About these ads

The Lighter Side of Tom Martin (the repulsive British MRA)

Not Tom Martin

The other day we took a look at some of the more reprehensible opinions of Tom Martin, one of the UK’s most prominent Men’s Rights Activists and a man who evidently believes that child prostitutes are taking the easy way out to avoid having to get real jobs. He returned with even worse stuff, which I highlighted in my previous post.

Happily for all of us, not all of Martin’s views are this reprehensible. Many are merely ridiculous. So, today, let’s look at the Lighter Side of Tom Martin, as evidenced by some of his recent comments here on Man Boobz.

Martin apparently spent last Sunday working on a video project which involved him buttonholing passers-by on the streets of London and asking them questions in order to “prove” his various crackpot theories about gender. Here’s how he explained one aspect of his video research:

After shooting my video experiment tomorrow to discover who is more sexist on the street, women or women, I will be shooting another short, investigating if there is a correlation between unfunny women and prostitution ethic. I believe women could be as funny as men on average if they tried, but instead, invest in whoring strategies. I have a reliable street experiment to investigate this hypothesis also  …

If I can establish that women can be as funny as men (in a zero prostitution environment), then this video experiment will be released in a news piece, and used as a springboard to pre-sell the feature-length documentary it will form a part of, on a related topic.

Good luck with that!

Martin also took on the contentious (to him) subject of male baldness, a topic of intense interest to him, due to certain factors with regard to gender and misandry … er, long story short, he’s  bald. Sorry, balding.

After one commenter here suggested that Martin’s ambition was to become a sort of “Ann Coulter … with less hair and more swearing,” he took umbrage – not at the comparison to Coulter but at the bit about hair.

Well Cassandra, there are five new baldness treatments in the pipeline, but no drugs for treating a receding personality, so what are you going to do?

In a followup comment, the man whose favorite word in the English language is “whore,” used as an insult, declared we were being a bunch of evil meanies for even mentioning the whole (lack of) hair thing:

Cassandra, thanks to your receding personality (for which there is already a cure – renunciation therapy), I have decided for my filmed experiment tomorrow to also measure the degree to which each sex is prepared to make physical insults about the other sex.

Even if you specifically were fat for instance, and it was all your own fault because you refuse to get a job, I would never mention it in a debate with you. I debated an obese woman once. She ordered a pizza whilst we were still on stage, but I did not refer to it at the time, because of the most basic standards of decorum.

This I believe was an attempt at a joke.

How many manboobzers are prepared now to concur that Cassandra was being a douche by picking on an involuntary physiological characteristic of a debating opponent? And then encouraging others to do the same?

Of course, in Martin’s mind, mocking women as fat whores  is totally cool, because:

Fatness is a choice, ladies, and so is being a whore. Going bald (currently) is not, due to poor efficacy of available treatments, including transplants. That will change, if Aderans, Histogen, Replicel, Allergen and Tsuji-Lab among others have anything to do with it. All you need to do in the meantime is shut the fuck up until they sort it out. The apparent acceptability of attacking the bald though, is a great example of the lack of equality men have. People do not generally attack or humiliate women who are going bald – but when it’s a man…

Uh, yeah, that’s why virtually every bald or balding woman wears a hat or a wig, while bald or balding men just comb it over or shave it all off.

Evidently Martin feels that even a mention of his lack of hair is some kind of hate crime. Here, prominent Bald Rights Activist Larry David tries to convince authorities to investigate a similar hate crime against him.

Note to Martin: Larry David’s show, “Curb Your Enthusiasm,” is fictional.

(Note: Tom Martin has confirmed that this is indeed him posting comments here on Man Boobz by sending an email from the account associated with his website Sexismbusters.org. Also, he’s retweeted quotes from his comments here. Contact him via his web site if you are skeptical.)

About these ads

Posted on July 16, 2012, in antifeminism, evil fat fatties, hypocrisy, irony alert, men who should not ever be with women ever, misandry, misogyny, MRA, oppressed men, Tom Martin, whores. Bookmark the permalink. 651 Comments.

