Demotivated
Um, what?
I found this illustrating a typically incoherent rant about “The Aphrodisiac of the False Rape Claim” on What Men Are Saying About Women, the blog of the infamous MRA double period. Whoever made it needs to stop making Demotivational posters because he doesn’t understand how these posters are supposed to work. Or how to communicate a coherent message to other human beings using language.
Posted on August 20, 2011, in evil women, false accusations, idiocy, misogyny, MRA, pics, thug-lovers. Bookmark the permalink. 299 Comments.
Sarcasm can be such a crappy way of conveying concepts.
Is this person trying to say “it’s always her fault” (obviously not true) or “it’s sometimes her fault” (no one’s actually debating that)?
I get the feeling they’re trying to imply “always” while leaving open plausible deniability that they only meant “sometimes.” And because they’re talking in Sarcastese, they don’t have to clarify! They can just let off a little “grr, women” and walk off without having to think it through. They probably don’t fully know themselves which one they meant.
Thanks to that demotivational picture, I’m afraid to click the link. That’s enough butchering of basic human language for me.
wtf
I don’t even
But if we just went and did a quick regender on that? it would be an accurate description of the MRAs/MGTOW
In fact, no, it’s never her fault she’s raped.
I’ve never had a thuglover. Seriously, is this a thing?
I don’t think it’s about rape. Or is it? I have no idea what it’s about, actually.
I’ve never had a thuglover. Seriously, is this a thing?
It’s code for (*stagewhisper*) BLACK PEOPLE
I just went to the OP, and uh. That whole first “paragraph” is just one sentence. One, big, vague run on. The whole post is three paragraphs, and maybe 4 or 5 sentences total. Like. What was he even talking about?
When I think of thugs, I think of British Football hooligans. Rioting and burning cars because your team lost/won/whatever really turns chicks on, apparently.
Whatever the quality of the post, it conveys the message that women are not held accountable for their actions to the extent than guys are. That’s the message, whether you accept it or not, that’s another quesiton.
@Spear, no that’s Canadians when the Canucks loose in the 7th
Football hooligans are funnier than deranged Hockey fans. Maybe because I’ve never met a Football hooligan. Also, the word “hooligan” is inherently funny.
Maggie, so you’re pretty much inclined to defend any bullshit if it aligns vaguely with your beliefs?
(Note: I am not blaming the voices, your employer, your “thuglover,” etc for your dumb comment here; I am blaming you.)
Whatever the quality of the post, it conveys the message that cesium has 39 observed isotopes. That’s the message, whether you accept that or not, that’s another question.
(Also: I had a lover who was kind of thuggish. But he was Irish and from a wealthy suburban family. [And he treated me fine; he was "thuggish" in his mannerisms and dress, not in being actually violent.] Anyone want to take bets on whether he’d count as a “thuglover”?)
“Hooligan” reminds me of when I was 14 and my mom wouldn’t let me and my brother walk to the ice cream parlor on a Thursday evening (6pm or so) because, “the yahoos are out.” Pronounced “yay-hooze.”
Because … women! (Sorry. Trying to be on-topic.)
Whatever the quality of the post, it conveys the message that women are not held accountable for their actions to the extent than guys are.
Do you have any proof of this at all? That’s the thing about your posts: you come in here, snipe out some arch thing about how you’re Really Concerned about the Poor Young Men who aren’t taught to socialize, who are feared and loathed and held accountable for their actions, the dears…and then when we ask you to back that shit up with evidence or even reasoned speculation, you’re out of there. I have yet to see you addressing the Asperger’s topic that you brought up down in the sociopathy thread. This is getting really old.
Women are so held accountable for their actions: ‘Why didn’t you fight back?’ (or even better, ‘Why did you fight back? It only provoked him!’) ‘Why were you drinking’ ‘Why were you out walking at night?’ ‘Why did you dance with/accept a drink from/go out with him?’ ‘Why did you let him drug your drink?’ ‘Why were you wearing a short skirt and tank top?’ ‘Why were you outside, being all female?’ Women are constantly held accountable for the fact that some men can’t control their erections.
The article seems pretty clear, it basically states women lie about being raped. Women have loads of reasons to lie about it, from jealousy, revenge and excuses for cheating /pregnancy to attention getting and on and on.
