About these ads

Warren Farrell warns fellas to watch out for the “Repair Friend” Zone

Ladies! Look only at the picture of this sexy, sexy Alpha duck and do not read the post below.

Ladies! Look only at the picture of this sexy Alpha duck and do not read the post below.

Hey fellas! While we’re talking about the evils of the Friend Zone and possible legal sanctions against the women who so often and so maliciously put us there — and while the women are distracted by that picture of Scrooge McDuck above — I’d like to warn you of another kind of Friend Zone you need to be wary of: the “Repair Friend” Zone.

I learned of this danger from none other than Warren Farrell himself, in the pages of his book Women Can’t Hear What Men Don’t Say (which amazingly does not have the subtitle “But It’s Not Like Angry Dudes On The Internet Are Going to Shut Up Any Time Soon”).

Here’s how old Warren explains it, perhaps exaggerating the innocence of the wily female Repair-Friend Zoners:

Single moms who rely on male friends for repairs — “he’s just a repair friend” — are often unaware that the man really isn’t sacrificing his Sunday afternoon in exchange for a Sunday night dinner. The truth is, if he’s making that type of sacrifice, it’s usually because he’s interested in her.

That’s right, ladies! Men never actually want to be just friends with you. Never. And when they act friendly, it’s just because they want to [insert weird creepy Warren Farrellesque euphemism for sex here]. Only instead of making a move on you they’d rather make a move on your car, and just sort of hope you’ll get the hint.

I’ve seen many single moms who have men who they claim are “just friends” work on their cars, do repairs, help them move. They think nothing of it. (Which says it all.) When she starts dating someone seriously, the “repair friend” feels hurt and her new boyfriend feels suspicious. And Mom feels caught between a rock and a hard place, so to speak.

Is Farrell making some sort of awkward boner joke here?

Anyway, for Farrell, this is somehow all the fault of women, and feminism, or misandry, or something.

This attitude rests on a deeper foundation. Just as women who are poor turn to the government as a substitute husband (in the form of welfare and AFDC payments), so women without husbands often unconsciously turn to substitute husbands, such as dads, “repair friends,”and male neighbors.

So, fellas, be careful out there. One moment you’ll be chatting casually over the fence with the former Mrs. Jones, and the next thing you know you’ll be in her basement buried deep in her washing machine trying to fix, I dunno, whatever is inside of washing machines that might need fixing, I’m not really very mechanical.

Come to think of it a female friend of mine had me change a light bulb the other day that she couldn’t reach. Granted, I don’t want to have sex with her, and also she’s fixed my bike on several occasions and sometimes brings me cake, but, still, I think I may have just been Light Bulb Friend Zoned.

About these ads

Posted on May 17, 2013, in antifeminism, evil single moms, friend zone, friend zoning, I'm totally being sarcastic, misogyny, MRA, patronizing as heck, the myth of warren farrell and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. 692 Comments.

  1. The Nice Guy found out about this, and spread a rumor that he had sex with the girl who ruined his chance, got her pregnant, and then she miscarried.

    Wow. That is one of the more appalling Nice Guy stories I’ve read.

  2. What a complete shit. I wonder if he ever grew up, metaphorphosed into a human being, and regretted what he’d done?

    I’m guessing not.

  3. augochlorella

    The Nice Guy found out about this, and spread a rumor that he had sex with the girl who ruined his chance, got her pregnant, and then she miscarried.

    Thus proving beyond all reasonable doubt that he was not an asshole. Good job, guy.

  4. The interesting thing about that is it shows that he could understand rejecting someone on the basis of not being interested in them, as long as he was the one doing it. After all, he would supposedly have rejected any woman who showed an interest in him for the rest of his life* (you know, because icky girl cooties). But a woman rejecting him? After he’d already invested time and energy into being her “friend”? Apparently that was inexplicable.

    There’s a deeply ingrained cultural sense that stereotypical male criteria for women are not only acceptable but assumed, while female criteria for men are completely unreasonable. For instance, refusing to date fat women is so expected that guys who do date overweight women get a serious side-eye, while women who reject guys based on their looks are shallow bitches. Remember that awful “Women of LA” video?

    This is obviously closely tied to the invisibility of non-conventionally attractive women. It wouldn’t occur to these guys that they’re being picky by being unwilling to date fat women because it wouldn’t occur to them that they’re women (or people) at all.