  1. Argenti Aertheri

    “At least ties aren’t a health hazard, like high heels.”

    Seriously! Well, except when they are, but I can’t imagine factory jobs require ties…safety girl and all…whereas heels are a hazard, full stop — nothing harmful about wearing a tie in general.

    His 9 min video just took me 17 min because I had to stop for more vodka, repeatedly (I’d complain he’s driving me to drink, but I’m celebrating my birthday a few days early)

  2. Argenti Aertheri

    And extra lulz? He’s got some sort of begging container people are dropping change into. We know what that makes him right? XD

    (I’d say they’re quarters, but that’d be US currency, whatever’s UK currency and about the same size, he’s collecting them on film there)

  3. You know what? It actually reminds me a little bit about Expelled. Here’s what I mean.

    Except that Ben Stein makes the mistake of talking to actual knowledgable people rather than random folks off the street. No, Tom takes a leaf out of Ray Comfort’s book and labels college students as experts then frustrates them with bullshit “facts,” cherry-picks some good-looking exchanges, and declares victory.

  4. Hey everyone, long-time lurker here. I just wanted to say that I think I’ve finally cracked the case on who REALLY has the power in Saudi Arabia.

    You see, the manboobz regulars here believe that Saudi Arabia is very clearly a patriarchy. Tom, using his high IQ, figured out that Saudi Arabia is a whoriarchy cleverly disguised as a patriarchy. Both of these beliefs, however, are incorrect. While he came close, even Tom, in his infinite wisdom, could not deduce that the patriarchy-disguised whoriarchy is, itself, a disguise. So who holds the true power, you ask? It’s quite simple: Reptilians!

    Yes, Saudi Arabia is really a Reptilianarchy disguised as a whoriarchy disguised as a patriarchy. As amazing as it seems, it’s actually quite obvious. Take the mahr, for example. Pecunium and Argenti Aertheri have said that the mahr is merely symbolic, since wives have no real way of spending the money. Tom, with his vast intellect, has seen through such silliness and realizes that it is just a sum of money husbands have to give to their wives. But what even Tom doesn’t realize is that once the wives have this money, they go out to buy SCENTED FUCKING CANDLES, which the Reptilians have laced with mind-controlling spores! It’s so obvious! Soon, the Reptilians will have all of Saudi Arabia under their mind-control!

  5. Argenti Aertheri

    Not to derail two threads at once with Doctor Who, but I’d take homo reptilia over the current rulers…seriously Eldane was awesome, he can have the Nevada desert.

  6. Tom, a serious question. If during the course of your research for your documentary, it transpired that your subjects were giving radically different responses to those that you predicted, in such a way that your project’s entire thesis was being undermined…

    …would you still go ahead and complete it?

  7. How Is Tom Martin’s Butt?

    by E.L. James

  8. @Wetherby:

    Tom, a serious question. If during the course of your research for your documentary, it transpired that your subjects were giving radically different responses to those that you predicted, in such a way that your project’s entire thesis was being undermined…

    …would you still go ahead and complete it?”

    My guess is that the edit button would be more liberally used. Tom, much like a crackpot
    obsessed with reptilian shape shifters, is far too invested in his worldview to care about little things like having true beliefs as opposed to beliefs that are emotionally satisfying to him.

  9. Wordspinner: At least ties aren’t a health hazard, like high heels.

    Depends on where you work. When I was a projectionist… no tie in the booth. When I was a machinist my “boss” (he was the owner’s son-in-law, didn’t know one end of a ball-cutter from the other; I know why she employed him [her daughter refused the job], but gods what a pair of fools they were; in different ways), used to wear a tie, and then come round the machines.

    I was terrified he was going to get himself killed.

  10. Tommy: You thick prick. 33 percent of Afghan women may be active, in all of Afghanistan, but how many are active in the areas of Taliban control?

    That’s what Taliban controlled Afghanistan for another, means.

    To make it more plain I point you to the portion marked, Inequality-adjusted HDI (IHDI) . Like all averages, the HDI masks inequality in the distribution of human development across the population at the country level. The 2010 HDR introduced the ‘inequality adjusted HDI (IHDI)’, which takes into account inequality in all three dimensions of the HDI by ‘discounting’ each dimension’s average value according to its level of inequality. The HDI can be viewed as an index of ‘potential’ human development and IHDI as an index of actual human development. The ‘loss’ in potential human development due to inequality is given by the difference between the HDI and the IHDI, and can be expressed as a percentage. (For more details see the technical note 2). Due to a lack of relevant data, the IHDI has not been calculated for this country

    In short, you don’t have any actual data more granular than, “all of Afghanistan.” When were you there last? How many people do you know who’ve spent time there recently? What have you got which details female freedom of action in Taliban Controlled (or even in the more tribally structured areas) of the country.

    Blind people, face insurmountable obstacles to work, and yet 34% of UK blind people have a job.

    Then they aren’t insurmountable.

    Feminists like to play up Muslim restrictions on female freedom of movement, which is largely a symbolic restriction,

    So that is, “symbolic”, and so is irrelevant, but the Mahr is symbolic, and devastating in its effect. Looking at the way you use it, and the way you used insurmountable I’m beginning to think your grasp of English isn’t all that strong.

    , other than the guarantee by law of money they receive from their legally enslaved husbands.

    What law? Show me the act of Parliament which says Muslim men are slaves to their wives? Because if you are arguing that, in the UK, this is a trufact… citation needed. Hell, if you are arguing it’s a “trufact” in Saudi, show me the law, not the Sura. Because Islamic laws are interpreted by each Muslim. There is no “pope”. Shi’a Muslim do have such leaders, but even they aren’t perfectly dispositive.

    Again, have you been to Saudi, or Iraq (I have), or Kuwait, or Afghanistan (Urban, or hinterland)? Have you got direct observation to support your assertions that this, “law” is actually in effect?

    No, you don’t. You know that it was against “the law” in England, prior to disestablishment, for a woman to be a leader of the church? Except that Elizabeth, and Mary, and Victoria all were. But it says, right in the holy book of that church, that women aren’t to be church leaders.

    That’s because the legal and religious laws aren’t the same.

  11. Tommy: give us a slogan you could fit onto a placard

    Hard chairs chap my ass.

    Fembot used the “You’ll never get anyone to agree with you” argument, or effectively “most people agree with me”,

    No, those are substantively different. She said you were wrong. Fractally so. So wrong that no counter-argument is really needed; because on its face your case folds like wet crepe in a windy rain.

    That’s not a claim that people will agree with her argument, and so you are wrong because of that. It’s a claim that because you are wrong, people will agree with her that you are wrong.

    Direction matters.

    You’re collective failure to even dent my argument about financial abuses of men in Islam has convinced me to make a documentary on it.

    Will that be before or after the one about humor in women? Or the one about the renunciation of all aspects of whoring? (and will there be a definition of the concept in that one)?

    Will it be available to the public, or languishing behind a paypal button in the vain hope someone will plunk down 5 quid to see your shining visage?

  12. Kirby: I mean, I know you don’t like to acknowledge that your opponents are arguing against you, and would rather only focus on the people who are fed up with your bullshit and are off to do better things, but even you can’t pretend you’ve made an argument when you haven’t.

    Yes, he can. He does it all the time. His arguments are much like his documentaries… he’s planned them out in his head, it’s the pesky work of actually making them inw which he bogs down.

    But the planning, Oh!, you should see the brilliant rhetorical flourishes he ponders, hear the awestruck silences, feel the thundering applause and see the crushed opponents whom he has destroyed with the brilliance of his reasoning, the tightly structured ideas, the irrefutable evidence and the carefully turned phrases.

    They are so magnificent that Cicero rose from the dead to clap and the famed speech of Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c) in the auditorium pales.

    Someday he will share them with us, and we will be amazed.