Years ago in the old history books Philidelphia was known as the gayest city in the world while George Washington and the gang were in suffering in Valley Forge. (Gay at the time meant festive). Being born in Philly I was of couse interested in the story as anyone would be about their home town. The reason it was so festive is because the British would hold parties every night and many of the local women would attend. No doubt there was plenty of fraternization going on making for a festive occasion. Obviously quite a few women attending the parties got pregnant and of course cried rape upon return of George and his army. According to the old history books, quite often those women weren’t believed in the slightest as word got around about which women curried favor with the enemy.
False cries of rape are as old as the hills. During the Valley Forge days the women of Philidelphia had chioces to make. They could stay in Philly and keep the home fires burning as it were. They could brave the fridged cold and bring goods/supplies to the troops, or they could accept gifts from the enemy, fraternize and party every night. For the most part the women falsely claiming rape back then weren’t believed, and with good reason they weren’t believed. People were pretty savvy back then. Yet these facts were removed from the history books for portraying women in a bad light, which show you who is calling the shots; who has the power so to speak to rewrite history. The not really funny part is, if these facts were still taught I have no doubt false claims would be a scarce as feminists claim.
Now if we fast forward to the present, the same women who falsely accused a man might actually end up as a policymaker blocking anonymity, or a judge trying rape cases, or prosecuting lawyer, or any number of professions that unfairly use the violence of the State against men. Before the great indoctrination, a woman lying about rape was ostracized from the community, today, she might remain anonymous, or she could even benfit after having a man unjustly incarcerated or even killed.
First, thuglover? I want a glove to cover my thu and all four fings.
Second, is it my imagination or do these guys say that women are children/animals/less-evolved and then claim and complain that men are held to a higher standard? Do they not understand self-contradiction?
“People were pretty savvy then.”
Only you would think a 200-plus-year-old mindset would be savvy and believe that grade-A word salad in the OP made any sense, NWO.
NWOSlave:
One trick is to tell ‘em stories that don’t go anywhere, like the time I caught the ferry over to Shelbyville. I needed a new heel for my shoe, so, I decided to go to Morganville, which is what they called Shelbyville in those days. So I tied an onion to my belt, which was the style at the time. Now, to take the ferry cost a nickel, and in those days, nickels had pictures of bumblebees on ‘em. “Give me five bees for a quarter,” you’d say. Now, where were we? Oh yeah, the important thing was I had an onion on my belt, which was the style at the time. They didn’t have white onions because of the war. The only thing you could get was those big yellow ones..
I leave these: a box of mint-condition 1918 liberty-head silver dollars. You see, back in those days, rich men would ride around in Zeppelins, dropping coins on people, and one day I seen J. D. Rockefeller flying by. So I run out of the house with a big washtub and in 1957 I saw him turn turn the Secretary of Agriculture into the Secretary of the Interior. It was hell on their wives, but it sure brought down corn prices. Built a house out of corn. It was the worst home I ever owed? when it got really hot it smelled like Frito’s.
Anyway, about my washtub…I just used it that morning to wash my turkey, which in those days was known as a “walking bird”. We’d always have walking bird on Thanksgiving with all the trimmings: cranberries, Injun eyes, yams stuffed with gunpowder. Then we’d all watch football, which in those days was called “baseball.”
“Do they not understand self-contradiction?”
Ned, they’re not actually thinking or reasoning out their arguments, is the problem. Their anger and hate is just erupting out of them in every direction in the form of logorrhea. Their paranoia and narcissism require that they channel most of the most violent eruptions at women, but gays, blacks, and anybody who isn’t them will end up catching whatever’s left over.
It’s hard to penetrate walls of delusion so thick. Sadly, I find watching these guys have public breakdowns (the mask- it’s slipping!) oddly entertaining. I don’t what that says about me… but there’s not much else I can really do, is there? Besides draw attention to them as a sort of boil on society’s ass? Warn people to steer clear of them? Antagonize them because it’s funny how easily roused they are? I’m stumped.
VoiP, I think I love you.
And then what happened?
Ned, they’re not actually thinking or reasoning out their arguments, is the problem. Their anger and hate is just erupting out of them in every direction in the form of logorrhea.
Intellectually, I understand that. But when I see it, it’s incomprehensible.
You could also quote a fake conversation to concrete the theme of your story:
Thomas: I was the best husband and father in the whole history of the world
Polish waitress: western women are stupid, you are the best man in the world, you should marry me
Thomas: I even though eastern European women are more attractive than fugly, cat loving feminizi western womyn, I will never marry again until the family court is abolished etc
Seriously, NWO, I would really like to get in touch with your dealer. Whatever you’re taking seems to have removed you from common reality entirely.