  5. Dear god, I didn’t realize how terrifying a Rand wank could be until Buttman — or whatever his name is, spilled his guts all over this thread. Rand’s work as romantic? *Shiver* But after the creepy crawlies ceased, I decided his fawning was mostly hilarious:

    “…the thing about Atlas Shrugged is that it’s so beautifully masculine.”

    So much so that it had to be written by a woman!!!

    “She (Dagny Taggart) refuses to fuck with any man that isn’t a reflection of her strong values. When she does find her ideal men, she screws their brains out. I’m talking about them throwing her lovers up against the wall high school bully style kind of sex.”

    There’s a style of sex based on high school bullying? Huh. Admittedly, I don’t keep up with every fetish out there.

    “The hair pulling, chest biting, celebration of life kind of sex. The kind of passionate love making that only 2 people who truly love and admire each other share…”

    OK, at this point, I felt like I was reading a soccer mom’s review of a Harlequin Romance novel.

    “…It boldly states that men who aren’t valuable don’t deserve to be loved.”

    Ohhhhh, how romantic! Wonder how he defines “valuable.” Being able to engineer a train? His sentiments are wildly inhumane…but hey, Rand fan-boys, you know.

    “There’s no mincing of words, no rainbow colored Disney fantasies, no sympathy sex for loosers just the cold hard truth. Be a productive man or GTFO…”

    Wow, it almost sounds like he’s agreeing with all the people here who said a man shouldn’t get sex tokens for fixing a woman’s toilet.

  6. Hi everybody. And particularly Athywren! I comment very intermittently but lurk a lot, and I have been enjoying your posts. :D

    That point about not understanding fun is so on point I think. Whenever they describe how they see relationships – any degree of relationship, from workmates to partners – I feel like they’ve never actually had one. They speak in stereotypes and never sound like they’ve had a genuine feeling in their lives. It’s bizarre.

    That said, I think there is a certain subset of the population that kind of lives through stereotype, which is probably where MRAs get young guys. Young and yet to have any strong opinions, exposed to only pop media, from a non-abusive and politically indifferent family, not used to dealing with analysis and the hard work of being critical about themselves and the world around them. It’s tiring fighting against the constant barrage of gender policing, and it can hurt like hell to be rejected/have someone leave you.

    Which is how MRAs aren’t doing anyone any favours because rather than telling teenagers that it’s normal to hurt and it doesn’t mean they’re a bad person and they will meet more people – they tell them they’re right to feel alone and alienated, and it’s women’s fault. Which is basically telling them they should feel bad about themselves at the same time as hating women: lose-lose. -_-

    I work with a woman who I find sometimes like an alien (I’m pretty sure she feels the same way about me, haha.) She’s perfectly pleasant to work with and we can chat well enough. But she is genuinely super amused by those terrible radio shows which are basically a constant rendition of “BOYS like this and GIRLS like that, tee hee.” She appears to have planned her life around getting married and having babies; and now she’s had her child doesn’t feel like she “has” to have sex with her husband any more. When we were talking about anal sex in the staffroom she was utterly mindblown that any woman would actually *like* it. Talking to her I feel like there’s nothing there. That sounds super mean but it’s just like she has no strong opinions about anything, she’s just following a script.

    I can’t remember if it was this thread but ARH Kitteh, that thing about the drowning possum. Reading stuff like that is always a punch in the chest for me. :'(

  7. thebionicmommy

    There’s a deeply ingrained cultural sense that stereotypical male criteria for women are not only acceptable but assumed, while female criteria for men are completely unreasonable. For instance, refusing to date fat women is so expected that guys who do date overweight women get a serious side-eye, while women who reject guys based on their looks are shallow bitches.

    This double standard has always bothered me. A similar double standard I’ve noticed is the one where people say that girls are annoying for having crushes on male celebrities. It’s sooo awful for a girl to have a crush on Justin Beiber or whoever, but it’s just fine for boys to have crushes on female celebrities. Straight men go wild for women like Rihanna or Britney Spears, and people accept that, but a straight woman gushes about some handsome football player or rock star and “Oh no, what a shallow bitch! How dare she say that she is attracted to someone she finds attractive!”

  8. That said, I think there is a certain subset of the population that kind of lives through stereotype, which is probably where MRAs get young guys. Young and yet to have any strong opinions, exposed to only pop media, from a non-abusive and politically indifferent family, not used to dealing with analysis and the hard work of being critical about themselves and the world around them. It’s tiring fighting against the constant barrage of gender policing, and it can hurt like hell to be rejected/have someone leave you.