  13. I’m just waiting for Tom to explain why the Taliban attacks little girls for going to school. I’m guessing the answer will have something to do with The Who and Riarchy. The reptilian prostitute overlords must be depraved, indeed.

  14. Well, I’ve had a few more subscriptions to my sexismbusters youtube channel than usual, so someone must be looking forward to these vids.

    me. i am super excited about your videos.

  15. Tom Martin: Cargo Video Cult Master!

    Give him a topic, he’ll make a video!

    IF he can get a feminist collaborator, who can brake nails, and be his counterpoint (*collapses in helpless laughter at the image).

  16. Okay, it looks like you’ve all calmed down a bit over child prostitution not really being rape comment –

    so it’s about time I said something controversial, so Douchetrelle can write another article.
    Here goes…

    Old women should be conscripted to do National Service – but just the old women (not the old men) – because old women, 65 to 75, are the most privileged demographic in history. They should do the National Service, with one caveat… no whinging – just happy to repay their debts to society, and lose a little of that puppy fat.

  17. Damn, Tom, your need for attention is pathetic.

  18. I think someone’s lonely.

  19. Boring.

    I want you to blame the Taliban shooting little girls for going to school on the female dominated Whoriarchy.

    That would be fun.

  20. captainbathrobe

    Grandmothwhores?

  21. captainbathrobe

    Sorry, I meant to say:

    Grandmothwh*res?

  22. The more I see of Tom the more I think that he’s stuck at about a 5-year-old’s level of emotional maturity.

  23. Argenti Aertheri

    “They are so magnificent that Cicero rose from the dead to clap…”

    They’d better involve some damned good fish jokes then. (I’ll finish catching up in a moment, the idea of Cicero giving a shit about Tom is just too hilarious, Cicero is, um, headache inducingly complex)

  24. Argenti Aertheri

    Lol, wow, that Cicero comparison is rather apt. Cicero did a much better job of defining wh*re and only applying it where it’d help his argument.

    Yeah, pensioners are the most privileged demographic in history; that’s it, I’m sure /sarcasm

    And Tom, before you claim I just committed a fallacy, you have to proof your point, I don’t have to disprove it —

    (shifting the) Burden of proof (see – onus probandi) – I need not prove my claim, you must prove it is false
    Onus probandi – from Latin “onus probandi incumbit ei qui dicit, non ei qui negat” the burden of proof is on the person who makes the claim, not on the person who denies (or questions the claim). It is a particular case of the “argumentum ad ignorantiam” fallacy, here the burden is shifted on the person defending against the assertion

    …I need to check something, I think “onus probandi…” might be Cicero…

  25. So the whole child prostitution thing was a desperate bid for attention? Good to know. Any more videos yet? Or is the whole budget already blown on booze?

    (I think we all know the answer to that question.)

  26. i know they dont have the xiii amendment in england but even without it that still sounds super stupid

  27. Old women should be conscripted to do National Service – but just the old women (not the old men) – because old women, 65 to 75, are the most privileged demographic in history. They should do the National Service, with one caveat… no whinging – just happy to repay their debts to society, and lose a little of that puppy fat.

    Aw, now you’re just trying too hard.

    “And outlaw merriment and laughter!”
    “And everyone who bakes pie is evil and should receive fifty lashes!”
    “And… and FEED PUPPIES TO HITLER!”

    “…Are you paying attention to me yet?”

  28. Or is the whole budget already blown on booze?

    do they have maddog in jolly old england because otherwise i dont see how that could be the case

  29. The fact that the MRM is cool with child prostitution is not really news, either.

  30. howardbann1ster

    …yeah, this thing about old lady pensioners? It catches my attention. I know an old lady pensioner.

    Who has given, given, given her entire life.

    And now lives in fear that the next round of austerity is going to leave her penniless and alone to die in the dark.

    (long political rant here that ends with ‘…and I can’t promise those heartless bastards won’t succeed, either, only that I’ll fight them every step of the way.)

    Given, given, given her entire life. Whole families propped up. Working multiple jobs while home-making. Plus holding up organizations on the side. She still regrets that time in her life when she was too busy caring for her own disabled child to prop the church up (and they were too damn lazy to help her)

    …but, no, she’s the most privileged person in history.

    Living on practically nothing. Reliant on the goodwill of others, because after a life of hard work she had nothing to show for it.

    Hey, you know what? A big giant fuck you. Thanks for playing.

  31. Okay, it looks like you’ve all calmed down a bit over child prostitution not really being rape comment –

    Nah, just bored. Or rather relaxed, because we know full well that within seconds of you attempting to grab another spot in the limelight, up will pop your child prostitution comments like a bad smell that will never ever leave you.

  32. Aw, Tom’s pathetic need for attention is almost cute.

  33. howardbann1ster

    I mean, I know he’s reaction-trolling. He outright said it. I know he gains some sort of perverse thrill from me telling him that he’s a worthless pile of shit whose views are stains on the universe, and that I should be the bigger man and not call him a douchecanoe.

    But, you know, only human.

    Douchecanoe.

  34. Argenti: thanks. It’s nice to know that a familiarity with the classics is not wasted.

    I’d have said Martial, but we aren’t looking for pithy retorts her, we want eloquence.

  35. Thank you, Pecunium. As always you say things far better than I can.

    And sorry about the pearly skin and hunky husband bit. I guess I just got carried away. :)

    (I’m not apologizing to you, Tom, so bugger off)

  36. Got it: Tom Martin hates all girls and women, from age 7 to 75, and no doubt earlier and younger.

    No surprise here.

    So Tom, how many feminists are leaping up to volunteer to work for you?

  37. Argenti Aertheri

    Pecunium — wouldn’t Steele doing Martial require actual wit? Something he is clearly sorely lacking in?

    I had the unfortunate displeasure of reading Cicero in Latin, so I know his style best, but all the classics that are still read are either witty, or very dry history (I can probably still recite the opening of Caesar’s history of Gaul in Latin…very, very, dry history…) — I’m sure Cicero was brilliant to his contemporaries, trying to figure out his word order is why I called him headache inducing.

  38. Manboobzer: “She’s a home maker”.

    MRA: “You mean, her husband bought her a house.”

    Twelve weeks basic training, followed by the remainder of the year, doing deeds, for the good of the land. We need a constant reserve army of old women, who in a state of emergency, can be sent in to clean up.

    Disaster at nuclear power plant?

    Send in the old ladies. They’re infertile anyway, so cannot pass on any radiation-acquired genetic mutations through reproduction (unlike the old men who volunteered to clean up Fukoshima).

    Asbestos-ridden skyscraper gets brought down by a terrorist act?

    Send in the old ladies, as the effects will take years to show up, and again, they can’t reproduce, so any mutations, or conditions can’t be reproduced.

    A town gets anthraxed?

    Send in the old ladies, because although they might die – they’ve already had a good innings – and were statistically likely to have paid less tax, but received more government hand outs – leached off their spouse, never bought him a drink, avoided conscription as a youth, had positive discrimination in the workforce, had more maternity leave, received the state pension from an earlier age, got pandered to by political parties as a special victim group, got treated with kid gloves by the judiciary, received an engagement ring, got a juicy divorce settlement of alimony too, received more parenting time after separation, and grand parenting time, subsequently from all these privileges, destined for a longer, healthier retirement than the men.

    The old men got short-changed in all these areas throughout their lives – so it’s simply re-balancing the books.

    A bit of National Service will do you good, and will be something to look forward to.

  39. yeah, im gonna agree with everyone who said that now youre just doing this because you need attention

  40. Argenti: It’s the word order which made his rhetoric so powerful.

    I am sure you know this, but allow me to wax pedantic. :)

    Russian, as was latin (though to a lesser degree) is a declined language (Stephen King notwithstanding, he grandmother, no matter how expansive her education, never declined a verb).

    So, in English have a small amount of being able to play with word order. “Peter loves Anna” is a bit different from “Anna Peter loves”.

    Russian the three words, я не знаию mean, “I don’t know”.

    не знаию я means, “It is unknown to me.”

    знаию, не я, isn’t something I’ve heard (amused could help here, zie is a native speaker), but if I did hear someone say that I’d think something like, “Know that?… not at all!, (though to be honest, were I to wish to say express that thought I’d say, “знаию,нет я“, which doesn’t feel as wrong as ,b>знаию, не я; which is just unpleasant in my ears.

    Our (and by that I mean moderns who are familiar with Latin) problem is that we don’t really have a way to get the feel of the language, so the subtleties we can manage with English:dagger; are not present in the ear, and make the eye rather stumble, when to the ear of more practiced listeners (in an age when speaking was more of an art then it is now) those hints of nuance, and blasts of sentiment and rage, were as plain as any Bombastic Rantings of a David Duke.

    † with which we have been playing, because Steele is so bad at it, that one feels the need to counteract the stultifying vapidity of his prose. He wouldn’t have been far off them mark had he, rather than tedious, accused me of being a tendentious jackass. For real style he could have engaged in some repetition, “Pecunium you are moved from being a pretentious jackass to a tendentinious, interminous jackanape”, but that would require a facility we’ve not seen much evidence of… it would require that he have enough fondness [love would be nice] for language to play with, at all, but I digress.

  41. Can you imagine how horrible the world would be if Tom was in charge? The Hunger Games, Handmaid’s Tale, The Book of Eli, and Mad Max all rolled into one shitty world, with Tom sitting at the top of the heap surrounded by girl slaves. No thanks.

  42. Good Lord, Pecunium, you truly are the most pretentious douchebag I’ve ever seen. I don’t hate you; I’m just kind of slack-jawed reading your overblown pseudo-intellectual posts on an Internet message board.

    A hint: Being someone who has a life and other responsibilities (I am an entrepreneur, boyfriend, student and businessman), I don’t pore over my posts for hours on end in order to show off my knowledge of linguistics or irrelevant trivia from Wikipedia. I post quickly and efficiently. I get my point across. More than I can say for you.

  43. you really have no idea how long-winded you are, do you?

  44. I post quickly and efficiently. I get my point across.

    Yes, you certainly do, if your point is always to prove what an asshat you are. Still ignoring my post about “ignoring men’s pain?”

  45. (I was formerly posting as Molly McGee)

    Actually, lil’ Tommy, both men an women in Japan volunteered to go in and clean up after Fukashima. 200 people in total. All of them very brave and very generous to have volunteered. So. Just curious…. what’s it like being wrong all the time?

  46. Hey, at least he’s keeping all his various identities straight. For now.

  47. Btw Steele. Even assuming urban profession did mean someone working in/for a business at any level, urban professional still =/= businessMAN. Assuming that definition it would mean businessperson. But no, no way you are a misogynist. You just happened to totally forget about women being in the business world.

  48. Tom… you should have worked up to the pedophilia. I understand, it just sort of happened, and you lost yourself in the moment, and it came out.

    And the rush, the thrill of heated vitriol being poured on you… the incidental insults (such as the passing comment about Ann Coulter having more hair than you did), and the flush of controversy. You don’t want to lose it, but how can you top the predatory seven year olds taking advantage of those innocent pedophiles.

    You can’t just whip out some over the top, madcap nonsense and expect it to work. It needs to be a holistic growth from other bit of stupidity. You were on a roll, but to get another one, you have to lay the groundwork.

    You had some promise, the build up could have grown out of the vast swathes of women you can accuse of being insufficiently recompensatory for the benefits they derive from the centuries of MANual labor which preceded the present. Then given them a small bit of credit for taking care of the men in their lives; but you know the vast infrastructure of the past still hasn’t had enough in the way of admitting how much they owe men (those mammoth didn’t hunt themselves), and so the next, “logical” step {after the public renunciation} would be, as in the past women who were widowed might enter a convent, they should volunteer to do works projects.

    From their, as you get resistance you can start the foaming at the mouth, and the drunken ramblings (whilst explaining you will be filming your next expose on the evils of grasping women, and how they have been selecting trees for the density of the lumber, just to make men uncomfortable) and you could have done it.