The Simpsons is the source of all our wisdom.
I think you’ve hit it on the head, VoiP. NWO is the Grandpa Simpson of Manboobz, and he deserves to be taken just as seriously.
If they weren’t a bunch of moralizing asshats with no sense of humor beyond, “Rape! Hurr, hurr, hurr! Womyn! Hurr, hurr, hurr!” MRAs would find a spiritual home among Erisians, to whom long screeds that make little sense are sacred. But we’re also really not into, you know, limiting each other – there’s even a whole church for people who aren’t geniuses! And even if making sense isn’t required, a sense of humor, especially about yourself, is.
“Emotional diarrhea” and “intellectual constipation” are both pretty good descriptions of this article. The fact that whoever wrote that in the blog description applied those descriptors to feminism is a great example of the Dunning-Kruger effect. Contra magdelyn, the basic message is not that women aren’t held accountable for their actions in the same way that men are, it’s that women are inherently untrustworthy. As the author writes, “it is impossible for a women [sic] not to lie”. This, according to the author, is a “principal” by which feminism should have been rejected. Of course, maybe I’m just cherrypicking the one vaguely intelligible sentence out of all the ones that make no sense. What a depressing mess of incoherence and hatred. How does the person who wrote this even breathe without seizing up and suffocating?
Also, thuglover. What.
“Intellectually, I understand that. But when I see it, it’s incomprehensible.”
I know. My mind is seriously blown by the depths of depravity I’m seeing from the MRAs of the world. The rad-est of radfems has nothing on your average MRA.
I think about my life, and how it hasn’t been 100% peachy. I’ve had trouble with women, experienced some traumatic incidents involving nasty women, but I don’t have murderous rage toward women as a group as a result. Ditto for men; fewer incidents overall, but considerably less pleasant. Today, most of my friends are men. I just don’t understand what would have to happen to push you that far over the edge into blind hate.
NWO sounds like a garden variety paranoid schizophrenic and/or really good Poe. I’m no clinician, but I’d guess that about 50% of the MRAs I’ve encountered (IRL or on the interweb) have some variety of schizophrenia, often of the paranoid subtype. Women are the “persecutors” in their delusions, and could easily be replaced by something else; commies, or capitalists, for instance. What’s strange is that most schizophrenics aren’t violent, but the ones who tend toward violence seem drawn to MRA rhetoric like flies to shit. Probably because it justifies their delusions? Maybe they were abused by sociopathic women, or went through a traumatic divorce, and were genetically susceptible to schizophrenia => perfect storm? A lot of them talk about divorce to the point where I wonder if they had a psychotic break during a divorce…
I think you’ve hit it on the head, VoiP. NWO is the Grandpa Simpson of Manboobz, and he deserves to be taken just as seriously.
I’ve hit the nail right on the button!
“Whatever the quality of the post, it conveys the message that women are not held accountable for their actions to the extent than guys are. That’s the message, whether you accept it or not, that’s another quesiton.”
In the sense that men are held less accountable, that’s true. Women and men aren’t held to the same extent.
Short, succinct and to the point. That’s exactly what the message is. What is it that some people still don’t seem to get?
If this question of accountability needs to be proven to someone, then it is clear that they will never understand. You either see it or you don’t. After all, even before feminism, we have millennia of chivalry to draw our examples from. I am reminded of Bill Clinton’s famous comment “It depends on what the meaning of the word is is.”
Deny, deny, deny. It’s what feminists do best.
Actually, just because he was sweet to you, how can the rest of us know he’s not a thug? I wonder if he’d go thump the shit out of someone at your behest, just because that someone said mean words to you? In my language, that’s a thug, of the white-knighting variety. In fact, what you seem to be describing fits the typical thug profile – “thuggish to others but sweet and ever-protective to me.”
Apart from which, I tend to take issue with the idea that women always choose thugs. I’m more inclined to think that women choose whatever idiot comes within their orbit at the right time (timing is everything – catch ‘em on the rebound). Obnoxious morons subscribing to the numbers game tend to hit on women more, and so an added perk is that a slob so encountered is more likely to be an exciting, gina-tingling thug, but this does not always hold true. Brain-dead degenerates, dull providers and an assortment of plodders also seem to get equal billing. It’s an orbit thing, and is contingent on the type of company that men and women prefer to keep. Free tip to those women drawn to proto-thuggish types… be more discerning with the company you keep, because you risk choosing one that might turn out to be not so sweet or pleasant when you burn his toast.
