David K. Meller on women getting cancer: “HA HA HA HA HA…LOL!”
Not reallly the appropriate response to someone else getting cancer.
Those of you who aren’t regular readers of the comments here may not appreciate the true genius of David K. Meller, an excitable and exclamation-point-loving MRA I’ve mentioned once or twice in my posts, but who shows up in the comments here with some regularity – ending each comment with his trademark “PEACE AND FREEDOM!!”
Mr. Meller is a great lover (not physically) of men:
Men, by and large, are a wonderful sex! We are more intelligent than women, more creative, at least in the areas outside the home. We are, also, as a rule, physically stronger as well …
He claims to love women, too – though not feminists, whom he seems to consider something other than human:
Women ARE people, and often wonderful people at that! Feminists, on the other hand, AREN’T! …
Women are people, and properly raised, educated, and loved,, are beautiful, charming, and lovely!
Despite his alleged love of women – at least the non-feminist ones – he often says utterly horrible things about them. The examples are too numerous to catalogue. But let me draw your attention to one rather telling comment of his I found recently on The Spearhead.
In the midst of a discussion of Sharon Osbourne’s now notorious comments about a woman who cut off her husband’s penis, Meller offered the following musings on the subject of women and cancer. I am having trouble finding much love of women in them:
It is .. possible that the breast cancers (not to mention ovarian and vaginal cancers) have a psychosomatic aspect to their development. … The feelings of vicious sadism, brutality, and callous indifference to another’s pain in such harpies must inexorably work on the molecular, genetic, and cellular level to generate consequences! I hope that you girls find these consequences as hilarious as I do when you annoy me with your next women’s health campaign against cancer!
Maybe women don’t strictly speaking, DESERVE cancer, but it will be hard for me to stop laughing at them …
Isn’t the thought of cancer-ridden women going under the knife amusing? Isn’t thought of women losing part, or all, of a sexual organ that is precious to them FUNNY? The pain women experience when recovering from surgery (and radiation or chemo, which is almost as bad) is still less than the agony which that poor man underwent when he underwent castration at the hands of a deranged, sadistic, and vicious she-weasel (my apologies to weasels)!
[F]or every man who is abused and tortured by his woman, it almost warms my heart that the same hatred and spite characteristic of the female human(?) sets THEM up for a similar fate down the road, as that bitterness, vicious sadism, and bloodthirstiness so characteristic of those who would LAUGH AT the suffering caused by a “woman” committing such a vicious crime predisposes them toward cancer, and (I hope) a similar fate!
Karma is always there, girls, and it is a bitch!! HA HA HA HA HA…LOL!
PEACE AND FREEDOM!!
David K. Meller
That “PEACE AND FREEDOM!!!” always gets me.
This being The Spearhead, Meller’s comments garnered more than a few upvotes. Not as many as he usually gets, admittedly, but some.
At some point I will do a Best of David K. Meller post, highlighting some of his “best” comments here. He is one for the ages.
Posted on August 16, 2011, in antifeminism, creepy, douchebaggery, evil women, misogyny, MRA, penises, reactionary bullshit, that's not funny!, the spearhead. Bookmark the permalink. 386 Comments.
His “raised properly” bit makes me think that if it were up to him, women would be raised like veal.
It was a horrible, violent crime and there is no excusing the women who made light of it. But tarring all women with the same brush?
Unless the DA is a guy named Susan and the judge is a dude named Debra… I can’t stomach reading through all the comments, but for those who have, did any one of them comment on this?
So this makes me wonder, is Meller a sock puppet of Sharon Osborne?
if impotent rage causes cancer shouldnt dkm be on his deathbed?
Oh look, another MRA who very obviously and clearly DESPISES women. And yet their defenders keep coming here trying to argue that people like Meller aren’t the average in their group.
Feminist Hulk needs to smash.
Eight upvotes, no downvotes. I’d say that’s approval.
No misogyny here, no sir…
How can he be certain that every woman who gets breast cancer is an emasculating, shrewish, feminist? Never mind. I’m certain Meller will be here, shortly, walking back this little diatribe with a lot of flowery language about how much sympathy he has when well-behaved “real” women end up having to have a radical mastectomy.
Then, NWO will remind of us of that show with Sharon Osbourne and point out that mammograms cause breast cancer anyway.
Should be fun.
Citation needed
Citation needed
Citation needed
Citation needed
Feminists are Soylent GREEN!!!
If trained and treated like animals, women make great people.
Gotta love MRA logic.
cancer is cause by PEACE AND FREEDOM!!
This reminds me of the pro-lifers who not only say that abortion causes breast cancer*, but that the women who get this abortion cancer** deserve it.
* It doesn’t.
** Who don’t exist because abortion doesn’t cause breast cancer.
1. Sharon Osborne’s comments about the poor man who’s wife cut off his penis are completely despicable. Shame on her.
2. David K. Meller’s comments about women in general — and particularly about how he find sick women, women in pain, women who are close to death, amusing — are completely despicable. Shame on him.
It’s too bad. I always found DKM kind of amusing (though ultimately boring), what with his references to she-weasels and such (my apologies to weasels! heh). But scratch the gross little man exterior, you’ll find a hateful, twisted, gross little man inside.
Does he not know that men get cancer too? Or … does man-cancer arise from sheer awesomeness or something? Cancer fucking sucks.
“This reminds me of the pro-lifers who not only say that abortion causes breast cancer*, but that the women who get this abortion cancer** deserve it.”
Silly. Everybody knows you get cancer from EATING FETUSES. Doy!
So…cancer in women is caused by bitchiness, therefore women who get cancer deserve it for being bitches. What causes cancer in men? Shit, what if it’s PEACE AND FREEDOM?
Ohboy. I’m really looking forward to hearing him defend this one.
more importantly, what does L.H. Puttgrass think?
@Bee and shaenon —
Yeah, no kidding. I wonder how he explains prostate cancer — or the men who suffer from breast cancer, which is a rare but real condition:
http://www.medicinenet.com/male_breast_cancer/article.htm
Meller does know that men have breast tissue as well, which means…MENZ CAN GET BOOB CANCER TOO. Oh heavens! Just think of the man-boobs! Or should it be…what about the man boobs!
*Not making light of breast cancer, my mother’s two sisters have had it, beat it, but the post-treatment issues are no laughing matter (google “chemo brain”).
Meller, however, is a laughing matter…well, the hatred isn’t all that funny, but I just can’t help but laugh because he’s definitely been drinking the hater-ade.
I expect DKM’s explanations to prove underwhelming and utterly predictable. He is going to say that in women, cancer is just deserts for their irreverent behavior towards men, and therefore yay! serves them right. As for men, he is going to say that cancer in men is caused by abuse on the part of women, and therefore every instance of male cancer is evidence of another crime committed by women. I mean, what else would you expect out of him?
*helps herself to a tall, creamy baby smoothie*
@Katz: That reminds of an Eddie Izzard bit: “We’ve got babies on spikes! You want babies on racks? We’ve got babies on racks!”
Sorry, a little off-topic, but I couldn’t resist.
Can I have a smoothie too? I haven’t gotten my daily dose of baby, and the powdered type just sucks! You put it in your drink and stir it up, but it’s just not the same…
Don’t you know, David? Only feminists get breast cancer.
I must have a strong stomach, because I went ahead and read the rest of the Spearhead comments. Some of them were just as bad as DKM laughing about breast cancer. I know it seems impossible to be that bad, but somehow the commenters at the Spearhead keep outdoing themselves. A few of them made “jokes” about raping women with barbed, red hot irons or bayonets, or praised domestic violence. I agree that Sharon Osbourne was out of line, and she has apologized for her statement. That doesn’t make it right for MRA’s to make their comments, though. I know it’s a tired cliche, but ‘Two wrongs don’t make a right’ is fitting in this case.
@Ozy: So THAT’S the reason I have to start getting mammograms when I hit 30! I just thought it was my genetic predisposition^.^
If a dude eats a baby, will he get breast cancer too?
I ask because a friend of mine…
I honestly think David K. Meller is just a very dedicated sockpuppet/concern troll. I mean, the peace and freedom thing? Come on…
Well mral none of us believes a word you say.
Also I bet DKM will come in here saying “IT ISNT SEXIST IF ITS JUST TRUE!!!!!”
I used to imagine David K. Meller as looking like a 60-something old man, but from now on I’ll imagine him looking just like the maniacal smiley above.
Tabby, I did read the comments and as of now, they have not mentioned the women involved in the case who showed outrage at the crime. It’s easier for the MRA’s to deny any evidence that contradicts their worldview, even when it’s looking them right in the face.
It used to be a pretty common idea (up until the mid-20th century, AFAIK) that cancer had psychosomatic origins (and judging by this comment it’s not entirely dead). Clinging to long-discredited ideas seems to be an MRM trademark. :D
I’m imagining David as one of the people from this:
I cannot defend Meller’s words.
His post was in response to an episode of “The Talk” where the panellists made fun of the man who Catherine Becker assaulted. Becker poisoned and bound her husband, waited until he regained consciousness so that he would feel the pain, cut out his genitals, and then destroyed the genitalia in the garbage disposal. The panellists on “The Talk” glorified the event, worshipped the victimizer, laughed at the victim, and generally behaved like the inhuman monsters that they are.
My guess is, Meller was mad. Really mad. So, he went too far. “You think our pain is funny? Maybe we think YOUR pain is funny also!”
You see, Meller was watching an audience of hundreds of women, NOT ONE OF WHICH had the humanity or compassion to empathise with the pain of the assaulted man.
The problem is that Meller did not understand that this audience is selective. People who sign up to watch “The Talk” are not drawn randomly from society. They are the worst of the worse, the women who breath eat and drink hatred of men. It is not surprising to me that this audience of man-haters would find the mutilation of a man to be funny, neither is it an indictment of all women.
However, the genital mutilation was generally greeted with mixed mirth and condemnation by media across the nation, most of whom snuck in “ba da boom” remarks:
Mr. Becker is calling the attack, in which Catherine employed a 10-inch kitchen knife (lord have mercy) a “private matter” from the hospital.
— LA weekly, Jul 13
The Orange County Register told the Los Angeles Times: ‘This is a private matter.’
— Mail online, Aug 16
What do you think: Should the verb “Bobbitise” be changed to “Beckerise,” given Catherine’s one-uppance of the woman who started it all?
— LA weekly, Jul 13
Nothing like this would happen if a man had carved out his wife’s privates with a 10 inch knife while she was bound to the bed and helpless, awake and in agony during the entire “surgery”. Man hate is certainly stronger at “The Talk” than in the mainstream media, but it is alive and well everywhere. It is a question of intensity.
Nevertheless, there is no reason to celebrate the pain of women, even as society hoots and cheers the agony of men.
Was Meller wrong to lash out at women with cancer, in response to the disturbing scene at “The Talk”? Yes.
It is pretty understandable though. Given that he had just witnessed an audience full of women laughing and hooting at the agony of a helpless man, being victimized by a crazed wife with a butcher knife.
I think it is amusing that at this point, most of the regulars here (Manboobz Irregulars?) could pretty effortlessly sockpuppet any of the typical trolls that repeatedly stop in.
I don’t see our society “hooting and cheering” the agony of men suffering from cancer.
Did you know that many of the feminists on this very site actively participated in protests and petitions of the comments on “The Talk”, specifically calling out the misandry of the hosts in question and held the studio directly responsible? In fact, NSWATM was referenced in an article on the Washington Post.
Nearly every poster here expressed condemnation and outrage over what happened on the show. You know what’s ironic? NWO said that, as feminists, there was no amount of outrage we could express, boycotts/petitions/protests we could form or participate in, and no amount of disagreement we could firmly state that would change anything. He said that protesting, and boycotting, and working for change were pointless because misandry is so dominant in the culture that we are complicit even when we work to address it.
So, yeah, David K. Meller was upset by what happened on “The Talk.” But apparently his comments are mitigated by misandry in the media. I’ll remember that the next time I’m working with a homeless shelter that specializes in male veterans with addiction issues. Or working to help urban Boyscouting groups retain their charters.
Or visiting my friend in the hospital while she has chemo.
So I’ll utilize a RED HERRING!!!!!
Look at me! I proved ALL WOMEN ARE EVIL by pointing to a single incident that’s been repudiated multiple times here!
Gimme a cookie!
“Was Meller wrong to lash out at women with cancer, in response to the disturbing scene at “The Talk”? Yes.
It is pretty understandable though.”
So, in other words, you support what he said and agree with it. Thanks for letting the truth slip about amid your pathological lies.
“Given that he had just witnessed an audience full of women laughing and hooting at the agony of a helpless man, being victimized by a crazed wife with a butcher knife.”
And therefore, its totally cool to laugh at the pain of women WHO HAD ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH THAT?
Get help. Before you hurt someone.
So, Anthony Zarat, you cannot defend Meller’s words…but then you spend 9 paragraphs defending and excusing him? That is like when someone says, “No offense, but” and then proceeds to say something entirely offensive. Why don’t you just say what you mean and not try to sugar coat it?
Also, what is with the assumption that he had “just witnessed an audience full of women laughint and hotting at the agony of a helpless man”? Do you know that Meller watched the show? Do you know when he watched it? Was he really watching it right before writing his rant?
But men, being the paragon of humanity, never, ever get cancer. Men who went to jail for their principles and drank from the colored fountains in 1950’s Georgia just to piss people off never, ever get sick. Executive vice presidents of chemical companies with patents under their names are immune to cancer. Riiiiiight.
Then I guess my family all had a collective hallucination when my dad was diagnosed with small cell lung cancer. According to this douchenozzle, he’s probably in hiding from his wife and two daughters (we all know what shrews we of the female persuasion are!).
MRAL, you’d know all about sockpuppetry, wouldn’t you?
Yeah, that’s why I’d know, thanks for the support!
“You see, Meller was watching an audience of hundreds of women, NOT ONE OF WHICH had the humanity or compassion to empathise with the pain of the assaulted man.
The problem is that Meller did not understand that this audience is selective. People who sign up to watch “The Talk” are not drawn randomly from society. They are the worst of the worse, the women who breath eat and drink hatred of men. It is not surprising to me that this audience of man-haters would find the mutilation of a man to be funny, neither is it an indictment of all women.”
*sigh* I think I’m gonna make a lot of people angry with me with this one.
You hear about hundreds of dead soldiers, blown up by road-side bombs. You hear about genocides, rapes, murders, etc. Does it affect you? Not really. If pressed, you’ll certainly agree it’s a tragic event, but you aren’t going to be bursting into tears over so many lives lost (unless you have some personal connection to one of the dead).
The panelists on “The Talk” may be foolish, they may be insensitive, but they are hardly monsters. Neither is the audience. They heard about the story from miles and miles away, far removed from any actual pain and suffering, distilled down to “Heh, check this. This woman actually castrated the guy, isn’t that hilarious?” Well yeah, in a way it is; as long as you don’t think about it too hard. These woman probably joke a lot about castrating their husbands.
Put the knife in their hands, though, and they’d shut up real fast. Show them photos, have them talk to the guy involved, and they’d probably lose their lunch. You know, like any normal person would. Fact is we humans can distance ourselves from tragedy, and you don’t have to hate humanity to laugh at it. These women don’t “breath eat and drink hatred of men.” They don’t find “mutilation of a man” to be funny either, at least when presented with its consequences. From a safe distance, and in the right framing, yeah, it’s funny.
Oh Kathleen, so sorry to hear that. :( *hugs*
Nobinayamu: “In fact, NSWATM was referenced in an article on the Washington Post.”
I didn’t know that. Pretty freakin’ cool.
I cannot insult Anthony Zarat.
But his head is up his ass.
Quick addendum to note that DKM is essentially laughing at cancer, a terrible and heart-breaking disease for anyone who has to go through it. Years of throwing up, fear of complications, and the ever-present threat of resurgence. Is he a monster, a vile human being not worth the air he wastes? Probably not. It’s the same distancing effect that allows him to laugh at the idea of women being “paid back” for something, without thinking much about what that would actually mean.
kirby, you’re exactly right about the response.
Kirby, you know what you said makes me think of this old ethical dilemma problem that I heard about somewhere-there is a train track with five people on it. A train is coming and the first scenario has you pushing someone into the way of the train to save the five people.
The second scenario has you just flipping a switch to cause the pushing of the someone to save the five people.
Most humans can manage the second one…not the first. It is a matter of immediacy to harm. In both situations someone will die and possibly more then just one person. But most humans cannot bring themselves to harm another person. That is why generally it takes some kind of great emotion to do it. Well unless you are a sociopath or psychopath.
Elizabeth:
The second is even easier if you imagine one track with 5 people, one track with one person, and a switch to change the way the train goes. It’s boggling try to justify why this is so. I wonder if its because being on the track sort of implies a “you put yourself in that position” type of thing.
Nobody wants to live in a world where they could walk into a hospital, be killed, and have their organs removed to save 5 people’s lives. Nor walk across a bridge where you, at any time, could be pushed over to stop a runaway train from killing 5 workers. But being on a train track is different somehow.
That was actually a pretty good response Kirby, too bad feminists don’t make that excuse for rape jokes and domestic abuse jokes and shit, but only for The Talk.
Well, when you regularly compare rape to rejection, it’s hard to find the humor.
Kirby, you are right that distance from a tragedy makes it less real to people. I know I’ve seen disasters on the TV news, said, “Oh that’s awful” and then went back to my normal life without giving it much more thought. When the Joplin tornado actually happened to me and hit my own house, then it was hit home, literally and figuratively. In fact, I felt like the whole event was surreal, because it’s the type of the thing that’s supposed to happen on TV to total strangers, not something that could actually happen to me and my own family.
Since I actually saw the rubble and victims, I couldn’t just say, “That’s awful” and then shrug it off. I know Josef Stalin was a monster. However there was a kernel of truth to his quote “One death is a tragedy. A million is a statistic.” I don’t want any MRA to now think I agree with anything he did. He was a vicious murderer. It’s just that one thing he said so callously actually was somewhat true in how people respond to tragedy. If we can relate personally to it, then we feel emotions about it. If it’s too distant and happens to strangers, we don’t think too much on it. Again I repeat that Josef Stalin was evil in case anyone wants to take me out of context.
And Zarat has an apologia for the man who says that if women don’t begin to toe the line he thinks they should it will be necessary (and perhaps even regrettable) that they be eliminated, except for the few who are kept as sex slaves for the really spiffo-high ranking man in his sexbot equipped Utopia.
It was all because the woman in the show was so vile. Unlike Meller, who is just reacting to the horrors inflicted on men by those nasty women.
In short, you just defended Meller’s words.
The train track dilemma is a classic first year philosophy problem, and it’s usually put in more concrete terms. The five/one problem is rail-workers. The single guy who can save people by being tossed in front of the train is just some random passerby.
“That was actually a pretty good response Kirby, too bad feminists don’t make that excuse for rape jokes and domestic abuse jokes and shit, but only for The Talk.”
So, feminists are the ones making rape/domestic abuse jokes?
Huh. Guess that means I must be hallucinating some of the programing on Spike channel…though, if that IS just a hallucination of mine, then it’s not real, so that’s cool. :D
No, feminists attack Spike and Family Guy for making domestic abuse jokes, when Kirby’s logic applies to that phenomenon as well. Yet they don’t seem to care at all about The Talk’s moral transgressionz.
“So, Anthony Zarat, you cannot defend Meller’s words…but then you spend 9 paragraphs defending and excusing him?”
Correct. He said the wrong thing, in a moment of anger. I have said many wrong things, in moments of anger. Things I wish I could take back.
Context matters:
1) I disagree with Mellers words in no uncertain terms.
2) I do NOT condemn him as a person.
3) I state that any person can say things that they later regret, when confronted with an emotional wrong.
Here is an example:
On the female site feministe, in response to an article entitled “Why men rape”
by Jill on 11.29.2010, here are some comments:
“… Personally I think the answer would be nuclear holocaust …”
“… I’m begining to wonder if we should just give up on this generation of men and keep them under perpetual house arrest …”
“… line up every man on the planet, sharpen a machete, and castrate them all …”
“… they’d all disappear from the face of the earth …”
” … killing all men with nuclear weapons …”
None of this is man-hate. These people read an emotional article about violence in South Africa, and responded with momentary anger at all men because of what one man had done.
People who post an emotional response to an inflammatory article are doing just that, responding. My God, if every stupid thing I ever said when angry were placed in one file, I would melt into a puddle of shame.
The mark of misandry (or misogyny) is the presence of hate speech IN AN ARTICLE. Not the response to the article.
People say all kinds of things when they are angry.
Don’t you?
“No, feminists attack Spike and Family Guy for making domestic abuse jokes, when Kirby’s logic applies to that phenomenon as well. Yet they don’t seem to care at all about The Talk’s moral transgressionz.”
It’s been stated multiple times, and with links, that feminists did not like what occurred on The Talk. Men, women and feminists were offended by it.
MRAL: there is a difference between black humor in reaction to a real event, and scripted routines.
Want to see some black humor… go to a City Room, or an ER, or hang out with soldiers (for really black humor hang out with combat vets who were in theater together. You can’t imagine the jests friends of mine and I made when the Blackwater Mercs got killed/burned in Baghdad).
So yeah, the jokes being made about the guy who was mutilated, less than ideal. But they aren’t the same as, “what do you say to a woman with two black-eyes”, and the less so when someone actively decided to put it into a prepared routine.
Context matters.
“That was actually a pretty good response Kirby, too bad feminists don’t make that excuse for rape jokes and domestic abuse jokes and shit, but only for The Talk.”
Rape is reasonably commonplace, affecting one in 6 women in the USA. (https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles/172837.pdf)
Domestic violence affects a lot of people; a quarter of all women, for example (http://www.ahrq.gov/research/domviolria/domviolria.htm).
What makes you think women castrating men is remotely common?
Context is, in my opinion, a feminist tool to deny the prejudices against men as “not as important”.
“Here is an example:
On the female site feministe, in response to an article entitled “Why men rape”
by Jill on 11.29.2010, here are some comments:
“… Personally I think the answer would be nuclear holocaust …”
“… I’m begining to wonder if we should just give up on this generation of men and keep them under perpetual house arrest …”
“… line up every man on the planet, sharpen a machete, and castrate them all …”
“… they’d all disappear from the face of the earth …”
” … killing all men with nuclear weapons …””
No link? And this is supposed to excuse YOU saying nasty shit just because you have anger problems?
Sorry, but that is false. Even if those comments exist (Which I’m not sure they are, given that they’re quotemined and without actual links), that still doesn’t justify you lashing out at people WHO HAVE ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH WHAT YOU’RE ANGRY AT.
To MRAL, all rejection is castration.
BTW, pipsqueak, there was a LOT of discussion about The Talk. No one here was in favor of the way they acted.
Rutee yet again brings in the feminist “context” to deny the pain of men. Somehow I don’t think that guy, or any of his loved ones, care that domestic abuse and rape are “more common” than castration.
You know what funny? Prison Rape!
Wait… no it not.
Try again MRAL.
Zarat: Meller, in toto, isn’t reacting to a specific provocation.
He hates that women have any autonomy. Anything which supports the idea of women being less than servile dependents on a man outrages him.
Anything which makes a non-servile women suffer is something he thinks she deserves.
I would go so far as to say that any woman who isn’t adamant, and vocal, about wanting to see all women placed in a state of subjugation to men isn’t really a “real woman” to him, and so is fair game to all manner of insult, and not to be empathised with should something ill befall her.
And you are defending him, which is pretty rich, given the blood you say is on the hands of any feminist who doesn’t condemn what other feminists for advocating things you find objectionable.
“Context is, in my opinion, a feminist tool to deny the prejudices against men as “not as important”.”
…Are you serious?
Firstly, when Context is discussed, it is used to put things into perspective, to ensure that one isn’t just raging at something that is likely nothing but a soundbyte or a quote mine.
Secondly, if you think Context is a “feminist tool”…then what if you discussed moments of your own pain, with detail and (that dirty word) context? Are you saying that because you don’t believe other people when they state the facts and their own experiences, that we are also free to dismiss what you say simply because you take the time to flesh it out with perspective?
Pecunium is right about context. Black humor, in the right situation, is a coping mechanism. If you’re dealing with too much emotions in a horrible situation, you can help yourself by making light of it and distancing yourself emotionally from where you are. It is a very tricky thing to know which jokes simply push the envelope and which ones go too far. If you can’t tell, I’d recommend you err on the side of caution and bite your tongue.
Okay, I’ll amend my statement. Context is fine. But feminists just use it as a buzzword to immediately dismiss female privilege as “not really privilege” or “benevolent sexism” and to dismiss men’s pain as “not as important” (to use one of many examples, male objectification- tell me you haven’t heard some variation on “it’s not as big of a deal because it’s an individual problem, not a systemic/societal one, unlike female objectification”).