    But no, you got greedy, showed all your cards at once. It’s a pity. You could have been a contender, but it’s looking as if, for sheer perseverance NWO is once again going to be crowned Troll of the Year.

  49. Steele: A hint: Being someone who has a life and other responsibilities (I am an entrepreneur, boyfriend, student and businessman), I don’t pore over my posts for hours on end in order to show off my knowledge of linguistics or irrelevant trivia from Wikipedia. I post quickly and efficiently. I get my point across. More than I can say for you.

    As I said, it’s not pretense. 1: I don’t spend hours. I’m practiced at this. Writing (as with any other skill) is something that gets easier with practice.

    Today I have, made chicken stock, worked on rearranging our living quarters, to accomodate the new furnishings we got last weekend, gone shopping, read some of a novel, and a bit of non-fiction, corresponded with my father, pondered the frames which are for sale at the art supply in town, trimmed some bonsai, watered the garden, watched some videos, fried some basil for topping the stir-fry I’m making for supper, done some laundry, chatted with the new girl at the coffee shop (she’s interesting, attractive, and speaks Russian, so I have three incentives to spend more time there) talked with someone about drunk driving laws; and the Singularity, and found the time to mock you, mock Tom, mock NWO, do some (interesting) research on the Pulitzers for non-news, toss in some barbs at Elam, Peter-Andrew NOLAN©, discuss linguistics, and write this.

    What I am, is efficient.

  50. Oh… btw, I’ve not checked wikipedia for anything in days. There isn’t anything wrong with wikipedia, but I’m actually pretty well read, and tolerably well educated. Moreover, I know how to do research, and google has made finding primary sources a lot easier.

    If I were a better typist I’d be a bit faster.

  51. Varpole: I post quickly and efficiently. I get my point across.

    Spending days to do it… I know, I went and looked at your posting history, remember?

  52. What I am, is efficient.

    And what you are not, apparently, is employed.

  53. Yes, CNN did dig out a token female pensioner they’d found who also volunteered to clean up Fukushima – I’m sure most of the 200 will be nearly all men – but Fukashima is small-scale, compared to the clean up operation required after a full scale nuclear strike, or anthrax attack. We’re not talking volunteer time, we’re talking conscription – and while all the media did pieces on how it makes sense to send old people – none had the honesty to say that it actually makes more sense to send old women (as they’re infertile).

  54. @Pecunium, lurker here, posting for, i think, the first or second time, just to note that I am extremely impressed!

  55. Shouldn’t they send you in, Tom, because no one wants you to breed?

  56. we get it tom. you want us to say you old women to die. blah blah blah. this one is boring. come up with something new.

  57. also stop fucking posting here so you can finish your videos. seriously, it’s not like you have school to worry about, so when are we gonna get to see those?

  58. Does Tom want his own mother cleaning up toxic sludge, too? Maybe Tom’s father bought her a house once, therefore she is also a wh*re.

  59. Tom, it’s not shocking anymore.

  60. He’s so desperate. It’s kind of sad. Tom, get to work on your videos; there’s a good boy.

  61. CassandraSays

    Picture if you will this scene. A group of Scottish children are on a school trip some time in the 70s, performing a rousing rendition of “You Cannae Shove Your Granny Off The Bus”*, when one child springs to his feet, a look of outrage on his face. “Yes you can!” he proclaims. “That w%$re isn’t even fertile any more!”

    And thus an MRA activist is born.

    *http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3VCWROijdwM

  62. CassandraSays

    Link fail

  63. Argenti Aertheri

    Good Lord, Pecunium, you truly are the most pretentious douchebag I’ve ever seen. I don’t hate you; I’m just kind of slack-jawed reading your overblown pseudo-intellectual posts on an Internet message board.

    A hint: Being someone who has a life and other responsibilities (I am an entrepreneur, boyfriend, student and businessman), I don’t pore over my posts for hours on end in order to show off my knowledge of linguistics or irrelevant trivia from Wikipedia. I post quickly and efficiently. I get my point across. More than I can say for you.

    Hey Steele? That linguistics post was directed at me, and I rather enjoyed it.

    Pecunium — Unfortunately, try as he might, my best-friend has been unable to get any Russian to actually stick in my brain, so most of that went straight over my head. Nonetheless you’re correct about Cicero’s word order, and perhaps I’d have enjoyed it more under different circumstances (hard to get much done at all with a drunk asshole making demands, let alone translate Cicero competently).

    The faux self-mockery in Steele’s voice was hilarious btw, his insults would be worth it if he could pull of anything that well written…oh right, that’s misandry, because he can’t write because some teacher said he can’t, because he’s a man, thus he can’t write because he’s a man…having just spent an hour packing up art, I kind of have to disagree on that one. (It’s hilarious, I wouldn’t have thought I’d produced much of anything, but trying to pack it all? That pile might weigh more than I do!)

    Tom — that whole screed of “reasons”? I have but one reply — send in the robots!

  64. Sir Bodsworth Rugglesby III

    Tom Martin’s next stop why make Soylent Green out of people in general, when we can make it entirely out of dead women? Or why even wait until they’re dead… why are you all yawning?

    Seriously, you already hit rock bottom with your child rape apologism. There is no further you can sink. I’d say pack your things and go home, but I doubt you often leave.

  65. Steele: What I am is semi-retired. I have a pension and a day job, but it’s part-time. Why? Because I’ve earned the ability to not need more than that.

    So I put in about 20 hours a week, i.e. about three days. The rest of the time I am a house-husband for a family of three.

    I’m in my forties.

    Sucks to be me, Right?

  66. Varpole: If you’d read the post I itemised your posting schedule (it’s ok, I understand that seeing your obsession laid out so plain; when you probably thought it was a minor thing in your life, was probably a bit painful), you’d have seen me say I have a job, and that when I’m doing it I don’t post anywhere; thus (unlike you) not robbing my employer.

    It’s that English thing. The reading and the writing.

  67. themisanthropicmuse

    @Sir Bodsworth Rugglesby III: “I’d say pack your things and go home, but I doubt you often leave.”

    Soon he’ll start threatening to go, like a little kid that stands by the door swearing they are about to run away. If only he’d do it for real.

  68. So I put in about 20 hours a week, i.e. about three days. The rest of the time I am a house-husband for a family of three.

    In other words, you’re basically filling the role of a traditional housewife. Not that there’s anything wrong with that, but…

    Ladies and gentlemen, this:

    Today I have, made chicken stock, worked on rearranging our living quarters, to accomodate the new furnishings we got last weekend, gone shopping, read some of a novel, and a bit of non-fiction, corresponded with my father, pondered the frames which are for sale at the art supply in town, trimmed some bonsai, watered the garden, watched some videos, fried some basil for topping the stir-fry I’m making for supper, done some laundry, chatted with the new girl at the coffee shop (she’s interesting, attractive, and speaks Russian, so I have three incentives to spend more time there) talked with someone about drunk driving laws; and the Singularity, and found the time to mock you, mock Tom, mock NWO, do some (interesting) research on the Pulitzers for non-news, toss in some barbs at Elam, Peter-Andrew NOLAN©, discuss linguistics, and write this.

    Is what feminists and manginas consider “oppression”.

    Hey, sounds pretty dang good to me. I’d like some of that “oppression”.

  69. Sir Bodsworth Rugglesby III

    Steele, Steele, Steele, Steele. What are we going to do with you?

  70. Huh… Tom wants old ladies to die?

    Who is this person, anyway? Is this the same person that was trying to argue for men’s rights out in the streets of London? Is this the same person that was trying to make a stand for men’s rights by protesting what he thought was a vast inequality?

    Is that person really the same person that apologizes for child rape and advocates sending old women to do work that might kill them specifically because they are women and old?

    Incredible what the internet brings out in people… *shakes head*

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 9,766 other followers

%d bloggers like this: