Category Archives: we hunted the mammoth

Heads, you’re a misandrist. Tails, you’re also a misandrist.

Watch out for the Misandry Bears and their giant Misandry Teeth.

You may recall a post I did the other day about Roger Ebert’s recent claim that women are superior to men. You may also recall that my basic thesis was that Ebert was completely wrong. Heck, you didn’t even have to read my post to see what my stance was; I made it clear in the title itself, which started off with the words “no, women aren’t better than men.”

Well, apparently my saying explicitly that women are not superior to men, and approvingly quoting another feminist saying the same thing, was too much to handle for the proprietor of an exciting new blog chronicling how wrong and bad I and my commetariat are. Mikhael Varpole of the imaginatively named Anti-Man Boobz blog (motto: “Exposing Man Boobz as a vile hate cult”) wrote about Ebert’s claim, and my response, in a recent post.

Here’s what he wrote:

Naturally, Futrelle and the boob gallery had to get in on the action. To his credit, Futrelle doesn’t condone Ebert’s misandry- but then again Dave’s always been a sneaky one that way. He won’t stand in solidarity with Ebert- but note that he’s happy to spin an instance of bold-faced misandry into an opportunity to bash MRAs who are righteously angry, ultimately concluding:

Guys, I hate to have to tell you this, but you’re sort of making it look like Ebert might have a point.

Remember what I said about subtle bigotry? This is a prime example. Misandry and misandric attitudes are dismissed in our culture because the concept itself is seen as illegitimate. And by portraying AVfM’s righteous anger as childish and “proving Ebert’s point”, Futrelle is knowingly and consciously destroying the legitimacy of misandry as a concept. It’s psychological manipulation on a global scale, and it’s downright sinister. And Futrelle, along with his lickspittle toadies, are happily contributing to the anti-male conspiracy.

Yes, explicitly stating that women aren’t superior to men is an exceedingly subtle form of misandry indeed.

Oh, and in case you’ve forgotten what the allegedly “righteous” anger of the AVFM crowd looks like, here’s are a couple of excerpts from the angry screeds I quoted from in my post:

Feminism has provided today’s pampered princesses with the privilege-stuffed, consequence-free Nirvana that they believe they’re entitled to. Do you really think they can be swayed with reason and logic?


[E]verything on this earth from the knickers these women wear on their fat buts, all the way through to just about every single thing they touch in their day, up to and including homes, buildings, cars, trains, rockets, and the food they stuff down their throats, has all been either invented or produced by those useless ‘less than’ human, men.

That doesn’t sound so much like “subtle bigotry” as “just straight-up bigotry.” This is anger of an exceedingly un-righteous kind.

Well, after receiving some gentle mockery at the hands of the Man Boobz commetariat – sorry, at the hands of my “lickspittle toadies” – Varpole posted a comment here trying to clarify his stance.

I disdain commenting here for obvious reasons, but I have to clarify that subtle or “benign” misandry can be as damaging as overt bigotry- moreso, even, because it’s harder to call out. Radfem-level misandry can usually be dismissed (usually). But less overt displays of male-hatred are very difficult, because the concept has no veracity in a misandric, male-hating, anti-man culture. A culture, by the way, that MEN set up, and MEN continue to run, at both the low and high levels.

Well, this is an interesting thesis. Men – sorry, MEN – created the world as we know it, and run things – and yet have decided to set up a culture that is “male-hating [and] anti-man.” How would that even work?

After several commenters – sorry, toadies – asked him to explain this mysterious paradox, Varpole posted a clarification of his clarification on his blog.

First, I admit that “men maintain the culture” is an oversimplification. Obviously, that’s not true- certainly not today, arguably not ever. There are women police officers, women in government, women farmers, women firefighters, etc. Women do contribute to the maintenance of civilization. Not as much as men, but nonetheless.

On the other hand, women, feminists, and their assorted mangina lackeys have a disproportionate influence in the media and pop culture. Feminists and their dogs control the messages beamed at us through music, video games, and Hollywood. They have the print news media.  They control primary education (how many teachers are men?) and thus the shaping of our youth. The infamous SOPA was almost certainly backed by feminists, in an attempt to bring the Internet (not coincidentally, the primary holdout of MRAs) under their control. Even when it is a male hand holding the pen, a male voice speaking into the mic, they are generally manginas who kowtow to female demands (see: Roger Ebert; Bill Clinton; H.L. Mencken). Thus, they are mouthpieces for the misandrist NWO, and are not in any way representative of men as a class; it’s just a different mechanism for the female perspective. …

I’m not saying thy’re calling for mass castration or anything like that (such a move would be too obvious). But there is a systematic denigration of men and masculinity in the media, and a subtle promotion of a misandrist, feminist, female supremacist ideology. In the news, in television, movies, literature, comic strips- we see the epidemic with our own eyes.

Huh. MEN created and still run the world, but “women, feminists, and their assorted mangina lackeys” dominate the media and popular culture with their evil anti-man agenda? There’s no getting around it: Varpole seems to be suggesting that MEN are just terrible at running the world.

Wouldn’t such an argument be … misandry?

Not even subtle misandry, at that.

I look forward to more blatant misandry from Anti-Man Boobz in the future.

As well as some critiques of his misandry from a mysterious, even newer blog that sprung up the other day: Anti-Anti-Manboobz, devoted to debunking Anti-Man Boobz and being meta as fuck.

Wheels within wheels.


Civilization and its Discontented Ladies

If it weren't for us men, we'd all still be living like this.

Oh, you ladies! Apparently, if you were left to your own devices, we’d all still be living in caves. The dude at The Black Pill, the blog formerly known as Omega Virgin Revolt, explains the grave danger that uncontrolled ladieness poses to civilization. (The thing, not the computer game.)

What is civilization?  There are many definitions of “civilization”, but IMO the most important definition of civilization is controlling female behavior, all of which acts against civilization. Civilization was created as soon as ways of controlling female behavior were developed.  Before civilization men had to constantly deal with female behavior so they never had the time to develop science, technology, etc.  When female behavior was put under control, then men didn’t have to spend so much time worry about women.  Men could spend time inventing agriculture and later other forms of science and technology.  Keeping women and their destructive behavior under control is the key to civilization.

Seriously. If we dudes hadn’t clamped down on your lady behavior, we’d be fucked. Dudes like Mr. Black Pill would be out there trying their best to build up civilization by posting lady-hating screeds on the internet and not having sex with anyone, and you gals would be undermining all their hard work by doing terrible lady things like, say, working in government, doing scientific research, teaching filmmaking, writing books, making interesting jewelry, working as EMTs, being Secretary of State, and writing Supernatural fanfic. Wait, that’s already happening. Uh oh. Civilization is in danger!

And of course evil feminists are at the heart of the Lady Plot Against Civilization.

So much of feminism is a screed against civilization, science, and technology.  Feminists have called Isaac Newton’s Principia Mathematica a rape manual.  Feminists hate the technology industry and have attacked technology in general as male rape of the natural world and/or the enforcement of patriarchy over nature.  Feminists know unconciously that civilization is the greatest threat to the power of women.  Civilization was developed by men, not women.  Women are only along for the ride because sex and babies can’t happen without them (for now).  Every advancement in science and technology is a threat to women.  Every advancement in science and technology brings up a step closer to freeing men from needing women.

So watch it, ladies. As soon as we work out this whole having babies without ladies thing, your days are numbered! Then all we’ll need to do is to figure out how to get all the dudes in the world who actually like and respect women and think of them as fellow human beings to abandon them for sex robots. Piece of cake.

All you need is love. Also, misogyny, and a side order of homophobia.

Love is in the air! On The Spearhead, WF Price has penned a piece with the intriguing title: “What’s Wrong with Wanting to be Loved?” To that I would answer: nothing.

