Category Archives: evil women
>Shopping pissed
>
 |
| Woman Oppressing Men |
The oppression of men by mean, evil, surly women continues apace. Today: the verbal and psychological abuse heaped upon men by — brace yourself — female sales clerks. We turn to The Spearhead forums for evidence of this perfidy.
Kinetic opened up the discussion with a tale of a recent shopping excursion. It started out innocently enough with a trip to a tobacconist. Expecting to see men behind the counter at such a manly business, kinetic was horrified to find a pair of women instead. I’m sorry: C*nts. (That’s how they spell the word on The Spearhead.)
I ask for some good tobacco, and straight away one of the women give me attitude. So I say I want something thats not perfumed, something ‘male’, she says “you want what??!”, I say “forget it”. Im not put money in this c*nts pocket.
Im so sick of women. This tobacconist is a little shop thats meant to specialize, and this bitch first points me to the over the counter stuff which is available anywhere, then gives me attitude. It f*cking annoys me.
But this was not the end of the oppression inflicted on our poor hero by these dastardly women.
I then went to buy some new clothes from a major retailer, got to the counter, another woman there, I didnt say a word. She bags the stuff up, says “thanks”. I say nothing, take the clothes and walk off.
Can you imagine! She does her job, then says “thanks.” What an outrage!
As far as Im concerned they can all bollocks. Im not buying anything from a small female run business, and when I have to buy from the big department stores, Im not even going to say please or thankyou. They can simply f*ck off.
I’m sure they will dearly miss your business.
Clearly moved by Kinetic’s sad tale, Nurb piped up with words of support:
I know how you feel. I came to that same conclusion a few years back. When I go to the shops I act as if women don’t exist. I avoid eye contact as well, I can’t even stand to look at them because I know they’re just going to start me off with their cowshit. A woman who run’s their mouth just pisses me off to the point where I’d want to deck the fucker right there.
A woman talking in a store? Clearly deserving a punch in the head. Also: Note that Nurb has used the correct term in this context: “cowshit.” Women are, as we all know, incapable of “bullshit.” They can only manage the clearly inferior “cowshit.”
But are all female clerks equally evil? misterb suggested his comrades adopt a somewhat more nuanced view.
Personally I can tolerate a female attitude from a white woman and even a white male to female transsexual, never from a black woman or a latino woman. … I am not going give her my hard earn cents. …
If it’s an Asian woman or a Muslim woman I would classify her as a supremacist and a narcissistic asshat
A few commenters raised their eyebrows at this suggestion. “Why tolerate it from any female?” asked trent13.
Is there any solution to this kind of oppression? Several commenters suggested a kind of uncivil disobedience. Zebert suggested not buying anything from female sales clerks or sales representatives of any kind. ‘Women are the reason our species may exterminate itself,” he added later, in response to a commenter who was insufficiently outraged by the behavior of the sales clerks in question. “All human conflict exists due to women.”
But it was J. Durden who suggested an even more effective kind of incivility.
I remember when I was the assistant manager of a watch sales / repair shop, I had a policy to treat attractive women terrible. It was my way of balancing out the world (for myself), since I was sure their good looks got them tons of perks – drinks, getting out of tickets, etc.
It is from small gestures of defiance like this that revolutions begin.
J. Durden, I would call you the Rosa Parks of the Men’s Rights Movement, but I suspect that wouldn’t go over very well, given that Rosa Parks was, you know, a woman.
EDITED TO ADD: Thanks to Miranda for passing along a link to this lovely conversation.
Also, just so everyone knows: I’m totally being sarcastic in this post. (Except right now.) Indeed, I’d like to take this opportunity to introduce everyone to the “I’m totally being sarcastic” tag (see below), which will hopefully clear up any potential confusion in the future.
>What Women Think of Men, Apparently
>
 |
| She’s thinking unkind things about your penis. |
Yesterday we met Christopher in Oregon, a fellow who feels that other fellows might want to avoid all contact with women, who are all, as he put it, “whores … walking cesspools of filth … DIRTY creatures, pure and simple.”
Christopher was such an articulate spokesman for his cause that I thought I’d bring him back for an encore. Today, we learn that the hatred doesn’t only flow one way. In fact, he suggests in another epic comment on Marky Mark’s blog, women think as poorly of men as he thinks of women. Not just some of them, but every single one of them:
ALL women hate ALL men ALL of the time! (most of them can keep it hidden for some time.)
This is a CARDINAL RULE! If you can’t accept it, you’ve already lost the game. You’re rat-fucked! You might as well just give up and go hang yourself by getting married!
In case we forgot that women aren’t too be trusted, he gives us a little refresher course in the Evil That is Woman:
You can’t deal with women safely because we aren’t playing by the same rules. One must keep in mind that the three primary characteristics of All women are as follows:
1) Immoral (or amoral, if you prefer)
2) Dishonest
3) Selfish
Many other adjectives would apply, but these three are the main attributes of women. Since this is true, and the laws are on their side, a man can’t hope to break even in any dealings with women. It’s impossible.
Now we come to the crux of his argument. More sensitive men may wish to sit down at this point, and perhaps move to protect their testicles. For what Christopher has somehow figured out about what goes on inside the dirty, filthy, selfish, dishonest, immoral, whorish minds of women while they’re having sex with you will shock you to your core.
Every time you are humping and grinding and snorting like a rutting pig on top of a woman thinking you are SUCH a stud (in all fairness, you probably are NOT) she is:
1) Bored
2) Faking it
3) Disgusted
4) Glad she took her valium first
5) Fantasizing about a black man
6) Fantasizing about a new car
7) Fantasizing about the butch lesbian that drilled her last week with a ten-inch strap-on for six hours
8) Laughing inside about your pitifully small penis
9) Comparing you unfavorably to any one of her previous two-hundred partners
10) Wishing you would go even faster and trigger … a massive coronary
11) Fantasizing about the neighbor’s German Shepherd
12) Thinking about how your deodorant just ain’t making it
Sorry to burst your bubble. I’ve heard this from women. It’s all a sick joke. You are NOT Don Juan, and they don’t view you as such. In her mind, you are a disgusting, smelly pig, and you are invading her body with that…..thing.
Well, if that’s what he thinks women think of men, no wonder he wants to have nothing to do with them.
It’s kind of sad, really.
On a not-entirely-unrelated note, if you scroll up to the top of the page on Marky Mark’s blog on which this comment from Christopher is posted, you will note that Mr. Mark has worked himself into a lather over a story in The Onion. I can’t quite tell if he thinks it’s real — I mean, how could he? — but he acts as though he does. He even writes up a point-by-point rebuttal and everything. It’s so cute! As he puts it, unaware of the irony, “I can’t make this stuff up. … I can’t! No matter how hard I tried, I could not make this up.” Well, no. That’s why the folks at The Onion make it up for you.
>Shakespeare before hoes
>
A female friend of mine asked me the other day how Men Going Their Own Way (MGTOW) handle the question of sex — as in, how can these guys deal with their desire to have sex with women if they swear off women? It’s a good question, and one I still don’t have a comprehensive answer to. Some pine for sexbots, some masturbate, some seek salvation in supposedly more pliable non-Western women.
And then there’s Christopher in Oregon. He’s got his own plan, which involves motorcycles, Beethoven, and Robert Frost. Here’s how he spelled it out in a mini-manifesto he posted as a comment on Marky Mark’s blog.
First, Christopher defines the problem, as he sees it:
Women are whores. They are far more likely to have STD’s than men. Be aware of this. Handle with extreme care. Women are filthy, and they will lie about their infections. Condoms will NOT protect you.
So what can a poor boy do?
The simplest and wisest choice is to be as I am- a gender separatist. I have no social dealings with women (with the exception of my two lesbo neighbors).
LEAVE THEM ALONE, fellows!
But some of them are kind of, like, all sexy and shit.
Women are walking cesspools of filth! Most of them have or will have a permanent STD infection. It is unavoidable. These are FACTS, and not the rantings of an unstable misogynist.
(I’m a very STABLE misogynist, thank you kindly)
Women are DIRTY creatures, pure and simple. Be dignified, and don’t lower yourself to engaging in any filthy behavior with them. You WILL be infected with the diseases they are carrying. A moral, dignified man does NOT rut like an animal with one of these creatures. Sexual intercourse and oral sex are filthy, disgusting activities, and ruin a man morally. They spread disease.
Ok, ok. But what if you still want to rut like an animal with filthy women? Sublimate, sublimate, sublimate. And pull out some of the books you picked up in that one English-for-non-majors class you took in college.
Elevate yourself above such filth of the flesh.
Listen to classical music. Read Shakespeare and Frost. Meditate. Take long walks. Ride a motorcycle or bicycle. Think good thoughts. Purify yourself from the evil in our society.
And avoid any unnecessary stimulation:
I very recently tossed what little pornography I had left. Amazing the effect on my mind and soul. Do not lust after women in your mind. Masturbate only as a last result to relieve tension. Do not lust after women sexually. It weakens you.
Remember, women aren’t just filthy whores, they’re Satan’s representatives on earth:
God made man in His image, and women was made in the image of Satan. Squeal all you want, but history proves me right. A woman is a test; a stumbling block for man. Our life is an adventure. A journey. A pursuit of our creator, and a pursuit of excellence in our personal lives. A woman and her filth is part of the obstacle course set before us. If we are wise, and avoid them, we will grow stronger as a result. We will finish the race successfully.
Women was not put here to support us as such, and we will only grow stronger if we AVOID her snares.
Christopher, I support you in your quest. Please do not have sex with any women. The thought of you reproducing, even accidentally, is truly scary.
>Men: Do not be hypontized by Kim Kardashian’s boobies into getting a Kardashian Kard
>
Consumerist warns that “the reality show star is pimping a new prepaid debit card targeted at kids” — and, presumably, unwary men easily hypnotized by boobies — “that is as bursting with hidden fees as Kim’s shirt, featured prominently on the plastic, is bursting with integrity.” The card costs $59.95 to purchase (including 6 months of monthly fees); monthly fees (after this initial period) of $7.95; ATM withdrawals are $1.50. There’s also a $9.95 (per boobie) monthly boobie maintenance fee. (Ok, one of those fees is made up.)
>Anglo-haters gonna Anglo-hate
>
 |
| Bill O’Reilly secretly spreading Feminazi man-hate. |
The fellow behind the charmingly named Anglobitch blog — devoted to the notion that “Anglo-American Women Suck!” — has delivered up a rambling, loopy rant about hate crime legislation, which essentially suggests that the very existence of such legislation reflects an “inherent, all-pervasive hatred of men” in the “Anglosphere.”
For while Hate Crime is prohibited by each Anglo-American national state, pan-anglosphere misandry is actively promoted by each state against its male citizens.
His first example of this is … Rupert Murdoch’s media empire. I’m not sure exactly when Murdoch was promoted from media mogul to head of state, but never mind. Our Anglo-blogger is off and running:
The Murdochratic media ceaseless vilifies men as outcasts, misfits and sexual deviants while exalting women as paragons of virtue, beauty and intellect. This anti-male propaganda is at least as relentless as the Nazi media campaign against the Jews -- but even more insidious, since its agendas are covert and unstated. … And, as in the Third Reich, hatred of the outcast group (in this case, men) has been fully normalized since the rise of gender-feminism in the late sixties.
Uh, yeah, that agenda is pretty … covert. I don’t remember there being a lot of Jews at the top of the Nazi party. But it seems like every time I turn on Fox News I see someone from “the outcast group (in this case, men)” spewing what to the untrained ear sounds like reactionary nonsense. (I mean, there’s Gretchen Carlson, but she’s got to share the set with Steve Doocy and that other dude.) But apparently I can’t see Bill O’Reilly, Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck for what they are: footsoldiers of our feminazi overlords. Er, overladies? Overwomyn?
Our Anglobitcher then moves from the anti-male evils of Murdoch to the anti-male evils of the law. Apparently divorce law is so biased towards women that
many Anglo-American women consciously plan for a ‘starter marriage’ to fleece some unsuspecting male [which] proves that malicious misandry is rapidly becoming a female lifestyle-choice.
After a brief denunciation of the welfare state — men pay the taxes and women benefit! — Anglobitcher comes to the US military draft, for which only males have to register “despite them being tacitly viewed as Untermenschen by law, government and the media.” Hey, I didn’t like having to register, and I don’t think any one of either sex should have to, but, uh, no one has been drafted in the US since the Vietnam war.
So the first of his examples of state oppression is based on the idea that Rupert Murdoch is The State, not to mention some sort of feminazi. And his last is based on guys having to sign what is for all practical purposes a meaningless scrap of paper. The Anglobitcher nevertheless concludes “that males represent the primary victims of ‘hate crime’ across the Anglosphere.”
Oh, but he’s not quite done. For what angry denunciation of hate crime laws is complete without, you know, some good old-fashioned homophobia, served with a side order of transsexual-bashing:
It is also telling that the only male groups effectively protected by pan-Anglosphere hate-crime laws are gays and transsexuals. This is entirely to be expected: such males simulate the female role which, as we have endlessly observed, is routinely and blindly exalted by Anglo-Saxon culture. When the only way for men to achieve protection from ‘hate crime’ is to adopt homosexuality (or female genitalia) the true nature of Anglo ‘patriarchy’ reveals itself. Only women and their mincing mimics can enter that charmed circle; the healthy, potent male never can.
Dude, you’re an Anglodouche.
EDIT: Mr. Anglobitch has responded to this post. His response is actually a bit more coherent than the original post, though, admittedly, that’s not much of an accomplishment.
>Around the world in a Google-Translated daze
>
 |
| No girls allowed. |
So yesterday I asked the MRA masses to post the names of blogs, websites, online manifestos, etc. that in their opinion represent the best that the Men’s Rights Movement has to offer.
I got a lot of comments, but, er, I didn’t exactly get a ton of suggestions. The first commenter to come through with actual URLs was Yohan, a non-native English speaker who mainly reads non-American sites. He posted three URLs, all to sites not in English.
But hey, we live in a global village, and I’m not going to let a little thing like language get in the way. So I pasted his URLs into Google Translate and took a look.
The first site he mentioned, a German Men’s Rights hub called MANNdat, looked, sadly, almost completely identical to any number of American Men’s Rights sites, from its page on “Feminist Myths” right on down to the obligatory “Woman Behaving Badly” post on its front page.
The second URL led to an Austrian site with the translated title “Executioner,” which looked too dour and creepy to me, so I didn’t even bother poking around.
I approached the third site he mentioned with a little bit more optimism. It was Japanese, so I figured the combination of vast cultural differences, gross translation errors, and the natural hilarity of internet antifeminists would lead to pure win, as they say on the internet.
And at first, I did indeed seem to have struck internet gold. I found myself utterly charmed by the site, which is apparently called “Feminist Fantasy,” and which through the magic of Google Translate seemed to be a virtual repository of fantastic Dadaist poetry:
Identity of feminist leadership
America seems to be the queen of quibble.
Around in a thoughtful but very good at sophistry,
In the United States to refrain from the country so fast lady,
I argue that it is no longer anyone to organize a quibble
I can even sort of agree with that. America really is the “queen of quibble.”‘
But, alas, my euphoria was short-lived. As I kept looking around the site I found some things that even Google Translate couldn’t render charming. Like the articles “Sodom, Gomorrah, and the Netherlands” and “Gay marriage is a human misery,” which explains, in Google-translate-speak:
In order to destroy the institution of marriage, the idea of same-sex marriage are pushing a plan to destroy the sanctity of marriage.
So God does not bless same-sex marriage in the Bible the same shape as opposite sex marriage.
Yeah, I don’t need a perfect translation to get the gist of that article. Or this one, which I reproduce in its Google-translated entirety:
American abomination
Abomination ever played the glorious U.S. military in Iraq. Why such a moral collapse happened. Between men and women of loose morals are the leading cause of it. That gender equality and women soldiers of the United States, the relationship between men and women, who had loose sexual relations, she was weakening resistance to an immoral abuse.
Also, female sumo wrestlers? They aren’t having any of that either.
So much for my foray into international antifeminism.
>Stunning photographic proof of the historical oppression of men
>
I have discovered stunning new proof of the historical oppression of men. In these photos, from mid-century America, we can see clearly how men are humiliated, annoyed and otherwise held down by The Woman. Just look at the expression on this man’s face as the wily female emasculates him, assaults his ear, and makes him listen to her blab on and on about clothes. These photos obviously predate the Second Wave of feminism in the 1960s and 70s, but that just shows how sneaky the feminists are. I blame women’s suffrage. You give them the vote, and the next thing you know, they’ll be wantonly adjusting their girdles, wearing wrinkly stockings, and poking their fingers in your ear.
For more of these deeply disturbing photos, see here.
>Discussion of the day: The Feminist Chair-drag of Doom
>
Here’s an enlightening little discussion going on currently on the Men Going Their Own Way (MGTOW) forum. Under the misleadingly jaunty title “Funny Feminist antics at work” Junior MGTOW Member lovekraft describes a horrific new feminist abomination against men: chair dragging! CHAIR DRAGGING!!
Here I am at work, concentrating, when suddenly we hear the loud scraping noise of metal chair legs being dragged across the workfloor. For about a minute this goes on.
The dragger is an old Feminist who likely wouldn’t have thought how irritating this noise was and how easy it would be to just ask a man to carry it for her.
But being the feminist, this thought never crossed her mind and instead everyone had to be irritated.
spidey weighs in with this observation:
That’s what seperates men from women. We can show consideration for others and we like to do things efficiently
dontmarry, a keen student of human nature, offers some possible explanations for her behavior:
Over here where I work, office chairs can be easily carried by the weakest human being. The bigger ones have wheels beneath, so you push them over a carpeted floor.
Unless it was some kind of exceptionally heavy and unusual chair, all I can say is that she’s a cunt deliberately trying to annoy everyone else in the office. That time of the month? Her man didn’t call? Someone she desired didn’t add her on Facebook?
But it is garvan — his name perhaps a misspelled tribute to the legendary Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute? — who offers the most carefully reasoned explanation for the chair-drag:
She knew exactly how annoying it was, and did it for the attention.
When a woman’s looks no longer get attention, she’ll annoy the fuck out of everyone to get it.
Don’t believe me? … Look to the Wal-Mart whales that make a public display of their lack of child rearing skills by having their child cry as they yell and belittle their kid in front of every other customer to see. Look to every “strong” feminist woman who’s every action is to annoy the “patriarchy” by growing underarm hair, and yelling about how oppression is everywhere.
An old lonely woman with only cats as friends will scrape that chair across that floor because of her attention starved natured, and when everyone looks up with a grimace due to her actions, inside a little part of her will be validated. She feels like she almost exists in this world once more.
Let the lonely cunts suffer in their own prison. Had they went through the efforts of learning how to be a decent person when they were younger, they’d actually have friends and people who’d want to spend time with them. Instead they had to be a worthless annoying cunt.
The reality is this: No one wants to be friends with a bitter person who blames their problems on others ...
Hold that thought, dude. That last bit might be truer than you realize.
Somehow I’m thinking the women of the world aren’t missing much as a result of these particular men “going their own way.”
>QuoteOTD: Teh Menz at work
>
Another day, another muddled mess of misogynist generalizations completely unsupported by any actual evidence. Today, at A Voice For Men, Theodore Labadie reflects on the Roman Pantheon, and how teh menz made all the cool shit in the world lol, ladies are teh suckkssss! I’m paraphrasing, of course. In his words:
Men do not see the world like women do. The gaze of men projects outward into it; they see it, they take what they need from it, and they remake it anew. The gaze of women falls inward. The world becomes them, it exists for them. And thus, women do not build; they consume. It is not the vicissitudes of society or the education system that makes women like this. It is their nature. And, I hazard a guess … that because of the consumptive nature of women and of men’s desire to give them every comfort and convenience that we are eating ourselves alive.
I wonder, if the genius of men were fully recognized where would we be now?
Gosh, I don’t know. We’d probably all be flying around with jet packs while having sex with sexy sex robots. That’s just a guess, though. But I have a question for Mr. Labadie, and for every MRA who gets vicarious man thrills from stuff other dudes have made: how many Roman Pantheons have you personally built?
Also: it sort of undermines your case for inherent man genius when you use the word “bare” to mean “bear.” Real men proofread.
Program Note: I will be man-debating Paul Elam, the man behind A Voice For Men, on the topic of Domestic Violence, starting tonight on his man-site. I will post links when the posts start going up.
>Cartoon of the Day: Tied Down
>Remember all those outrageously sexist cartoons that used to fill the pages of our popular periodicals back in the good old days before evil feminism brought its blight upon the world? They’re having a sort of second life on the Internet, and apparently some people still find them hi-larious. I found this is on an Indian Men’s Rights site, which offered this little bit of commentary: “So so so true……………….”
EDIT: Apparently my not thinking that this cartoon is hi-larious makes me the “Cartoon Monitor for the Confederacy of Dunces,” or so says the often inadvertently hi-larious Paul Elam.