He says, she says. I say you’re wrong. Bite me. Here’s a free tip, gratis… if a woman does not choose an idiot to begin with, then the question of having to fight back, provoking him, him drugging her drinks, whatever, need never even arise. Careful choice of the company one keeps eliminates 90% of your objections. Sure, there is never ever, under any circumstance, any excuse for rape… but here in this discussion the emphasis is on the company that we choose to keep, and this is entirely under your control.
(As for that 10% – anecdotally, I’ve never met a woman who was assaulted just by walking out at night, so I regard this claim as bogus. But hey, I’m feeling generous today, or rather, too lazy to substantiate with references, so allow me to give you the benefit of the doubt).
Now… what were we saying about holding women accountable for the dopey choices they make?
My thug can make his own toast, thank you!
@Chuckeedee
lolbro? What’s with all this denying? I thought you said that is what feminists do. Geez, what a hypocrite.
Now… what were we saying about holding women accountable for the dopey choices they make?
Given that you’re implying that women are dopey, why should they be? You can’t both say we’re incompetent and that we should be held accountable.
Let’s fix this:
“Here’s a free tip, gratis… if a [MAN] does not choose an idiot to begin with, then the question of having to [get a prenup], [fight for custody], [resist a false rape accusation], whatever, need never even arise.”
When I think of thugs, I think of Republicans.
Precisely. MzDarwin seems to get it. I do not like what Anglosphere women have become, and so I opt out, and confine my interests to Europe and Asia. And life is good. It is my choice, and I alone am responsible for it. I tend to get into disagreements with many mras, who often adopt an “I’m a victim too” attitude, because of this.
So the Manboobz response to this is basically… “hurr, it’s dumb and stupid and wrong! yeah!”
Masters of humor you are…
I will say, though, that women are sometimes held less responsible for their actions, but that’s actually a result of patriarchal and chivalrous attitudes which view women as less intelligent/capable/mature than men.
I got a question for the commenters here. Do you believe that the false rape accusation cases cited in the media and on sites like False Rape Society are bogus, or are they simply not worth paying attention to?
I do not like what Anglosphere women have become, and so I opt out, and confine my interests to Europe and Asia.
Then clearly you haven’t met some of the European and Asian women I have.
I suppose if you further confine your interests to European and Asian women in the “international marriage” market, you get a little more of what you’re looking for, or of what at least looks like what you’re looking for, but the fact that someone is willing to put up with you to get a better life is… kind of a low bar for True Love.
Actually, just because he was sweet to you, how can the rest of us know he’s not a thug? I wonder if he’d go thump the shit out of someone at your behest, just because that someone said mean words to you?
No. Probably not.
He did once serve as “security” for a friend while her abusive ex moved his stuff out of the apartment, but:
A) Good for him
and
B) He didn’t lay a finger on the guy
if a woman does not choose an idiot to begin with, then the question of having to fight back, provoking him, him drugging her drinks, whatever, need never even arise.
And how do you know someone’s an idiot? If he tries to rape you or drug your drink!
Since I’m Madame Fucking Cleo, that’s easy enough.
I got a question for the commenters here. Do you believe that the false rape accusation cases cited in the media and on sites like False Rape Society are bogus, or are they simply not worth paying attention to?
A mix. A lot of them are cases that aren’t “a woman legally accuses a specific man of rape.” I’m looking at the False Rape Society blog now (and ew, by the way, because they seem to never acknowledge that rape can happen) and most of the cases they’re reporting on don’t involve an accusation of a specific individual. And in some of the ones that do, there’s no reason to believe he didn’t do it other than “he says he didn’t.”
I also think it’s not that common. A lot of the statistics on false rape accusations count as “false” every allegation that doesn’t result in a conviction–which is hardly proof it didn’t happen.
And finally, there’s a part of me that’s really horrified and disgusted by false rape accusations, but nervous about admitting that because MRAs have so fucking often used them as a bugaboo and as a weapon to attack real rape survivors. I think falsely accusing someone of rape is a terrible thing to do and I know it does happen–but it doesn’t happen every fucking time a woman chips her nail polish, and acknowledging the first without implying the second seems to be outside the subtlety-appreciation abilities of most MRAs.
I’m talking about cases like this, where the charges are quite specific and often with devastating consequences:
Man sentenced to life in prison after committing murder because of false rape allegation
Couple booked for abetting suicide of Dalit youth
Woman accused of fabricating story of being raped by two black men
To rid him of alcoholism, family accuses man of raping daughter
Woman makes false assault claim because man wanted her to leave the apartment, gets caught on camera
Man kills himself after woman accuses him of rape – more
And these are mostly just from the first page of the False Rape society… real articles about real events, no speculations or subjective opinion.
I would argue that the reverse is true as well – somebody who is convicted will be forever tainted as a ‘rapist’ even if the accusation was false or the conviction made in error.
Can’t speak for other MRA blogs, but from what I’ve seen of the FRS, they keep the tone of their articles pretty civil and clear of hyperbole. If you have a specific example in mind where they claim that “rape doesn’t happen” or “all accusations are false”, I’d like to see it.
Anyway, I hope we can agree that this is a problem, and while perhaps not as widespread as actual rape, it still deserves better than mere sarcastic jibes and dismissal.
That’s not the worst Demotivational poster I’ve ever seen, but it is pretty bad. Remember when those things were funny?
I know many fine, decent men and women who are not idiots. Feminist women, on the other hand, choose idiots all the time. We know this because they tell us. “Men are pigs”, “men are bastards”, “men are stupid”, “the oppressive patriarchy”, and so on. It’s pure projection. What feminist women are doing is describing their preference for men. These are the types of men that they notice, the types of men that fit in with their values and their definitions of the things that matter, the types of men to whom they give air-time. The type of man that does not fit in with their preferred profile, on the other hand, is invisible to them. So if you want to identify idiots in a crowd, just unleash a feminist woman… she’ll sniff them out like a pig sniffing out truffles.
I have nothing to do with any “international marriage” market, and never indicated anything of the sort. You are projecting.
Here’s a free tip, gratis… if a woman does not choose an idiot to begin with, then the question of having to fight back, provoking him, him drugging her drinks, whatever, need never even arise. Careful choice of the company one keeps eliminates 90% of your objections.
So, you’re pretty much saying that women should never leave the house, because otherwise they can’t control the company they keep? As for the idiots, you can’t always tell. My godson’s father didn’t become an idiot until his son was diagnosed with autism. (or maybe he was always an idiot, but concealed it well…) So yes, one never knows if the person next to them at the bar or staring across the subway car is an idiot. But guess what? It’s not my responsibility to prevent idiots from doing idiotic things – or to prevent rapists from raping. That’s not how it works. If you don’t want men to rape, teach them to control their sexual urges, not to look at women as objects to be played with, and that women do not exist in a perpetual state of consent.
Also, chuckeedee, a minor point of grammar – free and gratis mean the same thing. Unless you meant to use the repetition to drive your point home, I suppose.
These are the types of men that they notice, the types of men that fit in with their values and their definitions of the things that matter, the types of men to whom they give air-time.
And yet here I am, married to a quiet, unassuming guy who loves our cats. And I’m a feminist. While one person doesn’t make a study, I’m still gonna call BS. I know lots of women who aren’t attracted to assholes. They’re just also smart enough to recognize MRAs as assholes, too. I also know women who are attracted to assholes. I don’t understand the dynamic, i really don’t.
Well good for you. But your anecdote does not respond to the generic “all men are bastards” that defines the feminist raison d’etre.
“I got a question for the commenters here. Do you believe that the false rape accusation cases cited in the media and on sites like False Rape Society are bogus, or are they simply not worth paying attention to?”
If the media, as an aggregate, is saying it, it’s often supported by serious evidence that it is the case, as it was in Duke University. Beyond that, there’s little reason to pay attention; the only sites that make real attempts to claim it elsewise are manosphere-centric, and I’ve yet to see them bring one to light that wasn’t already by the rest of the media; instead they assume all acquittals are false; this is beyond stupid for anyone with a cursory understanding of how rape trials frequently work, because step one is that the jury is typically primed to acquit regardless of the facts of the case unless the victim is either a madonna, the defendant is black, or there is strong evidence of a weapon.
