Blog Archives
A dude named Sizzletron shares his “honest opinions that are entirely merit-based, about women.” (Spoiler alert: They actually aren’t.)
This picture has nothing whatsoever to to with the post. I just like it.
It’s Friday. Why not welcome in the upcoming weekend with a picture of an anarchist cat and a completely unrelated, completely unhinged manifesto from the MensRants subreddit, the Men’s Rights subreddit’s unruly younger brother.
In a post with the somewhat roundabout title “Just posting this publicly gives me an ulcer. But I won’t let it stop me,” an angry fella who calls himself sizzletron set forth his opinions about, well, a lot of things having to do with women. It’s a piece that’s pretty much impossible to summarize, since sizzletron apparently finds it difficult to keep the thread of an argument going from one sentence to the next.
Let’s dig in:
A Voice for Men takes on feminist [rhymes-with-bunts] with new poster campaign
No, this is real. I didn’t make it up. I just blurred out the c-word.
Last week I wrote about the fondness of a certain Men’s Rights website for a certain four-letter word starting with the letter c. This week they’ve topped themselves — with a postering campaign based on the c-word.
Yep: A Voice for Men has thrown its support behind a postering campaign with the slogan: “Having a vagina is no excuse for being a C*NT.”
They don’t use an asterisk.
The postering campaign, spearheaded by a Youtube antifeminist calling himself Bane666au, feature what purport to be real quotes from feminists alongside not-exactly-subtle stock photos depicting comically angry women. For example:
How to get upvotes on The Spearhead: Violent rape fantasy edition
So I found this lovely little shoutout in the comments to an inane post by W.F. Price on The Spearhead last week.
Let me just preface it with a big TRIGGER WARNING for its violent rape fantasy.
Ten upvotes. No downvotes.
I guess that’s technically a rape metaphor, but it’s the most graphic rape metaphor I’ve run across in a long time.
If you ever find yourself wondering why the so-called Men’s Rights movement has never done, as far as I can tell, a single fucking thing for male victims of rape — other than rant about it online in an attempt to one-up feminists — I think this comment suggests one highly plausible explanation: because many if not most MRAs don’t actually feel empathy for the vast majority of male rape victims, who are, after all, men in prison raped by other men. They see rape as an appropriate punishment for men they don’t like, and many actually relish the thought of certain men being raped.
Indeed, even the self-described “men’s human rights activists” at A Voice for Men think that rape jokes about men they don’t like are hilarious.
I mean, it goes without saying that MRAs generally have little or no empathy for women who are raped, and indulge in rape jokes about women all the fucking time, but you’d think they’d do a better job of at least pretending to care about raped men.
If you’re interested in an organization that actually does care about victims of rape and other forms of sexual abuse in prison — regardless of the gender of the victim — you may want to check out Just Detention International.
A Voice for Men presents: The [vagina-related slur redacted] Monologues
It is very c-worthy.
So the other day, in writing about the shutdown of MGTOWforums.com, I quoted a rather ironic comment from Men’s “Human Rights” Activist Paul Elam about the site, which he denounced as a hive of “self-consuming bitterness” that was essentially
one rolling “cunts and whores” diatribe after another, spiced only with vicious attacks on men who were deemed less than worthy by Nacho Vidal’s standards.
The irony, of course, was that if you replaced “Nacho Vidal’s” name with Elams’s, his statement was in fact also a perfect description of his own site, A Voice for Men.
But I didn’t really have the space to properly document just how pervasive “‘cunts and whores’ diatribes” are on AVFM. So today I’d like to start that process, by looking at some selected examples of times in which contributors to AVFM — not commenters, but actual article writers and in some cases staff members — resorted to the c-word to make their points, whatever the hell those happened to be.
James Taranto of the WSJ: Drunk women who are raped may be as guilty as their rapists
James Taranto, saying something terrible
Wall Street Journal columnist James Taranto is probably the closest thing to an authentic Men’s Rights Activist there is operating in the mainstream media today, by which I mean he regularly puts forth “arguments” on gender issues that are breathtaking in their backwardness.
His latest, er, contribution to the gender debate? A column in which he suggested that drunk women who are raped on college campuses by drunk men are as guilty as their rapists. No, really. Here’s his argument, such as it is:
If two drunk drivers are in a collision, one doesn’t determine fault on the basis of demographic details such as each driver’s sex. But when two drunken college students “collide,” the male one is almost always presumed to be at fault. His diminished capacity owing to alcohol is not a mitigating factor, but her diminished capacity is an aggravating factor for him.
Huh. I’m pretty sure we determine the victim of a rape not on demographics but based on WHICH PERSON RAPED THE OTHER PERSON. Much in the way we would charge a drunken person who shot another drunken person with shooting that person, rather than simply throwing up our hands and saying, well, they were both drunk, so no harm no foul, right?
For a longer take on the issue, check out this piece over on Media Matters.
Media Matters has also assembled a nice, and mercifully rather brief, media montage of some of Taranto’s other pronouncements on gender issues. See if you can make it to the end without pulling out all of your hair.
Some of the comments I don’t let through
How comments are moderated at Man Boobz.
So I had to re-ban a couple of long-banned trolls today, who had returned with new names and slightly different IP addresses but who gave themselves away with their behavior. And that got me thinking about the people — well, the MRAs and PUAs and other such charming folks — who regularly denounce me as an evil censor of FREE SPEECH.
In fact, when I ban people, I do so for good reasons: one of the two trolls I banned today was a longtime MRAish commenter here who eventually creeped everyone out by boasting about having sex with underage prostitutes; the other was a man of many sockpuppets known for angry, abusive meltdowns full of slurs.
Anyway, so I thought I’d give you all a glimpse into my “trash” folder. Here’s a sampling of comments from would-be first time commenters at Man Boobz that I felt would not add anything to the discourse here. But in the interests of FREE SPEECH I thought I’d give these “ideas” an airing today.
TRIGGER WARNING for violent and offensive language. (Sorry about the quality of the last two; you can click on them to see larger versions.)
Not all of the comments I trash are quite this awful. Some are only mildly violent or abusive. I tend to be a bit picky with people’s first comments, assuming that if someone posts a shitty first comment it’s not likely to get any better after that. There are a few banned commenters who stop by and try to post anyway, including one fellow who leaves endless comments trying to prove, as far as I can tell, that teenage girls are objectively hotter than women in their twenties and older.
And, of course, there are comments targeting individual women, whether these are giant cut-and-pasted rants about Anita Sarkeesian, vaguely threatening remarks aimed at other well-known internet feminists, or bizarre sexual comments about female MRAs from fans of theirs.
Once in a while I will get a comment from a feminist that resorts to violent language; I don’t let those comments through either.
And then there are the pictures people try to post in the comments. Below, one of the ones I actually let through, depicting me in a dress with some extremely tall dude. A quick Google image search reveals that it was originally posted online by regular A Voice for Men contributor Janet Bloomfield, in a blog post of hers from last year on Disney princesses. Stay classy, Men’s “Human Rights” Movement!
I don’t actually own a dress like this.
Anyway, the pictures I don’t let through are worse.
Sperm Banks: Prelude to male enslavement?
Not a real sperm bank
So manosphere dudes have a theory of sorts about young women that they frequently boil down to the handy catchphrase “alpha fucks, beta bucks.” The idea is that women — oh, you evil women! — have an insatiable desire to mate with and capture the sperm of hot but unreliable alpha males, and an equally innate tendency to try to con some hard-working beta schlub into paying the bills, with his beta bucks, for the resulting alpha spawn.
Evo Psych Sunday: “Women have an amorality similar to lower evolved animals that steal.”
Prehistoric women gathering foodstuffs.
So over on MGTOWforums — the festering hive of misogyny that is the internet’s largest forum for so-called Men Going Their Own Way — one of the regulars was so impressed with the Evo-Psychy insights of a YouTube commenter by the name of Moe that he decided to share them with the gang there. And I have decided to share them with you.
Brace yourself, though, because Moe is bringing some hardcore SCIENCE to the topics of feminism being awful and why women are such terrible selfish child-murdering monsters.
Moe starts off with some MGTOW basics:
Men’s Rightser: Men win the “we care a lot” olympics because of the Titanic, 9/11
The Man Boobz Pledge Drive continues! If you haven’t already, please consider clicking the little button below and sending some bucks my way.
Thanks! (And thanks again to all who’ve already donated.) Now back to our regularly scheduled programming:
This graphic is the top (unstickied) post on the Men’s Rights subreddit at the moment. Like that Warren Farrell quote I wrote about last week, it’s yet another example of a familiar claim made by misogynistic Men’s Righsers — that men are world’s true heroes, sacrificing themselves for the good of women too lazy or cowardly or whatever to stand up for themselves.
Wil Wheaton to MRAs: You’re idiots. MRAs: Yeah, well, you’re a mangina! And women actually like you! And your narration is bad!
Wil Wheaton is hiding somewhere in this official portrait of Kim Jong Un and pals. From photoshopwilwheaton.tumblr.com
So the Men’s Rights movement has faced some setbacks in the past. The Southern Poverty Law Center profiling them as a movement filled with hate (if not literally a hate group by the SPLC’s strict definition). Events that literally no one showed up to. Paul Elam.
But MRAs have never faced anything quite like this.
Wil Wheaton — yes, that Wil Wheaton, the one who was on Star Trek TNG — has stated publicly that he thinks they’re a bunch of idiots:
Naturally, this tweet has the fellas in the Men’s Rights subreddit feeling hurt and angry. Well, they always feel hurt and angry, so I guess I mean they feel even more hurt and angry than usual, with a lot of this hurt and anger directed in a Wil-Wheatony direction.
Here are some of their comments. I don’t really have any jokes to make about them because, I mean, just read them. I can’t top this sort of ridiculousness.
Click on the individual comments to see them in context on Reddit. Oh, and note that this comment at the top has MORE THAN ONE HUNDRED UPVOTES.
![giegerwasright 119 points 7 hours ago (150|31) Wil Wheaton has never had to live life as a regular man. He has never been treated by women as a regular man. He is a privileged white male. All those things that feminists say that white men have that we recognize are actually really only reserved for rich white men? Well. He's a rich white male. So. What do you expect? Perspective? LOL. He has media to sell and pussy to pander to for approval, hanglowstankin, and profit. permalink source save give gold hide child comments [–]cfornax 63 points 7 hours ago (82|17) Ironic isn't it. He undermines men to elevate his privileged status in eyes of feminists who wish to undermine his privileged status. permalink source save parent give gold [–]giegerwasright 39 points 7 hours ago (53|17) And that, my dear lad, is how the wealthy mangina maintains his status. Key word being "wealthy", a distinction that the unfortunately unwealthy manginas don't recognize. Always. Follow. The money.](http://manboobz.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/geiger2.png?w=604)
Wait. What is “hanglowstankin?” Oh, never mind.
Also, I would bet a mint-in-box Wesley Crusher action figure that Wheaton didn’t call you guys “idiots” because he wanted to pander to “pussy” but rather because you are the sorts of guys who routinely refer to women as “pussy.”
![ruboos [-2] 10 points 7 hours ago (16|6) Wil Wheaton has always been a self hating misandrist. I've never liked him. And his narration is atrocious. Listen to "Ready Player One" if you don't believe me. The dude is a joke. Thank you for calling him out in public. He has no excuse.](http://manboobz.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/narration.png?w=604)
![AnotherDAM 14 points 7 hours ago (24|10) Just because someone is famous in one context does not make him an expert in any, or every, other context. The man made a decent beer with Stone Brewing, he is incredibly practiced at talking with people so don't expect to win a war of words with him or out "cool" him. Just point out to him that he has had everything handed to him on a silver platter his entire adult life ~ he doesn't need to worry about money or getting girls or an invite to the uber-cool CES ~ does not actually mean his opinion matters to anyone but himself. He will eventually get it when all of his male friends start dying decades before his female admirers. permalink source save give gold hide child comments [–]VortexCortex [+1] 4 points 3 hours ago (5|1) I would merely appeal to his sense of logic: "There's much evidence to the contrary, Wheaton; You have not tried try to refute the null hypothesis before holding your belief." Not that it would actually work -- He's an actor who once played a young scientist -- but many of his viewers practice rationality.](http://manboobz.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/dyingrational.png?w=604)
But Wil had one defender amongst the Men’s Rightsers:
![chocoboat 6 points 5 hours ago (25|19) Wil is still cool. He just got misinformed by some feminists, who in an effort to protect their privilege, smear the name of MRAs and fight against equality when it doesn't serve them. He was taught that MRA = a whiny bitch who wants a return to 1950s gender roles and can't stand women having any power over anything. Of course he thinks that kind of person is an idiot. Don't bash Wil, bash the people who misinformed him. I can virtually guarantee you that he would support the same pro-equality ideas that MRAs do, and that he's against the sexist situations that men sometimes run into (such as being arrested after calling police when your wife attacks you, or being made to change airline seats due to "every man is a pedophile" hysteria). permalink source save give gold hide child comments [–]Zetadood 17 points 4 hours ago (23|4) Nah, no one gets a pass for misinformed ignorance. If he changes his views later on that's different, until then he's a tool.](http://manboobz.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/wilcool.png?w=604)
EDIT: H/T to the AgainstMensRighters for pointing me to this.