    Interesting idea. Now I’m wondering how many MRAs fit into that profile.

  9. G’day Hrovitnir!

    “I can’t remember if it was this thread but ARH Kitteh, that thing about the drowning possum. Reading stuff like that is always a punch in the chest for me. :’(”

    That’s how I felt reading it. I don’t know if she made it up as an example of how she’d react or if it was real, but it filled me with loathing for her or anyone who’d do such a thing, or condone it, or think it funny. I don’t give a shit at this point if it’s something in the brain, it’s fucking evil.

  10. Back to the relationships/fun – Louis and I just spent our time at Home last night drinking tea and talking. Talking. About things that matter to us, ourselves, our feelings for each other. Not fun in the sense of laughing, but we took a helluva lot of pleasure in it.

    Can you imagine these emotionally-dead-except-for-the-rage MRAs and NiceGuysTM and so on doing that? I can’t.

  11. CassandraSays

    There’s a deeply ingrained cultural sense that stereotypical male criteria for women are not only acceptable but assumed, while female criteria for men are completely unreasonable. For instance, refusing to date fat women is so expected that guys who do date overweight women get a serious side-eye, while women who reject guys based on their looks are shallow bitches.

    Remember Mr Al and the great Russell Brand wank? Of all the things that we talk about here it was the idea that women have physical preferences and will reject sex with men they don’t find attractive enough that caused him to have a public meltdown. This seems to be particularly common among young men, who’re encountering the reality that women do indeed have physical preferences and their culture has lied to them by telling them otherwise for the first time.

    I use an icon based on a concert photo of a super hot guy on sites that need icons, like Jezebel, and you would not believe the number of times random guys have yelled at me about it “because feminists are supposed to be against objectification”. It’s just a photo of the guy playing his instrument, nothing particularly shocking about it, but omg hot guy with a bare chest how dare you.

    It’s funny, and that response is part of the reason why I’ve kept that icon for so long.

  12. katz | May 21, 2013 at 5:11 pm
    Interesting idea. Now I’m wondering how many MRAs fit into that profile.

    It’s kind of my theory on social injustice in general. It’s work to think about all the issues in the world, let alone fight back even by pointing out issues. And who actively teaches their kids about the bad things in the world, and that there is no “karma” the way westerners like to use it, or just critical thinking in general? Not many.

    It’s also an observation from being pretty fucked up (as I call it) from my childhood. And many of my friends have abusive backgrounds. But I have found many people with “normal” upbringings just don’t have the empathy and breadth of understanding the people who’ve had to struggle to exist. Doesn’t mean I think that’s a good thing, but it’s a thing.

    Kittehserf | May 21, 2013 at 6:27 pm
    Louis and I just spent our time at Home last night drinking tea and talking. Talking. About things that matter to us, ourselves, our feelings for each other. Not fun in the sense of laughing, but we took a helluva lot of pleasure in it.

    Can you imagine these emotionally-dead-except-for-the-rage MRAs and NiceGuysTM and so on doing that? I can’t.

    I know, right?? I read some of their shit and just think of the sexual and romantic, and hell, platonic relationships I’ve had… the time I’ve enjoyed with those people just seems in a different universe to the MRA worldview. O_o

    thebionicmommy | May 21, 2013 at 4:59 pm
    This double standard has always bothered me. A similar double standard I’ve noticed is the one where people say that girls are annoying for having crushes on male celebrities. It’s sooo awful for a girl to have a crush on Justin Beiber or whoever, but it’s just fine for boys to have crushes on female celebrities.

    Note: this ended up ridiculously long and I don’t have the energy to make it better so… sorry? Least succinct thing ever.
    That dichotomy is annoying for so many reasons.

    1. It assumes all men are attracted to all women who are culturally deemed attractive which results in (a) men not being allowed personal tastes/being attracted to more than the perfect hip-waist-ratio/arse/what-the-fuck-ever. It seems to result in men being expected to approve of shit movies if they’ve got titties, and women being mocked for criticising said movies, which creates a feedback loop where men feel like they have to defend this to be manly and women’s opinions are dismissed. Sexuality doesn’t seem to come into this at all.