Let’s see what lovely sorts of things Price has to say about the subject:

[S]till we have people whining about “misogyny.” Young feminists whose most important concern is the ability to have sex entirely free of consequences, and who shamelessly raise their voices for the right to kill their children in the womb. Lesbian gender feminists who wreck families for profit and sex. Male feminists who boast about fathering children and shuffling their responsibilities onto some duped cuckold, and who malign their fellow men for a crack at college girls.

Huh. Not sure how exactly this bit of nastiness is supposed to advance the cause of love.

(Also, I think that last bit – the line about those “who malign their fellow men for a crack at college girls” – is supposed to be a reference to … me, and the talk I gave on Monday at Northwestern, to which he has added his own little fantasies, like he did in his original, highly fictionalized, post on the subject. The man is obsessed.)

In the comments, Spearhead readers offered their own thoughts on the topic of love.

Revver started things off with this lovely thought:

Having seen and heard a great majority of women, being “unloved” becomes lighter and lighter a burden with each passing year.

 How easily they make themselves look like fools.

Opus spat forth an opus; here’s an edited version:

Women judge men by pre-selection.

If you have been dumped, then a member of Team Vagina has deemed you unworthy, so as in Snakes and Ladders you start from the bottom again. There is simply no point seeking female solace, because the woman will see that you do not seek her, and thus, offended, accuse you of unsolicited attention, or alternatively act offended that you are not interested in her. (I speak from experience). …

Women as we know are programmed to get over even the worst relationship in no more than three months, whereas for a man (even when in hindsight it was Xmas come early) we are often talking decades, for to be ditched is to take away all that it means to be a man (provider, nurturer). …  Now, why am I betting that Futrelle did not mention these things last night – and why am I also betting he has not got one single phone number from any female at Northwestern Univeristy?

(You guys are really are obsessed. Aren’t you supposed to mention my weight as well?)

Greyghost managed to work the phrase “gina tingle” into his ramblings:

Men actually have the capacity to love. Only a man can write an article like that. Women just don’t have the capacity to love. Women gina tingle. …   

The big lie was and is that a woman can love. Romance is what men do women receive it. …

The MRM with women on board on not will never ever change the nature of women. No matter how much awareness of the pain men and even children are in, women will vote and demand what is in therir childish perception of their interest. ( It will always be uninhibitted status and hypergamy)

In a later comment, he added these creepy afterthoughts:

Women do not and can not love the way you do and can. The best a man can get is some good emotional gina tingle. Never ever forget it. It can be a very emotionally pleasing and soothing time for a man but a man can never forget he is a man and right or wrong is a keeper of civilization.

The emotional trauma brought down on men when the realization of the lie hits [is] off the charts. It is where murders and suicides come from.

Georice81 offered up a rather elaborate excuse for slut-shaming:

My observation is that when women have been sexually promiscous their ability to submit and be very loyal to a single man is very diminished. …  They can’t respect that one man that may actually love them since they are contemptous of a man that could love someone like them. Men in the 1950′s understood this and would not marry someone who was not a virgin since they did not trust those that were not.

We men can love and want to love. We also have a huge capacity to forgive. Modern western woman don’t seem to comprehend this because of their own hangups.

Binxton, for his part, seemed to be posting from an internet café on Gor:

Women are by nature emotional, self-centered creatures. Absent controls on their behavior, they lack both morals and objective principles. They are too easily manipulated by their environment to allow them to be free.

Ultimately, female emotional nature requires men to control women.

Women will love when they endure hardship and respect higher authority, i.e., patriarchy.

Western women must acknowledge a male-centered world where they can enjoy the labors of man only if, and when, they show due deference to male authority. Those who fail to do so must be disciplined and punished as examples.

Joe set forth some similarly, er, traditional notions:

Women are capable of love but there’s a reason St. Paul tells wives to “fear” their husbands. Because women are just much more like children in their moral reasoning and in their emotional “resilience” (or capacity for cruelty). So for a woman to love a husband is much like a child’s love for his parents. It is a love that is requires her to be in a dependent position. This is why marriage in a feminist society of independent and irreligious (I don’t mean women without superstition, but women without fear of moral judgment) women, cannot work.

I think I’ve had enough of The Spearhead’s notions of love. Let’s try ten hours of Haddaway instead:

Congress hears testimony on contraception: Once again, men have to do all the work!

Hard-working dudes, talkin bout contraception.

So  there was a congressional hearing yesterday about contraception, and, once again, men had to do all the work. Not a single lady on the panel! They were probably all eating bon bons and riding the cock carousel, like ladies do. Misandry in action!

Well, to be fair, the chair of the committee blocked a woman who was going to testify on the panel, but, you know, she probably would have just started yammering about shoes and how hot Taylor Lautner is. You know how ladies are.

Just another day in the feminazi gynocracy!

Alcuin and out. Or, the KKK with tits.

Insidious gynonazi propaganda

Let’s celebrate this lovely February day with some random stupidity from Alcuin, a brave anti-misandrist intellectual titan who is single handedly bringing about what he calls “the Intellectual Renaissance of the Western Tradition.” Mostly by blathering on and on about how much ladies suck.

Some highlights from recent posts.

We hunted the mammoth, then wrote Troilus and Cressida, while you bitches were eating bon bons and watching The Talk

The history of achievement is, in fact, the history of male achievement to such an extent that, were women absent from human history, we might still be where we are today, but were men absent from history, da wimmin would be in the caves, screeching ‘n hollering at each other. …

Dante wrote the Divine Comedy. Feminists crafted VAWA, the beginning of the end of western freedom.

Shakespeare changed the English language. Sharon Osbourne laughs about the female mutilation of men.

Socrates established a way of thinking and reflection on the virtues that still inspires us. Women falsely accuse men of rape on a weekly or even daily basis.

The KKK – now, with tits!

Feminism is the KKK with tits. The only difference is that western women don’t have any shame, so don’t cover up with white bedsheets. They are openly supremacist. That is why their starting point parallels the KKK, but they tend towards Nazism as well. The Hitlerists were no more ashamed of their supremacism than western women are of theirs. Both bigoted groups, in fact, are quite proud of their prejudicial thinking.

Racial supremacists running around with bedsheets are cockroachy – they run to the darkness whenever light is shed on them. Feminists, like Nazis, prefer the limelight. Will we soon see Nazi-like rallies with tens of thousands of banshees and their manginic self-hating male bozos?

Everybody Loves Raymond, and your female supremacist mom

Men are made into buffoons by Hollywood because male buffoonery sells. Women eat it up as greedily as they inhale chocolate cake and buy useless luxury goods. “Everybody Loves Raymond” is Everyman. Why does your mother like that sitcom so much? Because she’s a female supremacist. Why does your girlfriend like that show? Because she’s a female supremacist.

That’s why the lady is a tramp

Life is too easy. It’s too easy for a woman to become a tramp, and experiment sexually and socially, so she does. What are the consequences? Our society has so much surplus that we’ve eliminated the consequences of bad or irresponsible behavior, at least for women. We are wealthy enough to reject the concept of shame. Thus, we have shameless hussies.

Perhaps because men are still the most creative movers and shakers of our society, men as a whole class have been pushed into being the responsible ones, the moral adults. Women are let off the hook, able to remain perpetual moral children, responsible for none of their behavior, such as drunken sex. Non-issues such as faulty breast implants or police warnings about slutware enrage these people because they face no real injustices or hardships.


Also, here are The Undertones, with “Life’s Too Easy.”


MRA: Men have it great, and that pisses me off! Also, women are as dumb as baboons.

Typical females! Sitting on their giant red asses while men do all the work!

Men’s Rights Activists generally like to pretend that the world is some kind of feministy dystopian hellscape for men. No so the gentle MRA philosopher who calls himself Cooter Bee. In recent post on A Voice for Men, he admits frankly that

In absolute terms, men have never had it better. Our lives are longer than ever before. Especially in the western world, we are not nearly as plagued by violence and disease as our grandfathers. Never in history have we had as much economic opportunity or as much latitude to choose our own careers and our ultimate station in life.

Well golly. Sounds like life is pretty good for us dudes.

We are clearly neglected and abused relative to women, but is that really a legitimate comparison? Is that any more meaningful than measuring how we are doing compared to squirrels or dolphins? There are a few men who do cross-over and become women but I never heard of even one who did it to gain access to all the goodies that go with being an entitlement skank. I know of few men who would be anything else despite the supposed unfairness.

So what is the beef? Could it be that even though men are doing better than ever that the level of ingratitude is also disproportionately high?

Uh oh. Do I smell some “we hunted the mammoth to feed you” coming up?

Let’s face it. Men are and always have been where it’s at when it comes to sustaining this world. In former days, men used to get some credit for it. Not now. Scorn, vitriol and blame are the thanks we get for making this world livable. Biting the hand that feeds you was always a no-no. Perhaps that’s what eats me.

Hmm. Given that most women work, and that women make up roughly half the work force, it seems to me that most women are actually feeding themselves. Statistics on all this are readily available.

I am starting to tire of all the stats and data.

Statistics? We don’t need no stinkin’ statistics!

Isn’t the fact that we don’t like what is going on enough reason to change it?

So you’d rather fight against imagined ingratitude than real injustices?

Ironically, after acknowledging that he’s primarily motivated by feelings, not fact, Mr. Bee accuses women of not being able to deal with gender issues rationally:

Talking equity among men is useful because men are capable of equity. Exceptionally few women are capable. Talking about equity to a typical woman is like talking particle physics to a baboon.

We want it the way we want it and so it should be done. No other justification is significant.. We have it good but want it to be better still.

Well, at least he’s being honest about it, I guess.

EDITED TO ADD: The comments on this post on AVfM are, of course, a treat. Here are some choice excerpts from my favorite one, posted by a fella calling himself DruidV:

[D]id any of you ever stop to consider the very first expendables in this gendercidal war against us?

You know, those accomodating Men of the sixties and seventies who were just trying to do the “right” thing. Those Men, who reluctantly but dejectedly gave up their lives and livelihoods so that millions of poor, oppressed wimmin could enter the work force (and completely FUBAR it, btw) in the name of ekwality.

Was there ever any kind of token memorial statue erected by the wimmin, to honor these displaced Men who were forced to hand it all over to their future political enemies? Was there even ONE?


My grandFather just happened to be one of these very first Men to be displaced from his job by a woman, at the hands of the government. He never fully recovered from the loss, to be sure. But hey, who gives a shit right? As long as some loud-mouthed, 1960′s hatchett wounds could feel “liberated”, umm sorry-I meant to say “Empowered(tm)”, it made no difference how many Men were sacrificed…

So, yeah, let’s get working on that memorial, folks! I wonder if we could get Maya Lin to design it?



Men Who Hate Women and the Women They Try to Date: Another visit to the Annals of Online Dating

What is this fucking shit?

A lot of guys who try online dating (of the heterosexual kind) complain that they send out message after message to the ladies and get no responses. Now, I’m no dating expert, but I would like to offer these gentlemen a piece of advice that I feel could dramatically improve their chances. Here it is:

If the message you are sending the lass you fancy would get upvotes on The Spearhead, do not send it.

This seems like a fairly self-evident point, but it’s one that a lot of guys don’t seem to understand, at least judging from some of the awful online come-ons posted at the always fabulous A(n)nals of Online Dating. Take this fella:

 [M]en have an obligation to rescue kittens from burning buildings, pay for your drinks, hold the door open for you, keep their hair neat, go to war and many other things. I’m just saying… Society worldwide really does put more obligations on men than women all around. There are few things women have to do… Shaving your legs is one of them.

I’m not sure how exactly this topic came up in conversation, but I’m pretty sure that Mr. Mammoth-Hunting Kitten-Rescuing Door-Holder-Opener and Lady Who Doesn’t Shave Her Legs are probably not a match made in Internet heaven.

This guy’s strategy is also somewhat problematic:

A so-cal Brooklyn transplant who believes in grammar, manners, music, and humor. I’m nice to my mother, always smile at dogs and babies, and am in the process of pleading that statutory rape charge down to a misdemeanor.

Yeah, it’s probably not a good idea to open with a joke about raping underage girls. Assuming it is a joke.

This message would be a bad idea regardless of gender:


Sorry indeed.

This next fellow is a bit of a Stealth Misogynist, in that he starts out with some actual compliments directed toward an actual women. Really creepy compliments, but complements nonetheless. Then we get a plot twist that’s about as shocking as the big reveal in M. Night Shyamalan’s The Village. Which is to say, so obvious that it could probably be spotted from space.

When I look at you I see very happy, fun loving, sexy, good girl. I love looking through your photos, I only wish there were more. Do you enjoy being obedient to the male figures in your life?

David K. Meller, is that you?

Will the coming apocalypse put bitchy ladies in their place?

Men: We all know how to wrestle bears.

Angry manosphere dudes sure do love them some apocalyptic fantasies! Which totally makes sense, since they all seem to imagine the apocalypse as little more than an opportunity to deliver a big “told you so!” to women and “manginas” and probably their pet goldfish.

Over on, our robogirl-obsessed friend avoidwomen has been reposting assorted comments he’s apparently found on The Spearhead, and which he just loves, loves, loves! Unfortunately, he hasn’t provided links or any other information about them, and Google didn’t much help, so I don’t know who exactly should get the credit for the following bit of postapocalyptic fiction.

It’s sort of long, but I think you’ll pick up the gist of it right away. (It also sounds really, really familiar – have I written about it before, or is it just that MRAs and MGTOWers are so predictably unoriginal?) Are you sitting comfortably? Good. Let’s begin:

An economic collapse will put women in their place. Virtually no women have the skills necessary to survive in the real world. They can survive in this artificial politically correct, multi-cultural, anything goes, “death to the West, death to the white male patriarch” system that we are presently in….

As the economy declines even further the government will be forced to make massive cuts. … The first things on the chopping block will be entitlements, the sort of entitlements that have enabled women to use big government as a substitution for a stable nuclear family, a family they would only be able to have by behaving themselves and conforming to acceptable standards of behavior as determined by their fathers and later their husbands.

And now we come to the payoff:

 In the near future women will be given the choice of starving in the street, finding some way to hunt/fish/garden on their own, or conforming to the standards men set for them and being kept alive by men who actually place value upon their continued existence.

Let’s throw some Ayn Rand into the mix:

This dysgenic society favors the weak and indeed it subsidizes the weak at the expense of the strong and the fit. … We are ruled by thieves who steal from the productive and give to the idiotic masses to keep themselves in office at the expense of the intelligent, the creative, the productive, the true movers and shakers of society.

Can I have some “we hunted the mammoth” to go with that “Atlas Shrugged?”

We build civilizations yet we are penalized at every step of the way in every aspect of our lives. Instead of being allowed to innovate, invent, and create, we are made to subsidize the recklessness of unworthy women, tens of millions of illegal aliens, and any other group that some clique of weak and effeminate politicians decides to cave to.

Hmm. That’s pretty good. But still not quite melodramatic enough. Can we add some big blustery clichés to the mix? Some “we stand on the edge of a precipice” sort of shit?

We stand on the cusp of the precipice, gazing down into the abyss.

Oh, ok. I didn’t expect you to take me quite so literally. But never mind:

After our civilization is pushed over the edge a new one will emerge from the void left by the collapse of the old one. All we have to do is make sure it is to our benefit rather than to our detriment.

And now, back to all those mean bitches who were so mean to us:

 The prospect of starvation, death by exposure to the elements, or being turned into a prostitute by a street gang that openly dominates some X number of city blocks in the absence of big government police, should be amply adequate to put most women in their place.

You can almost hear the writer jazzing in his pants as he writes this.

The question is not one of “will they come crawling back to us” but rather, “how do we respond when they do finally come crawling back.”

Yeah, ladies, maybe we don’t want you after all!

Most of them are bitter, selfish, self-absorbed, idiotic, brain-dead, used up whores, and I have no need for such creatures in my life. They don’t know how to cook, how to clean, how to butcher livestock, how to till a field, how to cultivate crops, how to hunt game, how to fish, how to defend themselves in hand-to-hand combat, how to zero a rifle, in short they have no practical useful skills for existence outside of an artificial globalist “post industrial” financial/retail services economic structure.

Ooh! In your face, ladies who can’t cultivate crops and take down bears in hand-to-hand combat!

Did your feminism prepare you for BEARS? I think not!

In addition they don’t even know how to treat people, especially men, in a right and proper fashion.

Um. What happened to hand-to-hand-combat and all that survival-of-the-fittest stuff? This seems a tad, er, petulant.

I personally have no use for a bunch of used up whores who “had their fun” and now expect men who know what is what and have their act together, to put their lives on the line to keep them safe.

Ah, now we’re rolling again.

Screw you, whores! It’s all fun and games until the economy collapses and the BEARS show up!

Hopefully in the new society, the one on the way, women will be treated as perpetual minors with no contractual capacity and no right to ownership of property. … what we cannot achieve politically will be achieved socially and physically by the nature of the coming collapse/implosion.

Yep, ladies. It’s our way … or the BEARway! (By which I mean, “the highway, except that the highway is covered with BEARS!”)

Never forget, that at some point back in time, EVERYTHING women have they obtained from MEN, either via big government initiated wealth/resource transfers, or because men were foolish enough to dote on them in some hope of obtaining sex/sexual access (or even just the affections/approval) from some creature that was doubtlessly a used up whore.

So there you have it. Our glorious future!

I’m not sure how the robogirls fit in all this exactly. If the economy collapses and we’re fighting the BEARS in the streets, won’t that put a little dent in production of robogirls?

Never mind. That’s a mere detail. The important things to remember are:  Apocalypse soon, women screwed, men happy, BEARS.

And the We Hunted the Mammoth Award goes to …

Ow! Guys, quit it!

 I didn’t bother to watch the VMAs last night, but something in the air has led me to want to give out some awards of my own. So: the coveted Man Boobz “We Hunted the Mammoth” Award this month goes to some comments from MRA oddball Uncle Elmer on women in the workplace that were recently highlighted on the Pro-Male/Anti-Feminist Technology blog. They are, of course, magnificently stupid.

Without further ado, here are some of the choicer bits of Elmer’s rant.

Women are competing for jobs but are not creating them. Other than providing a mass market for their vanity products, they are not forging new industries or technologies. …

Though men shank me and insult me, only men provide me with opportunity. … Only men, and only a small fraction of them, take the risks that create industry and opportunity. Women can only serve as mere functionaries in man-created structures. When an organization becomes feminized, priority shifts from efficient and profitable production of goods and services to development of labarynthine rules for the comfort and security of women. …

No woman can or will provide me or any man employment, yet all western women feel entitled to help and opportunities from men, even as they drive men out of the workplace.

[W]orkplace women are your enemy. They cannot help you but can and will hurt you. Do not look at them, do not talk to them.

And now the “we hunted the mammoth” moment:

Females want to inhabit man-created business structures as if those structures existed before man appeared on the veldt. … When you have pushed the last man out of the corporation it will collapse under its own dead weight.

And while I’m handing out awards, I’d like to give the Man Boobz Whaaaa?! Award for the strangest, dumbest and least true thing said about me in the past week to Wytchfinde (presumably the same guy who used to comment here as Wytchfinde555), who posted this strange and not-altogether-grammatical comment on my latest YouTube video (which you should all go watch if you haven’t already).

David Futrelle is an opportunist that pretends to worship white women (which is true to a certain extent) helps just fuel more fire for hating men.


A man and an old lady get in an elevator

Those "sweet" old ladies are anything but.

Another elevator joke for you all:

So Pierce Harlan of the False Rape Society blog gets into an elevator ….

Well, OK, not a joke. In his latest post, Harlan offers a reaction, of sorts, to the whole atheist elevator incident –- by relating an anecdote of a recent elevator experience of his own.

EDITED TO ADD: Harlan has now deleted the post in question. It can still be seen, at least for now, in Google’s cache of the original page, which you can find here. Grab screenshots! Back to the story:

Seems he was riding a hotel elevator with a sweet old lady. Neither one said anything to the other (Harlan apparently hates talking to sweet old ladies) but when he got off the elevator – well, let’s let him explain:

I glanced back at her and saw that … she was immobilized with fear. In fact, she was practically cowering in the corner. Her eyes couldn’t have been wider if I had whipped out my dick and lathered it up with Grey Poupon.  Hers was the face of utter, unbridled fear, and she was watching me like the scardest of scared deer. She said not a word but her demeanor practically pleaded, “Please don’t rape me, sir!”

Now, Harlan seems to have what you might call a taste for overstatement. He describes feminists as “screeching banshees” and “extremist loons allied with the sexual grievance industry.” I doubt he could describe a chicken-salad sandwich without resorting to angry hyperbole. (That was a little bit of overstatement on my part.) But let’s just assume that there is at least a kernel of truth here: this woman was creeped out by Harlan.

So what was Harlan’s response to this woman’s obvious discomfort?

 [N]o one has more empathy for his fellow human beings than I do. The first thought that came to my mind in response to the obvious fear on the face of this pathetic, sweet looking, older woman — who probably never hurt anyone in her entire life — was fuck you!

Obviously we are supposed to ask just what it was that drove Harlan – the self-described world’s most empathetic man – to say something so seemingly callous? Well, as is usually the case with those we write about here, it all comes back to man-hating ladies and their male allies, with their evil insistence on sexual assault education (sorry, “indoctrination”) and their callous demands to “’take back the night,’ although the night has always been theirs.”(I don’t quite know what that means, but it sure sounds selfish of these women to want a whole extra night just for themselves.)

Ours is, Harlan says, “a culture marked by crass, hysterical fear-mongering about male sexual predation and violence.” (Evidently some guys haven’t gotten the memo on this.)

But all this evil misandry seems to have left poor Mr. Harlan in an uncharitable mood towards, well, almost everyone — though he directs his worst opprobrium at sweet old ladies.

Fuck them all. The paranoia of the woman in the elevator is her problem, not mine. Ironically, the elevator, the hotel itself, the car she rode in and the roads she rode on to get to the hotel were all undoubtedly conceived, designed, and built by men — men she’d fear just as much as me if they were standing in that elevator with her. I felt no guilt or shame or bewilderment over the fact that she fears me because of my birth class. Let her fear me. I can’t change it, and I have too much to do to worry about it.

And maybe, just maybe, it’s good that some people fear us. Maybe we should exult in the power we wield by reason of their paranoia. One thing I know: I will never do anything to alleviate their paranoia. In fact, I’m just fine with it, thank you very much. If someday, my riding the elevator causes some old woman to have a heart attack, that, too, is not my problem.  Blame it on a culture that I don’t approve of. Blame on sweet looking, older women who give in to the paranoia.

Truly the world’s most empathetic man.

Harlan goes on to talk briefly about the Rebecca Watson elevator incident. Needless to say, he adds nothing interesting to the discussion.


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 17,628 other followers

%d bloggers like this: