Patriactionary: Women who hit the age of 40 without a husband or kids deserve to be alone and miserable the rest of their lives.
Be careful, ladies, or you too will LOSE DICK FOREVER! Borrowed from Easily Mused. (Click the pic to see more crying chicks.)
Over on Patriactionary, a proudly reactionary and patriarchal Christian blog, the blogger who calls himself electricangel is angry at himself – for not being an even bigger douchebag than he already is.
You see, he’s just heard from his wife that one of her friends isn’t happy about hitting the big 4-0. Apparently, his wife’s friend
broke down in tears, sobbing uncontrollably. What had hit her was the realization that she was 40, with no husband, no children, no prospects of either, and she was staring at a future of loneliness.
His reaction to this news?
I wish I could tell you that an evil smile of vengeance crept across my face, and the children this woman discarded were getting their revenge upon her. That this was payback for riding the cock carousel for years, always aiming at the guys she wanted, not the guys she could get.
But alas, hidden deep inside in his tiny misogynistic heart there remains a tiny fragment of sympathy.
But I cannot tell you anything other than how saddened I was at her tale, and how this sadness will rip out the hearts of so many women who did not set out to become lonely, childless spinsters, but whose families and societies removed the strictures on their behavior so that their own lack of self-control was left unbounded. This will be the ongoing social disaster of coming years.
I did say it was a tiny fragment.
But he still wants to use this woman’s story for his own ends.
In discussing this woman, I am insistent upon her becoming an object lesson to my wife, and especially for my wife to tell the beautiful, smart, virgin young women close to her about what happens to carousel riders. Life is a coin you may spend any way you like, but you may only spend it once. This woman spent it on an amusement park ride. Now the park is closing, she has been thrown off the ride, and faces 45 years of solitude.
Yeah, because no woman over the age of 40 is capable of ever finding a date or a mate.
Yeah, because her sadness at hitting 40 is going to last for the rest of her life.
Oh, and the bit about “the children this woman discarded?” She didn’t “discard” any children. She simply didn’t have any. She’s not “discarding children” any more than those with penises instead of vaginas are “discarding children” each and every time they masturbate to orgasm.
In the comments, not everyone is quite so restrained as electricangel.
“I don’t even know this woman and I’m pissing myself laughing at her,” writes one commenter going by the name Friendzone. “Fuck her.”
Take The Red Pill is equally unsympathetic:
I have NO sympathy for this woman whatsoever. Just like most Modern Women, she bought into the feminist deception with eyes wide open with never a thought about the future. Well the future has arrived and it looks a lot like a cold, lonely one for her – just like the cold, lonely youth and young adulthood that MOST men have had and continue to have.
Karma has come due, and the bicycles have realized that they don’t need fish, either.
When women like her are young, they treat decent men abominably – being as cruel and sadistic as they can be when rejecting an ‘unwanted’ man’s advances – simultaneously, they enjoy being ‘free whores’ for every player, dirtbag, and Alpha thug who crosses their path; then when they reach their thirties and are little more than ugly, repellent, diseased trollops (often with some thug’s illegitimate spawn or two in tow), they complain about ‘the lack of good men’.
Others adopt Electricangel’s more, er, mature approach. Will S. decides to be a pompous dick about it, while patting himself on the back for his enlightened attitude:
Indeed, it is proper to not gloat, but rather mourn what we have lost, as a society, and feel sorry for those who have made poor decisions – and try to help others not make such poor decisions, by pointing to unfortunate examples, that at least others might learn something from them.
Sometimes, schadenfreude is tempting, but we Christians do generally know better than that.
Because patronizingly exploiting someone’s (probably temporary) sadness to make other people feel shitty about their own lives is such a moral thing to do. Is faux sympathy better than no sympathy at all?
Our friend Sunshinemary jumps on the “let this be a lesson to the rest of you sluts” bandwagon:
We need not mock such women, but we need to hold up their tales as cautionary examples to other young women. The older women themselves cannot face that their lives should serve as an example of what not to do, and they will rationalize it forever.
Electricangel expounds on his plan to use this woman’s apparent misfortune for his own ends:
I am using her as a vector to drop comments to my wife about the dangers of the carousel. Next is the overt suggestion that she talk to some young women about this friend specifically.
Uh, I guess you don’t let your wife read this blog, huh? Because if I discovered that someone close to me was talking about me in such a creepily manipulative and patronizing way, that person would no longer be a part of my life.
Electricangel replies to Sunshinemary:
Yes, those who did not prioritize children will have their genetic tendencies to that behavior removed from the gene pool. Women do not have the sexual options that men do, and not letting them know this early and often is crushing.
But they must be pointed to, and shown as examples. I understand people who will laugh at and mock them; I thought I would. It’s just the enormity of a waste of a life, and the lives she threw away, and the realization that this is just the tip of huge iceberg that has gripped me.
Yes, EA, you’re such a deeply moral person. Posting an “I told you so, you whores!” post on your blog is no doubt exactly the way The Lord would like you to handle this.
In a later comment, he reiterates his plan to use this woman’s story to increase the insecurities of his wife:
I do not feel guilty at all about using this woman’s example to drop pellets of manosphere logic on my wife. It has the side benefit of my wife starting to ask me (because she’s asking herself) “What do I do to bring value to the relatinship?” It is a good thing.
First it was a sad thing, now it’s a “good thing.”
How exactly is this better than gloating? No, scratch that. How is this different than gloating?
Posted on August 17, 2012, in alpha asshole cock carousel, antifeminism, gloating, men who should not ever be with women ever, misogyny, patriarchy, reactionary bullshit, Uncategorized and tagged alpha asshole cock carousel, antifeminism, misogyny, patriarchy. Bookmark the permalink. 850 Comments.
The Legend RPG system actually suggests handling relationships rather like a market; everyone gets tokens and you spend them when you make checks and such.
Except it doesn’t make any damn sense. Why would successfully using Diplomacy to make one person like you make you unable to make another person like you in the future?
Well for a start, forum with lots of women =/= feminist forum.
Because those fora don’t exist.
The only example you’ve given us is an article saying “be nice to people and you’re more likely to have sex,” which is not the same thing at all.
And you claim you don’t even want to have sex! What are we even arguing about?
However, you just said
So how am I in any way losing my time or energy when I’m actually spending it the most enjoyable possible way? What have I lost, given up, or exchanged? Having a great time is not a waste of time.
Okay, then, I denounce what the women at those fora said. They are wrong, because there are plenty of 25 year old virgin men who have good personalities. I don’t see why you are holding feminists accountable for what some other women say on the Internet. Women are not like bowls of soup coming from the same pot. We are just as varied as men are.
“I would call them sites with a feminist lean but not feminist sites especially when they post “opposite viewpoints” or random celeb gossip and news. Even if they were I am not sure why it would matter because you don’t want feminists to use “nice guys” no matter what. No matter how many feminists don’t like hugo its irrelevant to you.”
So Ms. Magazine isn’t feminist?
“How many times do I need to say abusers are not the same thing as nice guys. You are changing what it means to fit your purpose.”
I am talkng about manipulators, and being manipulative was one of the things mentioned at heartless bitches.
“I didn’t see you post were it was originally used and words can change meanings from their original purpose.”
http://www.heartless-bitches.com/rants/niceguys/ng.shtml
“Beep Boop robot exchange happiness in procession beep boop exchange complete beep boop. This may be shocking but humans are not robots. XD”
Great, so when can I come over and read the FEDs latest statistics report with you?
Wondering: A summary for those interested is. Why do you want sympathy for being alone when you express the opinion that men who are alone should just deal with it and accept that they deserve to be alone.
It’s an invalid summary.
I don’t recall anyone here saying women need sympathy for being alone. We seem to be arguing the OP’s view (that women at the age of 40 will suddenly burst into tears about the wasteland of their lives if they don’t have a husband and kids) was an idiot because it’s not true.
English, it’s a real thing.
The part where they use the things they talk about to manipulate women, and more often than I like to think about, rape them.
That would be the problem.
Those two things, his being an utter, and manipulative, asshole and his getting laid, might be related. It might not have anything to do with your daft ideas of “sexual economics”, because it’s not actually a marketplace; and even if we work with that, inane, metahphor, he’s not working in the open, but rather engaging in a form of, “inside” (or perhaps, insidious) trading.
Nice guys, among Hugo isn’t numbered (not that this is any credit to him) are being manipulative in different ways. They don’t have the advantages of position that Hugo exploits, and so they don’t get laid. As a result they complain. If they were able to get away with their manipulations they wouldn’t be Nice Guys™. they’d be Hugh Schwyzer style douchecanoes.
I’m thinking that hanging out with strangers to watch paint dry is more worth my time and energy than reading Wondering’s comments. Is what I’m thinking.
Human relationships are a lot more complicated than that, people don’t always spend time around someone because they gain something like happiness. People go to funerals often not because they want to but to respect the people that knew them or to pay respect to the dead. Whats being exchanged there? People who live with their family still have to do things with them even if they have a rocky relationship. Whats being exchanged there? Sometimes friend’s invite friend’s who you may not care for. Whats being exchanged there? Sometimes you do stuff in a relationship because its necessary not because you want to and were there is no gain or loss.
It’s the same for sex. I enjoy having sex. My partner enjoys having sex. When we have sex, we both have a great time. Absolutely nothing was exchanged in this process.
Analogies can have great explanatory power. By comparing the unfamiliar and abstract with the familiar and concrete, analogies can make difficult concepts much easier to grasp.
And this is why Wondering’s insistence on his relationships/free market analogy baffles me. Everyone knows people who are in a romantic relationship of some sort. Most people have been in a romantic relationship at some point. Even those of us who have never been in a romantic relationship have been in other sorts of relationships and are familiar with the concept. Economics, however, is not something that most people are familiar with. The free market is an abstract concept. Most people are much more familiar with romantic relationships than they are free market economics.
It makes no sense for Wondering to keep pushing this analogy. It does the opposite of what a good analogy is supposed to. It obfuscates rather than clarifies. It tries to explain something that’s easy to understand by invoking something that’s much more difficult to understand. It has no explanatory power.
That, and I’m pretty sure that the premises on which Wondering is building this analogy are just plain wrong. The free market simply isn’t analogous to romantic relationships. At all. But even if it was, this would still be a terrible analogy.
Some people are more attractive than others regardless what sex they are. Therefore, some people have more sexual options than other people do, and some people have less of such options than others. I’m pretty sure that James Dean and Marilyn Monroe had no trouble getting laid in their time.
“The part where they use the things they talk about to manipulate women, and more often than I like to think about, rape them.”
Rape is a problem yes. Manipulation, didn’t we just learn from Nice Guy ™ that women can sense a manipulator and therefore reject him. Or was that just to explain to the unlaid guy why he doesn’t get laid?
“. If they were able to get away with their manipulations they wouldn’t be Nice Guys™. they’d be Hugh Schwyzer style douchecanoes.”
But if women could sense this, as is claimed, then Hugo would never be able to get laid. Much less getting married all of 4 times.
“Amanda Marcotte: “You have more fun when your friends are having fun, right? Apply the same attitude towards dating, and you’ll become immediately hotter.””
And on the second page, where every single tip is Change, this is what? Support? Help?
Um, yes? You want advice on how to improve your life that doesn’t require you to change? I think I have identified a core problem here.
It sounds like you’re describing a Sims game instead of real life relationships. First, I have my Sim say 20 nice things to the other Sim, they go on a date, they get it on, and finally, I make their house haunted with a scary clown and some ghosts. Their relationship reaches 100 points, and I win an achievement.
MR*L, remember all those really contrite postings about how you’d Changed and you wouldn’t ever post here any more and you knew how bad it was for you?
It is bad for you. Get off the Internet right now.
HOW MANY TIMES DO i NEED TO SAY NO ONE IS ARGUING THAT. I CAN ONLY REASON SOME WOMAN SAID THAT AND WITH YOUR SOUP THEORY YOU THINK FEMINISTS HAVE A HIVE MIND.
CLAIMED BY WHO????
Then I make them go in the pool and take away the ladder, because I am a cruel god.
“Um, yes? You want advice on how to improve your life that doesn’t require you to change? I think I have identified a core problem here.”
I want advice that is consistent. As for exampel putting as much effort into oneself as one demands that the other does. Does this mean that Amanda tells BBW with a crush on Ryan Gossling that BBW should hit the gym 8 times a week and live off carrots?
Does it mean that someone with an eight-pack is well within his right to say “No Fat Chicks”?
MRA*L WHO IS SAYING ABUSERS NEVER GET INTO RELATIONSHIPS WITH PEOPLE? COME ON BINKY BOY GIVE ME SOME PROOF.
That is very hard to get from DIFFERENT PEOPLE. Sometimes we don’t always check in with the hivemind, you know?
Nobody’s demanding anything. It’s just some people are attracted to some people and not others.
If I’m only attracted to men with six-packs, I’m not demanding any particular guy do sit-ups. (In fact, it would be super awkward if he did all that work and we turned out to not have compatible personalities.) It’s just a preference I have. Other people have different preferences.
I know you want the One Secret Thing that makes you move from “no women will sleep with you ever” status to “every woman will sleep with you always” but THERE IS NO SUCH FUCKING THING BECAUSE THAT’S REALLY STUPID.
I think your problem dude is you think women are all the same and think the exact same thing….might run into some problems,….
I searched the entire thread for “Nice Guy” and did not see you show the original reference.
@ Wondering,
1.) Most people like people who are friendly and considerate much more than they like people who are jerks.
2.) People are more likely to sleep with people they like than people they don’t like.
3.) Everything else being equal, people are more likely to sleep with someone who is friendly and considerate than someone who is a jerk.
I’m confused as to which one of these points you have a problem with.
I love mras who burst in here and demand we denounce for stuff random women have said to them.
Also, Brad Pitt has been with his current girlfriend for seven years and was married for seven years before that, and if the Hollywood rumor mill is correct Tom Cruise is not exactly interested in sleeping with lots of women. You should maybe pick some different sexy movie stars to be jealous of.
How about Johnny Depp? He’s always dating strings of supermodels. Get mad at him.
Amen. I know my love life became a hundred times easier when I figured that one out.
Wondering or whoever he is is yet another halfwit crybaby who thinks that women are vending machines. Sorry, dude, but there is no cheat code for human interaction.
And if he really was in a position to grade papers as he said, holy shit should that school get their accreditation yanked.
I think I’d tell an overweight woman with a crush on Ryan Gosling to consider dating someone else, since he is a celebrity and somewhat hard to meet, unless he’s single and she actually knows him, in which case I’d encourage her to ask him out.
Oddly, this is the exact advice I’d give to a man in a similar position.
THAT WHICH DIFFERENTIATES HUGO SCHWYZER FROM N*CE G*YS IS THAT HUGO SCHWYZER DOES NOT COMPLAIN ABOUT HOW CHICKS DON’T BANG HIM EVEN THOUGH HE’S NICE WHAT A BUNCH OF BITCHES
How thick is your skull? How dense?
Opportunity costs and preferences are not commodities.
Time is not exchangeable. Two friends watching a sunset are not exchanging energy.
Skull? Density/Thickness?
Wondering: As per http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/market?s=t
a meeting of people for selling and buying. Exactly as you just described it.
No, it’s not a purchase. There is no, “value” to it. If I say, “let’s go for a walk”, is that a market-based exchange?
What about studying for the AP Phsyics exam? Sharing bench in the park? Giving someone who has a much less full cart my place in line? Letting another car into the traffic stream on the highway? Joining a game server on “America’s Army”? How about Soul CaliberV on XBoxLive?
Are those shared activities and aspects of generosity being “bought and sold”?
Because those are the parallels to sex, not going to the souk and getting a dozen flatbreads.
the fact or quality of being widely accepted and circulated from person to person.
What’s being circulated from person to person?
Of course. Women/feminists are not allowed to differentiate between different types of feminism or to identify certain sites as not being mainstream in feminism (Jezebel isn’t a feminist site by any definition, radfems are way out of the mainstream of third wave feminism, especially online, etc.), but then these whiny jackholes complain endlessly about people like Roissy not being representative of the movement and it’s so!!! unfair!!11! for David to point to them.
Other than that, this troll’s logic is hurting my brain. When you refuse to accept that your definition is wrong and then insist on using definitions to try and shut down other people, you’ve lost the plot.
Unless Ryan Gosling likes BBWs. I doubt Marcotte would tell anyone to drastically change their lifestyle and body type for the slim chance of establishing a relationship with a celebrity, however.
Everybody is well within their right to “say” they don’t want to have sex/a relationship with people who have any body type. WHY IS THIS EVEN A QUESTION?
Wondering: Rape is a problem yes. Manipulation, didn’t we just learn from Nice Guy ™ that women can sense a manipulator and therefore reject him. Or was that just to explain to the unlaid guy why he doesn’t get laid?
No, that was 1: Your assertion, based on a misuse of the Nice Guy™, and 2: wrong.
Nice Guys™ complain about how swell they are, how they buy women things, and treat them like the perfect princesses they should be, and are selfless in their adoration, and then the BITCH won’t sleep with me.
Hugo doesn’t do that. So he’s not a Nice Guy™, he’s just another manipulative douchecanoe.
Johnny Depp’s been married for like 15 years with kids and everything.
@Shaenon – actually I think Depp has been with his current girlfriend for over a decade? They have a couple of kids.
Seriously, I can’t think of any actor who is considered “hot” who is known right now for serial romances right off the top of my head. Everyone I’m thinking of is married, in a relationship or just got divorced.
My time and my energy?
“Hey, will you watch a sunset with me at Pt. Reyes this thursday? I’ll give you two hours and 1,500KC of body heat to take home.”
These words, you are misusing them. These concepts, you don’t understand them.
DAMMIT CLIFF.
;)
Ninjaed by the best of them.
Here, artist Billy Nunez reimagines “The Wizard of Oz” in China. Gorgeous artwork: http://cizgilimasallar.blogspot.com/2012/08/billy-nunez-wizard-of-oz-in-china.html#
Correction: Johnny Depp and Vanessa Paradis are partnered, not legally married.
Still, even Johnny Depp is not going out with a different supermodel every night, so, uh, too bad for the rage fantasies.
boolprop testingcheatsenabled true
right-click on sim
spawn… Sim Modder
Click on Sim Modder… make mutual with… love…
Doesn’t work that way in real life. Also that’s a really shitty way of getting sims in love, most of the time when left on free will they drop down to zero (faster if one of them is a rather pokey sim). Sims who fall in love more naturally have happier, more affectionate relationships.
I play sims way too much.
Crap crap crap, that last link was to a blog, not the artist’s own site, which is here: http://www.biz20.biz/The-Wizard-of-Oz-in-China
Didn’t Depp break up with his girlfriend a while ago?
*Every* type of dude is well within their rights to be “I’m not usually attracted to fat ladies.” as long as they aren’t a douchebag about it. Similarly, every type of dude is well within their rights to say they aren’t generally attracted to thin ladies, muscular ladies, or any other kind of lady (or even ladies at all!). You can say “no” to sex for any reason you like, we promise.
@M Dubz hello and cheers from about a hundred years back in the comments, you will never ever see this because I can’t keep up with threads, but thanks, and your cousin sounds dead cool :)
Ozy – I don’t think Wondering understands the difference between “I, Sue Smith, prefer thin men” and “All women demand all men lose weight.”
I searched the entire thread for “Nice Guy” and did not see you show the original reference.
Now for the n:th time I give reference.
heartless-bitches.com/rants/niceguys/ng.shtml
”
I love mras who burst in here and demand we denounce for stuff random women have said to them.
”
And I am still not an MRA, have never been one.
“How about Johnny Depp? He’s always dating strings of supermodels. Get mad at him.”
I am not mad, I used persons to examplifiy that yes there are people who a lot of people find atractive.
“How thick is your skull? How dense?”
So now it moves from the manipulation to the complaining.
“Are those shared activities and aspects of generosity being “bought and sold”?”
Yes.
” but then these whiny jackholes complain endlessly about people like Roissy not being representative of the movement and it’s so!!! unfair!!11! for David to point to them.”
Sort of like how triplanetary on this very site was allowed to accuse all engineers ever of being sexist randroids?
“Other than that, this troll’s logic is hurting my brain. When you refuse to accept that your definition is wrong and then insist on using definitions to try and shut down other people, you’ve lost the plot.”
Right back at you.
“Unless Ryan Gosling likes BBWs. I doubt Marcotte would tell anyone to drastically change their lifestyle and body type for the slim chance of establishing a relationship with a celebrity, however.”
But that is exactely what Amanda said in page 2 in her article on GMP.
“Everybody is well within their right to “say” they don’t want to have sex/a relationship with people who have any body type. WHY IS THIS EVEN A QUESTION?”
BECAUSE I HAVE PERSONALY SEEN FEMINISTS SCREAMING THEIR HEAD OFF ABOUT HOW ONLY SMALL-DICKED LOSER MEN WANT SLIM WOMEN FROM ASIA.
Dear god, just reject all your standards and sleep with me even though I am objectively repulsive in every conceivable way!!!!!!!!!!!!! Oh, wait, I accidentally channeled the dude who wrote this. How about instead ‘feelings of loneliness is totally normal. You’ll be fine tomorrow”
“Ozy – I don’t think Wondering understands the difference between “I, Sue Smith, prefer thin men” and “All women demand all men lose weight.”
”
So things like this http://feministing.com/2010/02/12/cry-me-a-river-john-mayer/ Are what?
Looks pretty much to me like feminists being enraged with a man talking about his preference in women.
Is this the original reference? Because—I hope you’re all sitting down—it turns out Wondering lied about this one too, as it mentions manipulation nowhere:
http://www.heartless-bitches.com/rants/niceguys/niceguys.shtml
”
Dear god, just reject all your standards and sleep with me even though I am objectively repulsive in every conceivable way!!!!!!!!!!!!! Oh, wait, I accidentally channeled the dude who wrote this. How about instead ‘feelings of loneliness is totally normal. You’ll be fine tomorrow”
”
For the final time, I don’t care about your vagina. However, and this is what is important. Don’t come running to me when you are 40 and out of value and expect me to suddenly be willing to accept the humiliation. You chose to spend your 20s and 30s with the people who made my life a living hell. Now stay with them, leave me the f-ck alone and don’t complain that now you know how it is to be told again and again and again that you have you sexual value to anyone.
“Is this the original reference? Because—I hope you’re all sitting down—it turns out Wondering lied about this one too, as it mentions manipulation nowhere:”
Are you totaly blind?
“…Whether it is targeting women who are troubled to begin with, setting themselves up to be taken advantage of, or acting in a manipulative, patronizing or obsequious fashion,”
Do you notice ” or acting in a MANIPULATIVE, patronizing or obsequious”
That makes a third reference you’ve lied about. He’s being a sexist, racist douchebag in that interview. That is not the neutral expression of personal preferences.
“That makes a third reference you’ve lied about. He’s being a sexist, racist douchebag in that interview. That is not the neutral expression of personal preferences.”
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/racist
a person who believes in racism, the doctrine that a certain human race is superior to any or all others.
Where does John Mayer express a single sentence that includes this?
Dude, nobody is going to come running to you when they’re 40 and desperate. Trust me.
No, no, no, that is what is technically referred to as “being a douchebag.” You notice the bit where he says that his penis is white supremacist? And the bit where he says that Kerry Washington is “white-girl crazy”? Yeah. That is what we are objecting to.
Now, if he said “most black women aren’t my type,” I doubt much of anyone would be upset.
“Dude, nobody is going to come running to you when they’re 40 and desperate. Trust me.”
Great, do you promise this?
Wait, wait, wait, I’m sleeping with the people who made your life a living hell? o.o Whom do you think I’m fucking?
Dude, I just searched the link I posted and every single page in this thread for that quotation. Nowhere does any of that appear.
Are YOU totally blind?
“No, no, no, that is what is technically referred to as “being a douchebag.” ”
“You notice the bit where he says that his penis is white supremacist?”
Yes? So what? He is honest with his preferences.
” And the bit where he says that Kerry Washington is “white-girl crazy”? Yeah. That is what we are objecting to.”
No it is not, as is being said.
“Right, because the only black women that are gorgeous are the ones that white men want to bone. Kenyon writes,”
Child, there is zero danger of anyone running to you with anything. You are not that important, and I am quite sure that any women of your acquaintance know better than to come to you with anything personal. All they’ll get is is “that’s great, but what about MY pain, bitch?”
Oh, God. Sex=markets and now a dictionary troll.
Wondering is MRAL? I knew this shit was familiar.
Wondering is MR*L? That explains so much.
That post on Feministing wasn’t decrying John Mayer for daring to talk about his preferences in women. It’s not like John Mayer said that he personally preferred women with straight hair or women with blue eyes or women with narrow hips, etc. If that’s what he had said, no one would have cared.
That post at Feministing was decrying the fact that John Mayer said things that were racist and sexist.
Learn to read.
Learning to read is misandry!
Totally blind, clueless, and so thick a neutrino couldn’t make it through him.
Go away, Wondering, you’re giving me a headache, seriously though I can’t parse your logic.
Dude, I just searched the link I posted and every single page in this thread for that quotation. Nowhere does any of that appear.
http://imageshack.us/f/52/tmpaug.png/
“That post at Feministing was decrying the fact that John Mayer said things that were racist and sexist. ”
He said that he was not atracted to black women. That is just as much a preference as everything else.
Wondering: So things like this http://feministing.com/2010/02/12/cry-me-a-river-john-mayer/ Are what?
Looks pretty much to me like feminists being enraged with a man talking about his preference in women
Then you don’t know how to look.
And ultimately I am forced to ask, will he be hated forever like Kanye was after his mess up at the American Music Awards? Will the victims of his little racist sexualized tirade be upheld, the way Taylor Swift has been as the “pure and innocent” victim of big bad mean Kanye? No, probably not, because it is still considered edgy, deserving and just to say racist and sexist things about black women with no accountability, mechanism for remorse or narrative to say otherwise.
And let’s be clear, his depiction of how he perceives white women also feeds into hateful ideas of women’s sexuality and fear of the vagina. It is all just very sad and very telling.
It’s not about his preferences, but about his objectification.
And again, you don’t know how to look.
. However, and this is what is important. Don’t come running to me when you are 40 and out of value and expect me to suddenly be willing to accept the humiliation. You chose to spend your 20s and 30s with the people who made my life a living hell. Now stay with them, leave me the f-ck alone and don’t complain that now you know how it is to be told again and again and again that you have you sexual value to anyone.
Who has asked you to do that? Who has done that?
No one. Not even in the OP, where a dude tells us that he is certain that’s what made this woman he is talking about cry.
He said it. Not her. You said it,. not us.
Dude… no wonder you are wondering, you don’t read.