About these ads

Blog Archives

Men’s Rights graphics extravaganza: “I need feminism so I can treat women like equals and beat them.”

Actual screenshot of "antifeminist graphics" collection. Apparently graphics do not need to contain graphics.

Actual screenshot of selection from “antifeminist graphics” collection. Apparently graphics do not need to contain graphics.

So the founder of the Men’s Rights subreddit, a fellow who now goes by the name of notnotnotfred, has done his fellow Men’s Rightsers a little favor and collected together a handy assortment of “antifeminist graphics” to assist them in their antifeministing activities on the internets. I thought I would share some of them with you all, just so you know what you’re up against.

Oh, who am I kidding? We here at Man Boobz love love love MRA graphics. There are few things in this world so hilariously awful. Take a look at these hot messes.

Read the rest of this entry

About these ads

Quiz: Who said “Sluts are just whores in training?”

MRAs also like to remain anonymous when they make terrible jokes

Misogynists also like to remain anonymous when they make terrible jokes

Time for a little quiz!

Who posted comments online in which he (or she) declared that:

“Sluts are just whores in training.”

“Women look at 2 bulges on a man, one in the front of the pants or second one in the back pocket. Whichever one is bigger, they can do without the other.”

“What’s the most used line in Arkansas: daddy get off me you are crushing my cigarettes.”

Female college students are “sororostutes.”

Women expect special treatment because of their “golden vajay jays”

Khloe Kardashian is “black by injection.”

Your choices are:

Read the rest of this entry

Saturday Night Live takes on Men’s Rights Activists in Not-Actually Funny Skit

SNL's MRA and his soon-to-be-ex Venezuelan girlfriend

SNL’s MRA and his soon-to-be-ex Venezuelan girlfriend

So this is … interesting. Last night, Saturday Night Live did a sketch, featuring guest host Lena Dunham, about Men’s Rights Activists. Alas, it wasn’t actually funny, or particularly on the mark, and it was kind of, sort of, maybe, a little bit racist (well, ok, a lot), but it did at least give a pretty good impression of what people in the real world think of the MRAs we know and loathe so well. I can’t embed it here, so go take a look at it on Hulu.

The folks in the Men’s Rights subreddit are up in arms about it, and have started not one, not two, not three, not four, not five, but six threads on the subject. (There may be more; that’s all I noticed.) Well, it’s not often they get this much attention, so I guess their excitement is understandable.

Given that the sketch was actually pretty crappy in a lot of ways, the MRAs did have some legitimate complaints to make against it — like the fact that the women in the sketch mocked the MRA character for being an unattractive loser. But naturally the Men’s Rights Redditors managed to undercut even this perfectly reasonable criticism by attacking the women in the sketch for being uggos. (Oh, misogynists, why do you hate Lena Dunham so much?) Here’s a rather delightfully ironic snippet of the discussion:

SNL manages to misinterpret MRA arguments, shame man who are less physically attractive than others by implying they are somehow lesser, says that all MRAs are only MRAs because of bad love experiences, and accuse the MRHM of being pro-life, which is a blatant lie. (hulu.com)  submitted 7 hours ago by Feminists_Are_Jelly      29 comments     share     source     save     hide     give gold     report     hide all child comments  sorted by: hot navigate by: submitter | moderator | friend | admin | IAmA | images | popular | new you are viewing a single comment's thread.  view the rest of the comments →  [–]MockingDead 16 points 6 hours ago (27|11)  A bunch of unattractive unfunny women impugning a man for being not an apex male.      permalink     save     source     save     give gold     hide child comments  [–]ugly_duck 5 points 5 hours ago (16|11)      A bunch of unattractive unfunny women impugning a man for being not an apex male.  Imagine if the genders were reversed.      permalink     save     source     save     parent     give gold  [–]Grubnar 6 points 4 hours ago (12|6)  I am trying ... and I can't. Men are not usually judged by their attractiveness, but by their wealth.

Indeed, I’ve rarely seen irony so thick as in the outraged comments of MRAs in these threads. Here’s another angry Redditor:

Ruwanimo 132 points 14 hours ago (207|75)  I just saw the sketch and am speechless. I am beyond insulted as a male and heartbroken that flagrant sexism and shaming is OK. I can't even imagine how it would look if the genders were reversed.

Heavens! Sexism and shaming! MRAs NEVER engage in either of those things!

Oh, wait. That’s pretty much the entire basis of their movement.

Ruwanimo, you say you can’t imagine how it would look if the genders were reversed? You don’t have to imagine. All you have to do is go to the Men’s Rights subreddit, or A Voice for Men, or any other prominent (or not-so-prominent) Men’s Rights site. Or you could read through the Man Boobz archives. Ta da! Literally hundreds — make that thousands — of examples of MRAs directing “flagrant sexism and shaming” at women. (Also note: this shaming is directed at women, not only at feminists, whereas the SNL skit directed its shaming only at MRAs, not at men in general.)

You’re welcome!

The AgainstMensRights subreddit is also all over this thing, though they’ve limited themselves to four threads — here, here, here and here, which is where I found that first discussion I screenshotted.

Warren Farrell is an Ass, Man

Yep, that's a butt on the cover. He put a butt on the cover. Men are oppressed by women's butts.

Yep, that’s a butt on the cover. He put a butt on the cover. Men are oppressed by women’s butts.

You may remember the embarrassing spectacle a couple of months back when Warren Farrell asked the readers of A Voice for Men to help him pick out a cover picture for a new ebook version of The Myth of Male Power, the 21-year-old crackpot bestseller that more or less provided the, er, intellectual foundation for today’s Men’s Rights movement.

It wasn’t just embarrassing because AVFM is a noxious hate site that regularly calls women c*nts and whores and helps to organize informal campaigns of harassment directed at individual women. It was also embarrassing because all three of the pictures were sexualized images focusing on specific female body parts. You can guess which three, and you’d be right: tits, ass, and vagina (the latter tastefully covered in a merkin made of moss).

Well, Farrell ended up rejecting all of these images in favor of … a different picture of a woman’s butt. Yep, the screenshot above features the actual cover of the recently released ebook version of The Myth of Male Power. (You can see it in its full sized-glory over on Amazon.)

The implicit message of the cover couldn’t be clearer: men may seem to run the world, but women can control and exploit them through the power of their sexuality. Male power is undercut by … butt power.

Am I reading too much into a cover image? Farrell doesn’t really believe this nonsense, does he?

Well, in the introduction to the ebook, Farrell writes:

farrellButt1

In case you’re wondering, “genetic celebrity” is Farrell’s term of art for any attractive woman.

But golly, you say, the fact that a dude feels “powerless” because he can’t have sex with every woman with a nice butt that happens to wander across his field of vision doesn’t actually mean that men are powerless or that male power is a myth. Well, Farrell has an answer to this as well. And by “answer” I mean, well, whatever this is:

farrellbutt2
Got that? I’m not sure there’s anything there to get; it’s nothing more than hand-waving to distract attention from the nonsensical nature of his previous statements. In case any Men’s Rights activist ever brings Warren Farrell up as an example of a respectable, “academic” MRA, you may wish to point out that almost nothing Farrell writes ever actually makes any fucking sense.

In the book itself, Farrell repeatedly suggested that male power can be undone almost completely by the sexual power of women. In one oft-quoted passage, he wrote about the effect that a “secretary’s miniskirt power, cleavage power and flirtation power” allegedly has on their male bosses. (Myth of Male Power, p. 21)

While that statement has earned a certain notoriety for its sheer ridiculousness, Farrell went further elsewhere in the book, essentially arguing that men are as addicted to female “beauty” as drug addicts are to the drug of their choice — and as helpless.

“Sexually, of course, the sexes aren’t equal,” Farrell wrote. “[M]any men feel ‘under the influence the moment they see a beautiful woman.” (p. 320, emphasis in original.)

This sort of temporary “intoxication,” Farrell argued, leads men into shackling themselves to these temporarily sexy tyrants for the rest of their lives — thus agreeing to support them (he suggested implicitly) even after they get old and ugly. (p. 85.)

farrellbeautytrap

In Farrell’s original book, this “argument,” such as it is, was merely one of many that he thought undercut the alleged “myth of male power.” Now, with the butt on the cover, he’s put it front and center. Or, more precisely, rear and center.

Warren Farrell, you’re an ass, man.

Oh, awkward segue here, I just wanted to show off the cover to the new edition of my classic book, The Myth of Human Power.

mythhumanpower

It will soon be available for one million dollars in cash in unmarked bills, upon delivery of which I will sit down and write it for you. It will probably be pretty short and not very convincing.

Wearing a Skirt Has Consequences: A Men’s Rights Redditor defends a man’s sacred right to take upskirt photos

Women: If you wear skirts here, some MRAs think you should be punished for it

Women: If you wear skirts here, some MRAs think you should be punished for it

So we, as a society, have “peeping tom” laws to protect people who might unknowingly expose themselves to the creepy peepers of, well, creepy peepers who get their thrills from seeing and sometimes photographing strangers revealing more than they meant to.

It would seem reasonable enough to consider surreptitiously taken “upskirt” photographs as violations of peeping tom laws. But not in Massachusetts: On Wednesday, the Supreme Judicial Court in that state ruled that upskirt photographs are legally ok, as the laws there are written to apply only to protect victims who are “partially nude,” not those who are merely wearing short skirts.

In the wake of the ruling, legislators and women’s rights advocates are saying that the laws — written before cell phone camera were ubiquitous —  need an update.

Naturally, this has some of the dedicated Human Rights activists in the Men’s Rights subreddit in an uproar. How dare anyone challenge their sacred right to take pictures of women’s panties on public transportation without their consent!

Demonspawn [-1] 6 points 7 hours ago (26|20)  Wearing a skirt has consequences. If we use state violence to protect women from the consequences of her choice to wear a skirt, we remove her agency. This man didn't assault her, didn't touch her... all he did was take a picture of what her choice in clothing exposed to the public.  How is that criminal to the point of deserving of state violence upon him?  This is saying that protecting women from the consequences of their choices in clothing is more important than men's freedom.      permalink     save     source     save     give gold     hide child comments  [–]nigglereddit 5 points 6 hours ago (13|8)  You're absolutely correct.  If you wear clothing which exposes parts of your body from some angles, you have to expect that someone at that angle will see those parts of your body.  You can't tell everyone not to see you from those angles because you're not comfortable with that part of your body being seen; that's ridiculous. If you're uncomfortable it is your job to cover that part of your body.      permalink     save     source     save     parent     give gold  [–]DaNiceguy [-2] 4 points 4 hours ago (11|7)  Ah but you see the wrong man saw it. That makes him a criminal, right?

“Wearing a skirt has consequences!” What a perfect slogan for a “movement” that is about little more than tearing down half of humanity in the name of, what, a man’s right to be a peeping tom? Put it on a t-shirt, Demonspawn, and show the world the kind of creep you are.

NOTE: Thanks to Cloudiah for pointing me to this.

UPDATE: The Massachusetts State Legislature, moving surprisingly quickly, has passed a new law explicitly banning upskirt photos; it could be signed into law by tomorrow.

Red Pill Theorist: Women are like children. Except you can have sex with them.

This Morpheus dude may have a point.

This Morpheus dude may have a point.

Put on your thinking caps today, because we are going to wade into the highly rarefied world of Red Pill Theory. Our Guest Lecturer today is a totally ALPHA DOG Red Pill Redditor by the name of GayLubeOil — don’t worry, fellas, he’s straight! — who has some important insights for us all on the nature of women.

Namely, that women are basically just overgrown children. Who give blow jobs.

Let’s let him explain, in a post that’s now Number One With A Sticky in the Red Pill Subreddit.

Treating Women Like Children (self.TheRedPill) submitted 8 hours ago by Endorsed ContributorGayLubeOil - stickied post One of the key tenants of Red Pill is that women act like children. There are many reasons for this. Women are not held accountable for their actions growing up, so they are completely new to the concept of accountability. If a woman sucks a dick, she tells a realy long story about how she was put in a dick sucking situation. Women don't realy believe in their own agency. That's why they often believe in cosmic forces like fate and patriarchy, because nothing they ever do is their fault. If women don't take responsibility for their actions, someone else has to. That's why we have to treat women like children. Obviously, some woman is going to read this have a cascade of feels and then deal with said feels in the most immature way possible.  While Red Pill theory has definitely harsh view of women, the practical application isn't as anti-social as our detractors believe.  One of the things that children suck at, is regulating their internal state. They're too little to know if their hungry, sleepy or if they need to go for a walk. When a child throws a tantrum its often not about the toy, there is often some underlying issue you need to take care of.  As stupid as its sounds you can completely avoid a lot of arguments by ignoring everything she says and going for the underlying problem. I cant believe you never told me that you X! Aww is she hungry. She gets this way when shes hungry. Then just feed her some Greek yogurt or something, and the problem will go away. Or just take her for a walk around the block, because shes just anxious from being at work the entire day.  Red Pill holds that male leadership is the cornerstone of a good relationship. Sometimes that means treating her like a child.

After reading all of that, you may have a few questions. Obviously, the most important question is: why Greek Yogurt? Well, in addition to being very popular with the ladies, it is apparently quite high in iron. Let’s let Professor LubeOil explain why that’s so crucial:

GayLubeOil[S] 44 points 7 hours ago* The reason I used Greek Yogurt as an example is that its high in Iron. A surprising number of women are anemic which means they bruise easily. Its obviusly not your fault that she cant get enough nutrients into her body. However You don't want to be seen walking around with a bruised woman. Which is why GayLubeOil recommends feeding your anemic woman Greek Yogurt mixed with pomegranate so you don't look like an abusive asshole. If you are an abusive asshole yogurt and pomegranate will not fix or prevent hemotoma. Sorry abusive assholes.  permalinkparentgive gold [–]Knoxhon_ 8 points 5 hours ago Sorry abusive assholes.  lmfao
Well, with that critical issue taken care of in a totally not creepy or red-flaggy kind of way, let’s move on to some of the serious discussion Professsor LubeOil’s thesis inspired in the Red Pill Subreddit.

Ah, who am I kidding? They mainly just posted comments about how totally right he was and how women totally are a bunch of overgrown children. But saying women are children is totes not misogyny!

Usherai 39 points 7 hours ago For all the accusations of misogyny thrown at TRP, I don't think most guys, even here, go far enough. Women are exactly like children in that without strong male leadership they will ruin themselves by being slaves to their emotions and short-sightedness. Their inability to take responsibility for themselves means that men need to be the ones directing, influencing, and manipulating their emotions into beneficial behaviors and pursuits.  This means that the mindset RP men should have in their relationships with women is one of complete and utter superiority. Your analysis and suggestions are pretty spot on.
And, heck, even if a dude maybe is a teensy bit of a misogynist, what’s the big deal, so long as it convinces him to treat his women properly — that is, like you would treat special needs children.

GayLubeOil[S] 41 points 7 hours ago Even if someone is a blatant misogynist and thinks women are completely inferior to men, that doesn't necessarily translate into him treating women poorly. Lets say you had a special needs child . The kids obviously intellectually inferior, to you and his peers. You knowing this doesn't make you an asshole. Knowing this and admitting this is the first step in being a good parent for this kid. Yea maybe you have to wipe his mouth after he eats or pick up after him a bit more. But pretending that he is a totally normal kid is going to make you a shittier parent than admitting the truth. That's why you should do what men have done for most of human history:treat women like women instead of pretending that they are men with breasts.  permalinkparentgive gold [–]Knoxhon_ 14 points 5 hours ago misogyny isn't about superior/inferior. it's about a hatred of women as a group. this is a common misconception.  permalinkparentgive gold [–]Endorsed ContributorDemonspawn 13 points 4 hours ago But so much of the population has equality disease: thinking someone isn't equal must be coming from hate... because they are equal, don'tchaknow!

Damn those feminazis and their “equality!” Why, it’s almost un-American!

British Men’s Rightser to feminists: I will fight you until my dying breath! And so will my totally real ex-model girlfriend.

Sasha's eloquent words, immortalized in ugly MRA poster form by Cloudiah of Artistry for Feminism. And Kittens.

Sasha’s eloquent words, immortalized in ugly MRA poster form by Cloudiah of Artistry for Feminism. And Kittens.

Meet Sasha. Sasha is an angry young man living in England (allegedly), with a super-HAWT girlfriend (allegedly), and a lot of opinions about feminism (not-so-allegedly). The other day, he decided to share some of these opinions with the world. Or at least with any of those feminists who happened to be reading the Men’s Rights subreddit at the time.

In a topic devoted to a conference on “lad culture” in British universities, Sasha lashed out at feminists for what he sees as their hypocritical attack on boorish, sexist “lads.” Hypocritical, you see, because these very same women allegedly have sex with posh men all the bloody time:

Read the rest of this entry

Why can’t Men’s Rightsers design posters to save their lives? A new theory

feminists-are-stupid

Note: Not an actual quote from me.

Is there something about Men’s Rights Activists that renders them utterly incapable of designing posters that aren’t embarrassingly ugly and offputting?

Posters designed by MRAs are so routinely godawful it’s hard not to wonder if there is something inherent about them or their ideas that prevents them from seeing what a complete mess they’re making when they put together something like the poster above, which I recently found amongst a whole collection of similarly terrible posters at the website What Men Are Saying About Women.

In the case of Christian J, the WMASAW poster-designer, there is clearly something more than bad ideas at work here, but I do think the bad ideas of the Men’s Rights movement are a large part of the reason why MRAs can’t design posters to save their lives. Their posters are muddled messes because their ideology is a muddled mess.

Read the rest of this entry

Today in Straw Feminism: Why they chuckle at male suicide figures — explained!

Over on the Men’s Rights subreddit, the regulars are getting worked up about imaginary feminists again. Well, I suppose that’s pretty much all they ever do. But these two have managed to get even more worked up about even more imaginary feminists than they usually do:

 

flying_downwardss 12 points 22 hours ago (18|6)  I'M SORRY FOR BEING BORN MALE, I'M SORRY!  Is that what the feminists and manginas want to hear?      permalink     source     save     give gold     hide child comments  [–]Maschalismos 7 points 18 hours ago (7|0)  You know full well it is. And the only way for you to atone for your sin -making a woman feel bad by existing- is to kill yourself.  Thats why they chuckle at male suicide figures: they think its justice for the vast, infinite, undefined bulk of crimes against women since the dawn of time.

Upvotes for everyone!

 

 

5 Arguments Least Likely To Convince A Young Woman That A Voice for Men Isn’t a Misogynistic Hate Site

Hi, girls! Dean Esmay reaches out to the youth of America

Hey ladies! Dean Esmay reaches out to the young women of America

Not that long ago, an 18-year-old student named Carly, appalled by the rampant misogyny on display at A Voice for Men, sent a critical but thoughtful email to a number of the men associated with the site challenging them to rise above their hatred of women.

AVFM “Managing Editor” Dean Esmay decided to take her email as an opportunity to reach out to all the Carlys out there in the world in an attempt to win them over to AVFM’s peculiar brand of “human rights activism,” penning what he called an

open letter … not just to you, but to any young woman who has an open mind and is willing to be challenged on her prejudices.

Naturally, given that Men’s Rights Activists are some of the most verbose douchebags in history, it was long as hell — some 3000 words. But Esmay’s diplomatically worded attempt at outreach didn’t go quite as well as he might have hoped. Carly responded with a note saying that his open letter had merely

reinforced everything I believe. It seems we are at a stalemate, you will never agree with me, and I will never agree with you.

So where might poor Dean Esmay might have gone wrong in his attempt to win Carly’s heart and mind?

Let’s start here, with 5 Arguments Least Likely To Convince A Young Woman That A Voice for Men Isn’t a Woman-Hating Piece of Shit Hate Site, in the form of direct quotes from The Esmay himself. Since Esmay is so long-winded, I’ve highlighted some of my favorite bits in bold.

1)“[Y]ou’re 18, and so, not to put too fine a point on it, you are still a young skull full of mush.

2)[M]en have few to no voices speaking about issues that are specific to men, or defending men as a group, in this society. Until very recently in history men never have had such a voice. Because pretty much all civilizations for the last few thousand years have prioritized the needs and desires of women over those of men. For hundreds, even thousands, of years.

3)If you believe men have silenced women for thousands of years … you believe something that just not true.Furthermore, if you believe that, what you have to believe is that Asian men have been oppressing Asian women for thousands of years, black men have been oppressing black women for thousands of years, European men, Australasian men, and so on, have all been oppressing their women for thousands of years. And those weak women could do nothing about it. So what you believe here isn’t just wrong, it’s racist.

4)For most of history, being female was a privilege. It carried certain special rights that only applied to women, and special responsibilities that only applied to women, and through most of history, being male was a burden, a burden which carried certain rights that only applied to men, and those rights were there mostly so they could discharge their duties to women properly.”

5) “[Y]ou may occasionally see angry remarks or articles on this site. What I would hope you would do with that, when you do see it, is contemplate that there is a difference between righteous anger at real injustice, and what you seem to have misinterpreted as hate.

The funniest thing about Esmay’s “open letter” is that this bizarre crackpottery, easily seen through by anyone with any knowledge of history or sociology or, hell, the real world,  is his attempt to sound as reasonable as possible. He’s reined in the wild conspiratorial ranting he often indulges in when arguing with ideological foes; he’s avoided the misogynistic slurs (cunt, bitch, whore) favored by other AVFMers like Paul Elam and Diana Davison. And this is the best he can manage.

The Men’s “Human Rights” Movement isn’t ready for its close-up. And I suspect that it never will be.

EDITED TO ADD: A commenter has pointed out another quote I should have included as well. So here is BONUS EXTRA LEAST CONVINCING DEAN ESMAY ARGUMENT NUMBER SIX:

6) “The truth is, the most privileged class of people in the whole wide world are young women living in places like the US, UK, Canada, etc.–and if you want to be treated like an equal, you should not flinch or cry like a little girl if someone tells you that.

How dare you accuse us of sexism, you spoiled little girl!

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 8,501 other followers

%d bloggers like this: