains to factories or building sites. By a trick of fate, it is always the latter, the poorest, who are exploited by the least attractive women. For, unlike women (who have an eye for money), men notice only woman's external appearance. Therefore, the more desirable women in their own class are always being snatched away from under their noses by men who happen to earn more.

No matter what a particular man does or how he spends his day, he has one thing in common with all other men - he spends it in a degrading manner. And he himself does not gain by it. It is not his own livelihood that matters: he would have to struggle far less for that, since luxuries do not mean anything to him anyway it is the fact that he does it for others that makes him so tremendously proud. He will undoubtedly have a photograph of his wife and children on his desk, and will miss no opportunity to hand it around.

No matter what a man's job may be - bookkeeper, doctor, bus driver, or managing director - every moment of his life will be spent as a cog in a huge and pitiless system - a system designed to exploit him to the utmost, to his dying day.

It may be interesting to add up figures and make them tally - but surely not year in, year out? How exciting it must be to drive a bus through a busy town! But always the same
route, at the same time, in the same town, day after day, year after year? What a magnificent feeling of power to know that countless workers obey one's command!

But how would one feel if one suddenly realized one was their prisoner and not their master?

We have long ceased to play the games of childhood. As children, we became bored quickly and changed from one game to another. A man is like a child who is condemned to play the
same game for the rest of his life. The reason is obvious: as soon as he is discovered to have a gift for one thing, he is made to specialize. Then, because he can earn more money in that field than another, he is forced to do it forever. If he was good at maths in school, if he had a 'head for figures,' he will be sentenced to a lifetime of figure work as bookkeeper, mathematician, or computer operator, for there lies his maximum work potential. Therefore, he will add up figures, press buttons and add up more figures, but he will never be able to say, `I'm bored. I want to do something else!' The woman who is exploiting him will never permit him to look for something else. Driven by this woman, he may engage in a desperate struggle against competitors to improve his position, and perhaps even become head clerk or managing director of a bank. But isn't the price he is paying for his improved salary rather too high?

A man who changes his way of life, or rather his profession (for life and profession are synonymous to him), is considered unreliable. If he does it more than once, he becomes a social outcast and remains alone.

​