Beyond that, there’s a number of extremely horrid precedents set in the courts that further limit the ability to usefully bring someone to court even if they did rape someone. Acquaintance rape, for instance, even if reported, is rarely prosecuted, because despite being an actual form of rape, and there being nothing in the statutory law that distinguishes it from regular rape, legal precedent makes it extremely difficult, if not impossible in most jurisdictions, to actually bring to trial. Bear in mind, as some morons are wont to believe, that I am not referring to the burden of proof in this; that’s acceptable. I mean that there are a number of rulings that have more or less said “Even if the defendant’s story were true, without qualification, that wouldn’t be rape”, because the law has a fucked up view on consent in sexual situations. So an acquittal doesn’t mean it didn’t happen, it just means they weren’t convicted (For what could be any of a number of bullshit reasons). Even the Innocence Project doesn’t say the rape didn’t happen, and they do actual work to get people out of prison based on new evidence; the Innocence Project only says the person behind bars didn’t do it, which is rarely the same thing in the rapes that can actually get someone to go to prison (Because they more or less had to be stranger rapes to begin with, so you’re really only saying ‘that guy didn’t do it’).
“So the Manboobz response to this is basically… “hurr, it’s dumb and stupid and wrong! yeah!”
Masters of humor you are…”
This is stupidity incarnate. There’s not much to add, just point and laugh.
“All men are bastards” (pigs, idiots, etc.) is something I associate with mediocre stand-up comedians of both sexes. None of the feminists I read express anything like that.
We don’t think all men are bastards, Chuckie. Just you!
And possibly NWOaf, but he’s so cute it’s hard to stay mad at him.
Also, there’s a fascinating strain of essentialism in MRA “thought”. Chuck thinks women should just avoid dating “idiots”. What is an idiot? To Chuck it seems to be an intrinsic quailty, like red hair or A- blood type, something you should be able to tell if you do your due diligence.
Personally I think an idiot is “someone who behaves idiotically” – i.e., a judgement of actions rather than intrinsic properties, and a word that can describe most people at one time or another.
But I’m just a woman. What do I know?
This is stupidity incarnate. There’s not much to add, just point and laugh.
That’s pretty much the appropriate response to all MRAs. Hence, this website.
It’s funny, Kristin. In MRAland, women are the ones to blame for choosing Bad Boy Spousal who subsequently abuse them. But men who marry women who turn into vindictive harpies when it comes time for divorce are never to blame for poor relationship choices.
Of course, we could all just acknowledge that, while everyone is responsible for exercising good judgement, choosing good relationship partners can damned difficult.
Spousal –> Alpha. Fucking auto correct.
@Holly
I don’t have to deny the existance or malevolence of false accusations — and I don’t — to note that, anecdotally, I’ve only ever seen it mentioned in feminist spaces in the aid of casting doubt on someone’s story of having been raped or to minimize the malevolence of rape itself.
And yeah, I suspect a lot of false rape accusations compiled by misogynists are cases in which there’s a fair amount of evidence but room for reasonable doubt, or perhaps in which the accuser, and not infrequently the law, regards it as rape, but the accused does not (or claims not to).
We know this because they tell us. “Men are pigs”, “men are bastards”, “men are stupid”, “the oppressive patriarchy”, and so on.
People say that we say that. But how many times have you actually heard it FROM A FEMINIST?
(The exception is “the patriarchy,” because you’re misinterpreting that word; it means “the system that grants unequal power to men” not “men themselves.”)
As for “idiots,” I know way too many people who’ve been sexually assaulted by Ivy League grads and spit-polished take-him-home-to-mama types. Not every potential rapist is a big dumb goon or whatever you’re picturing.
And yeah, I suspect a lot of false rape accusations compiled by misogynists are cases in which there’s a fair amount of evidence but room for reasonable doubt, or perhaps in which the accuser, and not infrequently the law, regards it as rape, but the accused does not (or claims not to).
Are you saying that only misogynists talk about false rape accusations? Or does it make you a misogynist if you breach the subject?
I actually had another lengthy-ish comment further up with some examples but it’s stuck in moderation… I wonder why.
I have an entire blog about how Men Are People Too. Am I going to get kicked out of feminism now? o.O
“If this question of accountability needs to be proven to someone, then it is clear that they will never understand. You either see it or you don’t.”
And if you can’t see these wonderful new clothes the Emperor just got, it only proves that I’m smarter than you.
Yeah, Dracula, that’s Chuckee’s M.O.: anyone who doesn’t agree with him is just too stupid to appreciate his brilliance–not, you know, because he’s made an indefensible argument.