By David Futrelle
The Gender Studies section of Yahoo Answers is a cesspool of Men’s Rights Activists and MGTOWs and other angry Red Pillers raging about feminism. But last night I came across one of the locals challenging a core tenet of Red Pill theory, wondering aloud if “a woman [can] look better when older [30’s] than she did when in her 20’s?”
“Don’t give examples of celebs,” he added, “they use too much makeup/surgeries.”
The answers were surprisingly reality-based, with most commenters acknowledging that yes indeed, some women do in fact look better in their 30s than they did in their 20s.
But no one was quite so effusive in their praise than the anonymous fellow who began his reply with a hearty “[y]ou bet they can.”
Comes a time when a woman loses that flat, soulless beauty of the mass produced Barbie doll and starts to gain a little character in her features. Provided she pays attention to her overall conditioning and health, she can be gorgeous in her 30s, 40s, 50s and beyond. Far surpassing the beauty she possessed in her teens and 20s.
Ok, that stuff at the top about the soulless Barbie dolls is a bit judgy, but at least he’s not your typical manosphere asshole obsessed with teenagers, right?
It’s at this point that his comment takes a bit of a turn.
Provided she doesn’t shave her head and become a strident, screaming bltch of a feminist good only for inclusion in a can of dog food, if you don’t care what happens to your dog.
Wait WHAT!? How did we get from talking about the gorgeousness of women in their “30s, 40s, 50s and beyond” to talking about — if I’m reading this right — grinding up feminists and using their, er, meat for dog food?
It’s times like this I begin to wonder if the internet was a mistake.