    2. This simultaneously exists with the first double-standard (of only men getting standards: pre-written whether they like them or not) which leads to the normalcy of people picking female actresses looks apart to a completely ridiculous degree, if it wasn’t gross enough to blatantly value someone for their looks above all else. And once again, it’s seen as “bitchyness” or jealousy if a woman disagrees with a man.

    3. The overall rigidity of expectations grates on me in general. Young men are “just being boys” but their attractions can only be looks-based: no personality for you. Young women’s crushes are childish and stupid: men can’t be attractive, ew. Not-young men are expected to point out, it feels continuously, that SHE’S HOT*. Older women are just gross, I mean how dare over-20 yo women be turned on by anyone, especially pretty men. Remember, women being attracted to a man based on looks is shallow! And bad! But pretty men are always in some way deficient. Except when he’s a MANLY MAN in which case she’s stupid for being sucked in. ARG.

    3a. *I am so sick of men having to point out the hotness of someone in this particular way that seems really “look at me, I like ladies! I expect you won’t like me saying this but I’ll say it anyway!” There is a subtle but distinct different between just commenting and seeming to test your female friend’s tolerance of your comments.

    This is a pet peeve of mine because I rather enjoy watching attractive women wearing skimpy clothing. But I also resent when they can’t run because of their shoes, can’t fight but that’s OK because their boobs jiggle when they do it, and the complete lack of depth to their characters. I don’t want to have to constantly point out that I find women attractive too, or have to enjoy that to be able to criticise a movie that is more boobs than plot. *mutter mutter*

  13. I use an icon based on a concert photo of a super hot guy on sites that need icons, like Jezebel, and you would not believe the number of times random guys have yelled at me about it “because feminists are supposed to be against objectification”.

    Those sound like some really fun random guys 9_9. Does anybody have a go-to link that clearly explains the difference between being attracted physically to someone and objectifying them? Because whenever someone claims that the two are equivalent it makes me want to pull out all of my hair.

  14. CassandraSays

    I can understand that well enough, but most* of the guys I’ve spoken to on the subject have been in 1-3 year old, childless relationships, which is why it’s confusing to me.
    *Not all, but obviously the new parents are expected, as you say, to be less active for a while.

    Maybe they’re just really bad in bed, and one the significant other realized that wasn’t a temporary/need to figure out the other person’s preferences thing she lost interest in sex with them.

  15. CassandraSays

    I did try to explain that “I find this person attractive” is not the same thing as objectification, and then they yelled at me some more. Which is, again, part of why I’m keeping the icon! It annoys the sort of people who deserve to be annoyed.

  16. There’s this game I like to play when in meatspace or while visiting online forums. When the conversation starts to go towards the “She’s so hawt” direction, I make a comment about actors and see what happens. I don’t mind dudes pointing out women they think are attractive, I just don’t think every subject has to be dominated by cis male\ interests. Also, I’m a shit and like to make these guys uncomfortable. One time these guys were going on and on about girls kissing each other in movies, and I mentioned how I kept waiting for Christian Bale and Sam Worthington to get it on in “Terminator: Salvation.” I mean, seriously, they had some serious chemistry going on. I got dead silence in return. There’s nothing more uncomfortable to these guys then female sexuality or even just preferences.

  17. CassandraSays

    Velvet Goldmine. Remember that scene with Christian Bale and Ewan McGregor? It’s very useful for illustrating how strong that particular double standard is.

    This is also the reason I have a lingering affection for visual kei despite it’s tendency to take the 90% of everything is crap rule and extend it to 99%. I just like the idea of a genre that flips the script and has mostly straight men pretend to make out for the entertainment of a female audience, plus the focus on men being pretty in general.

  18. I loved Velvet Goldmine, Cassandra. The soundtrack, to me, was incredilble.

    And of course, the idea of a female gaze is terrifying — should certain people not know what that is, take a look: http://www.flickfilosopher.com/blog/2010/06/061410defining_the_female_gaze.html

  19. Does anybody have a go-to link that clearly explains the difference between being attracted physically to someone and objectifying them? Because whenever someone claims that the two are equivalent it makes me want to pull out all of my hair.

    If they’re dumb enough to fail to understand rhe difference between treating someone like an object and saying that they look nice, not even a good link can save them, really. But here’s a good link. Warning, the first commentator is terribly stupid.

  20. CassandraSays

    Part of the reason I’m so in-your-face about my preferences is because it does freak some men out so much. I figure it’s like free therapy – it’s good for them to confront how totally wrong their assumptions about female sexuality are.

  21. “Part of the reason I’m so in-your-face about my preferences is because it does freak some men out so much. I figure it’s like free therapy – it’s good for them to confront how totally wrong their assumptions about female sexuality are.”

    Uh-huh. This.

  22. thebionicmommy

    If people don’t believe there is a double standard on how straight men are allowed to have preferences and women are shallow bitches for the same thing, I think it’s good to ask them this about Beauty and the Beast

    If Disney made a new version of the movie Beauty and the Beast where the roles were reversed, how do you think people would react? What if a man was the beautiful person and a woman were the beast? Would people expect the handsome man to look past her being a literal beast and judge her only on her personality, intelligence, and kindness? I honestly don’t think such a movie would be made in the first place. The main requirement for a Disney princess is that she has to be beautiful.

    In the movie The Hunchback of Notre Dame, though, it was okay for Esmerelda to pick the man she was attracted to. Both Quasimodo and Phoebus loved her, and she chose Phoebus, who was more conventionally attractive. The movie didn’t make her a villian or a shallow bitch for it either. Quasimodo was hurt about it, but he had to come around and accept that she does not owe her love to him even though she cared for him as a friend. Nice guys™ would probably accuse her of “friendzoning” though.

  23. The way a few of our trolls here have carried on about how heeedjus they are, they could practically do the whole “The bells! The bells!” schtick …

  24. CassandraSays

    …Quasimodo was kind of short, right?

  25. Actually, I don’t think “Beast” in that particular “Beauty and the Beast” movie was particularly, well, beastly.

    Sure, he didn’t look human and sure, everyone tells you: “Oh, he’s a terrible beast that one!”. But it always struck me as a very informed attribute, something someone just said and we’re meant to accept. I mean, what exactly is so beastly about the Beast? His strength, kindness, cunning, intelligence, symmetrical eyes, beautiful fur, large tusks, hulking figure? There was nothing overtly… disgusting, I guess? No clear focus were you could obviously see “This is what the witch meant to turn him into!”.

    At best, he’s just obviously Not Human. Quasimodo is a much, much better example of something not being conventionally attractive – which is why I’m somewhat amused by the difference (Rose and the Beast do get together, Quasimodo and Esmeralda do not HELLFIRE HELLFIRE, sorry, I have to do whenever I write Esmeral— no).

    I would love to see a reversed version though, where the Princess is the Beast and some lowly scullion is the person to come to her castle. There’d be some rose from a former lover, and a story, and dancing lamps and a chandelier choir.

  26. The first version of Beauty and the Beast I knew was in the Little Golden Book “Blue Book of Fairy Tales”. I adored the illustrations in that book, and thought the Beast just gorgeous- and the prince at the end a very poor substitute.

    (I thought Beauty with her stunning hair and the sleeves that came over her hands was pretty damn cool, too.)

  27. In the movie The Hunchback of Notre Dame, though, it was okay for Esmerelda to pick the man she was attracted to. Both Quasimodo and Phoebus loved her, and she chose Phoebus, who was more conventionally attractive. The movie didn’t make her a villian or a shallow bitch for it either.

    But some of my friends sure did. We would have all watched it as young children (it came out when I was 7) and I remember discussing it with some friends when we were 13 or so. General conclusion, from the boys and the girls, was that Esmerelda wasn’t very nice to reject Quasimodo and that it was, in fact, very shallow to choose the more handsome man. I seem to also remember something about how of course she was shallow, because she was beautiful, and beautiful women never learn compassion because everyone worships them and they just lap it up. Or something. I’m probably not relaying the details perfectly from this conversation more than a decade ago XD. But it’s interesting how young we are when we internalize these toxic messages about men and women.

    Looking back on it now I realize that two men were interested in Esmerelda, so unless she was going to set up a polyamorous relationship she had to reject at least one of them. And Phoebus was kind to her too, so would my child friends have believed that he also deserved a relationship in return, like Quasimodo did? I actually think they probably wouldn’t have, because Quasimodo deserved to “get the girl” because he was the protagonist. Which is how I think a lot of “Nice GuysTM” view themselves.

  28. Which version of Hunchback have people seen, btw? Are we talking the Disney cartoon? When I think of Quasimodo I think of Lon Chaney or Charles Laughton.

  29. Re: beauty and the beast

    I think the beast (in disney’s version) actually was kind of beastly, what with the anger issues and everything.

    I also remember (as a little kid) being disappointed when he turned into a prince, too, though, because I thought his beast form was cute, like a puppy, and his human form was dull.

  30. thebionicmommy

    I was discussing the Disney version. I don’t know, do the other versions also have a beautiful woman make a choice between a handsome hero or Quasimodo? If so, it would work the same way for them, too.

    And Phoebus was kind to her too, so would my child friends have believed that he also deserved a relationship in return, like Quasimodo did? I actually think they probably wouldn’t have, because Quasimodo deserved to “get the girl” because he was the protagonist. Which is how I think a lot of “Nice GuysTM” view themselves.

    Exactly. Both men were good. They both helped Esmerelda and treated her well. Phoebus is an important character, but still secondary to Quasimodo. So when people assume that Quasimodo “deserved” Esmerelda, it’s because they’re so used to viewing female characters as prizes for the main protagonist. I have seen some cases where a female protagonist “wins” a man, but it’s not as common as the other.

    But it’s interesting how young we are when we internalize these toxic messages about men and women.

    Exactly, it can be hard to pick up on these messages because they are so common. Even when we pick up on them, it can also be hard to verbalize what exactly it is that is wrong. So if someone says, “Esmerelda was mean for rejecting Quasimodo!”, I might think “I know there is something wrong with that, but I can’t quite put into words why that is wrong”.

  31. thebionicmommy

    Sorry to double post, but I forgot to say add me to the list of people who were disappointed in the human version of the Beast. He looked like he should be on the cover of a cheesy romance novel, or a Fabio wannabe.

  32. I have always been disappointed because Beast had a wonderful voice (I guess they mixed in some animal growls) and the prince’s voice wasn’t nearly as interesting.

  33. @fibinachi

    Actually, I don’t think “Beast” in that particular “Beauty and the Beast” movie was particularly, well, beastly.

    Me too. I liked him better as the beast because a) he looked so generic as the prince and b) he was so cute and fluffy! /I am weird.

  34. CassandraSays

    The Disney beast basically just looked like he was half human and half lion – nonhuman, but not hideous or particularly scary looking. What was beastly about him was that he had anger management issues that made it seem like he might turn violent at any time, which could have been an interesting metaphor in the hands of a company less devoted to reinforcing backwards social tropes as Disney.

    The fact that Viscaria’s friends got angry at Esmerelda for picking the one she was more attracted to out of the two men who were both equally kind to her just makes me sad, especially if some of them were girls. This stuff really does start early. I wonder how much of it is cultural-dependent, though? I seem to have completely missed out on the “you shouldn’t prefer good looking men and if you do you are a bad woman who should feel bad” programming, and I’m not sure if that was because of the place and time I grew up in or just because my parents didn’t reinforce any of those ideas* and a lot of cultural programming starts with the parents.

    *Quite the opposite in fact – both of my parents were always quite vocal about the idea that certain boys who were showing an interest in me just weren’t cute enough or interesting enough for me to consider dating.

  35. With Hunchback – it’s interesting how far any of the films are from the book. Partly it’s from censorship in the 20s and 30s. In the original story, Phoebus is an arsehole who’s only interested getting Esmerelda into bed. She’s in fact the protagonist, not Quasimodo, and both of them end up dead (I think Phoebus does, too) – she is hanged and Quasimodo seems to starve to death at her grave, where his skeleton is found later. There’s really no question of her choosing between Phoebus and Quasimodo, because although she pities the latter, she’s also repulsed by him to the point where she won’t let him kiss her hand. The story is as much about Notre Dame as any of the characters: its original title is Notre Dame de Paris.

    /wiki, source of all knowledge

  36. Countering Feminist Horseshit

    Feminist Lies. In the MRM it is very well known, and accepted, that women are looks-focused. Attempts to deny this are bald-faced lies, because is the fulcrum upon which the “carousel” and “hypergamy” tropes operate.

  37. CassandraSays

    Can I suggest that maybe we just ignore socky? After all, we’ve all ridden this particular carousel many times before, and it’s gotten a little dull.

  38. “What you’re saying must be lies, because otherwise our made up theories might not be true” does not count as evidence, dudebro.

  39. Oh, okay, I guess. What should we talk about then?

  40. CassandraSays

    I mean if anyone feels like another ride on the creaky old horse would be fun then go for it? I’m just really bored with this particular brand of trolling.

  41. I’m only gonna poke the troll on the other thread (unless you guys want us to ignore him on both). But otherwise he’s gonna be stinking up two threads.

    The only thing I’ve got on my mind is I’ve had a headache all day and I still have to clean my guinea pigs’ cage :(

    …um I hope I’m making sense today.

  42. CassandraSays

    Actually I think he’s posted (the same thing) on pretty much every active thread now.

  43. @cassandrasays

    Wow. guess I don’t have many open, cuz I thought it was just the two. :p Why’s he wanna stink up all our threads?

    Well, what’s up with you all over here?

  44. Anyone want my recipe for vegan tuna salad?

  45. CassandraSays

    Right now I feel like he’s that one shitty song that every radio station is playing every 10 minutes because payola is still a thing.

  46. CassandraSays

    Vegan tuna? Confused as to how this could be a thing.

  47. Feminist Lies. In the MRM it is very well known, and accepted, that women are looks-focused. Attempts to deny this are bald-faced lies, because is the fulcrum upon which the “carousel” and “hypergamy” tropes operate.

    Fulcrum? Are you fucking kidding me?

    What’s with MRAs and their horrible pretentiousness?

    Also, fuck off you misogynistic dipshit. Your claim for your support for equality is a lie.

  48. It just tastes vaguely like tuna salad. Take about a cup of cooked chickpeas and mash them up, add chopped red onion or scallions, parsley, capers, and mix with a little vegan mayo and lemon juice to taste. Surprisingly tasty. YMMV.

  49. @cloudiah

    That does sound nice. I’d check out the recipe if you want to post it :)

  50. That reminds me, I’ve a tin of four-bean mix and a tin of tuna in the cupboard. I really should boil up some pasta and mix ‘em up.

    ::drools::

  51. thebionicmommy

    I mean if anyone feels like another ride on the creaky old horse would be fun then go for it? I’m just really bored with this particular brand of trolling.

    I like this troll! Can we keep him? Please, I promise to clean up after him. I’ll never ask for anything again, I promise.

    Mr. Feminist Horseshit, can you please enlighten us about this cock carousel? I’ve never seen such a ride, not even at Silver Dollar City.

  52. Mr. Feminist Horseshit, can you please enlighten us about this cock carousel? I’ve never seen such a ride, not even at Silver Dollar City.

    Didn’t they replace it with the Alpha Cock Rollercoaster?

  53. I like the Alpha Cock Teacups.

  54. Alpha Cock Teacups should totally be a thing.

    … I now have an itch to do a pic of Sir drinking from one.

  55. thebionicmommy

    Is the alpha cock roller coaster also called the roller coaster of love? Sorry, I couldn’t resist.

  56. thebionicmommy

    You give me that funny feeling in my tummy.

  57. Yes! Because love’s one of those four-letter words that MRAs get frothy about despite having NO idea what it means.

  58. Yummy, yummy, yummy, I’ve got love in my tummy

  59. But some of my friends sure did. We would have all watched it as young children (it came out when I was 7) and I remember discussing it with some friends when we were 13 or so. General conclusion, from the boys and the girls, was that Esmerelda wasn’t very nice to reject Quasimodo and that it was, in fact, very shallow to choose the more handsome man. I seem to also remember something about how of course she was shallow, because she was beautiful, and beautiful women never learn compassion because everyone worships them and they just lap it up. Or something. I’m probably not relaying the details perfectly from this conversation more than a decade ago XD. But it’s interesting how young we are when we internalize these toxic messages about men and women.

    I reacted similarly, but I put the blame not on Esmerelda as a character, but on Disney: Every other guy is handsome and gets rewarded with a girlfriend; Quasimodo is ugly, so he doesn’t get one. Because, setting aside the gender aspect, there is an undertone of “people should love you for who you are and not for how you look, but they shouldn’t, like, kiss you, because you’re a hideous hunchback and ew.”

  60. Busband goes over to fix things for our elderly neighbour all the time. Does that mean he wants to get with her, and the only reason he hasn’t is b/c she repair-friendzoned him? Come to think of it… I do stuff for her too. Holy crap, have I been repair-friendzoned? Why won’t my elderly neighbour sleep with me already? That’s it, I’m not letting her borrow my shopping buggy ANYMORE.

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 7,456 other followers

%d bloggers like this: