About these ads

Blog Archives

Women are lying when they say they want more dicks on TV, Men’s Rights Redditors explain

Artist Louise Bourgeois also pretended to like dongs.

Artist Louise Bourgeois also pretended to like dongs.

So for some reason the fellas on the Men’s Rights subreddit are discussing an article by Australian newspaper columnist Clementine Ford in which she expresses her desire to see more dongs on television.

As she notes, there are plenty of boobs on display on HBO shows like Game of Thrones, yet “rarely are we treated to the visual smorgasbord of a well stocked meat platter. ” Ford is sick of it.  “So bring on the parade of wangs, willies and woodies!” she demands. “I’m fond of a wand and I’m not ashamed to say it.”

I’m not terribly familiar with the writings of Clementine Ford, but evidently she’s not big on subtlety.

Anyway, the fellas in the Men’s Rights subreddit aren’t having any of it. Nuh uh. They ain’t buying it, ladies! You may write columns about how you want more wang on TV. You may talk about it with your friends. You may have gigantic collections of peen pics hidden away on your hard drive.

But the MRAs of Reddit know better. It’s all some devious feminist ploy, as Steampunk_Moustache helpfully explains.

Steampunk_Moustache 1 point 5 hours ago (2|1)  It's rather funny seeing feminists pretend they want to see penises just so that they can make this (weak) argument, isn't it?  Women don't want to look at dicks. Women don't get turned on by the sight of dicks.  Do you know who gets turned on by the sight of dicks? Ironically, straight men.

Huh. That took an odd twist at the end there.

But it’s our old friend Giegerwasright who provides the real answer, in the form of a wall-o-mansplainin’ so giant that I had to shrink the text to even screencap it.

giegerwasright 27 points 10 hours ago (31|4)  OK, my negroes. I'm going to lay this out for you. Because the women in this article and the writer of this article... they aren't interested at all in the male form. Not a single bit. They're just being spoiled brat children (as usual) stomping their feet and nasally sneering "what about you! what about you!" They're just looking for something to whinge about and make demands of (as usual) that they never really have any interest in making use of.  How may women in visual arts profess an adoration for the male form? Can you name a single female visual artist who has expressed her passion for that male form through her art in a manner that is sublime? I can't. I can easily fine male visual artists who do so. Michelangelo's David is a pretty classic example. Everything by Caravaggio stands out quite beautifully. Mapplethorpe's photos of men show a passion for the male form, a passion that ultimately killed him, that I have never in my life seen expressed in a single woman's work. Never. Women don't appreciate or even like the male form very much. They like what it gets them.  You're just as likely to find men who express that adoration for the female form as you will the male. I'd start with Mona Lisa, but I find that painting to be rather reserved and dispassionate. Take a look at the work of John Singer Sargent. Picasso expressed adoration for the female form both in and out of his cubist works. Monet, Manet, Van Gogh, to Man Ray and Helmut Newton. On and on and on is a list of male artists with a visceral and obsessive adoration for the female form.  And female artists? What do they like? Nearly unilaterally, they seem to prefer the female form as well. They are not driven by the same compulsion for the opposite sex that so many male artists seem to experience. They just aren't interested. What did Frida Khalo paint? Herself. Georgia O'Keefe? her vagina. Cindy Sherman? More women. Even pop photographers are more interested in the female form. Look at the work of Bunny Yeager. Women as artists are only concerned with their own form.  The only interest that women have in the male form is it's utility and as fodder for humor. "tee hee! a penis! tee hee!". These women aren't requesting "cocks". They don't want "dicks". They aren't raging for "erections". They want "dongs". Fodder for jokes. Remember when Ensler came out with the Vagina Monologues? We all know it here. The play waxed poetic about the beauty and versimilitude of the female organ. What did men get that year? That year, the penis got "Puppetry of the Penis". A joke. A ridicule. A parlour trick. A fucking carnival act.  So, when women clench their fists and bawl with quivering lower lip "Why dere is no dongz on da tee vee!?!?" I have to respond "Because you don't fucking want them. That's why."

Huh.

So why exactly are women pretending to be interested in seeing more penises on television? So they can point at them and laugh?

Women are such an enigma, especially if you just assume that nothing they ever say is true and that it’s all part of some weird plot to screw with men’s heads.

(H/t to r/againstmensrights for pointing me to geigerwasright’s lovely comment.)

About these ads

Should gaming be a “safe space” for nerdy dudes who hate women? The Men’s Rights perspective

idiot-nerd-girl-reappropriated-05

I’m back from a brief vacation in Migraineland, and thinking about the ways in which Men’s Rights Activists love to appropriate the language of feminism and other progressive movements, usually in ways that are face-palmingly ass-backwards.

Take this recent discussion on the Men’s Rights subreddit of the dire threat of “fake gamer girls” invading the “male space” of gaming. The generically named guywithaccount sets up the discussion with this post:

Read the rest of this entry

A Voice for Men’s Dan Perrins: Great White Hope for Jamaica’s Gay Men?

Mighty white of you, Dan!

Dan Perrins has launched an international boycott of Jamaica. Mighty white of you, Dan!

So the other day, Canadian Men’s Rights activist and all-around crank Dan Perrins apparently noticed for the first time that gay men face massive bigotry in Jamaica. He reported his findings in a post on A Voice for Men:

Right now in Jamaica lesbian sex is legal while male homosexual sex acts can get you up to 10 years in prison at hard labor.

In other words, homosexual women are accepted as a normal part of society. Homosexual men are criminals, for just existing.

Wait, what?

Read the rest of this entry

MRA Paul Elam: “This world deserves a jerk on the collar and a slap across the face and the flying spittle of rage.”

A Voice for Men's Flying Spittle Production Department

A Voice for Men’s Flying Spittle Production Department

“Compassion for Boys and Men.” This, the slogan of Men’s Rights hate site A Voice for Men, has always struck me as a teensy bit ironic, given that site founder and head angry dude Paul Elam spends much of his time berating other men, and really only seems interested in showing “compassion,” if it can be called that, for those who not only agree with everything he says but also donate money to him.

Recently Mr. Elam ran across a four-year-old video that’s been posted to the Men’s Rights subreddit numerous times in recent days. It shows a young woman assaulting a campus preacher, and knocking him off a platform, after falsely accusing him of groping her. (The woman, a student at Middle Tennessee State University, was arrested and later pled guilty to assault charges, getting a year’s probation, some community service and a fine; the preacher suffered only minor injuries.)

But the fact that a few people in the crowd cheered for the attacker apparently convinced Elam that everyone in the world except him and a few of his pals are worthless pieces of crap.

Look at the crowd cheer this violent lunatic on. It isn’t just her that is the problem. We live in a psychotic world where women can do whatever they want to men, as long as they vomit up a lie, like “get your hand off my breast.” It is a world which praises sickness, as long as the person to suffer for it is male.

Well, actually, it looked like most of the people in the crowd were a bit shocked by her assault and the preacher’s fall, and several people came forward to help him. And I’m not quite sure how Elam managed to miss the fact that the woman in question was led off by police at the end of the video.

In this culture, most every woman is Sharon Osbourne. Most every man is Hugo Schwyzer.

By describing women as a bunch of “Sharon Osbournes,” Elam is not (I don’t think) suggesting that they are savvy, articulate women who’ve been able to not only survive but flourish in male-dominated industries; no, he’s making a reference to the one time that Osbourne made a horrible castration joke on national television, and suggesting that women are a bunch of evil harpies that love to fantasize about cutting men’s dicks off.

By referring to men as “Hugo Schwyzers” — Elam’s post was written before Schwyzer’s recent Twitter meltdown — he’s not (I don’t think) suggesting that men are all a bunch of manipulative predators who glom onto feminism as a way to exploit and manipulate women, but rather suggesting that they’re a bunch of obsequious manginas who let women walk all over them.

I feel confident in attributing these interpretations to Elam’s words because he’s made these arguments many times before. It’s pretty obvious that Elam hates women. It’s only a little less obvious that he hates most men as well.

But I don’t think it’s really this video that’s got Elam angry. It looks to me like he’s still stewing over a recent op-ed by libertarian anti-feminist Cathy Young — a writer in many ways deeply sympathetic to the Men’s Rights ideology — which took a passing shot at A Voice for Men and similar sites whose “steady diet of vulgar woman-bashing … discredits any valid points they may make.”

So far Elam’s site has run at least four other posts — possibly five? I’ve lost count —  responding to the single sentence mentioning AVFM in her column, including one by him and another by a “brigade” of self-described “Honey Badgers” (female MRAs), but Elam can’t resist the opportunity to point out yet again that he’s going to remain as angry as he wants to be:

I do not give a rat’s fucking ass about offending or upsetting any of them.

This world does not deserve MHRAs that are decent or measured or considerate of the mainstreams sensibilities. This world deserves a jerk on the collar and a slap across the face and the flying spittle of rage that it earns with each man and boy that it denigrates and abuses.

“The Flying Spittle of Rage” makes a much better — and more accurate — slogan for AVFM than that boring old “Compassion for Boys and Men.”

Men’s Rights Redditor: It’s not sexism that holds back women in STEM. It’s just that women are inferior.

Over on the Men’s Rights subreddit, the lovely IHaveALargePenis explains that it’s not sexism holding back women in science and technology. No way! It’s just that women are inferior at science and technology. No sexism involved at all!

IHaveALargePenis 10 points 1 day ago (15|6)      The fact that women are so underrepresented in many STEM fields indicates that there must be some educational, societal, or institutional force pushing them away.  There is. It has a lot to do with women though. First with STEM, the hierarchy in the workforce always favors the smartest/most knowledgeable people. This means you can't flirt your way to the top or simply just "make it" eventually.  The work is somewhat quantifiable, so people can be tracked in how much work they do. You can't sit around and chat or take extra time off and fuck around. People will find out.  Many fields have horrible deadlines and any person not finishing their work on time can slow an entire project and become the weakest link. When you're holding up something that thousands of people are working on, relying on, etc and they're all waiting for you, not fun. Additionally you'll be pushed to do overtime, heavy overtime. When it comes to software development for example, in the last few months leading up to release, you'll be better off bringing extra clothes and a sleeping bag to work. This can apply to virtually all other fields in different ways for different reasons.  Women and men study differently. Women are great and memorizing but don't focus on understanding. This is why there's a relatively equal amount of girls/boys in STEM the first year, but then it significantly favors the boys as time passes. The problem is that women do great on tests, but don't bother to understand that knowledge, which is fairly important later on and everything you learn will be used in the future (as you move from first to 4th year). This is why girls have been doing better (or so it seems) ever since standardized tests.  There are no problems in STEM for women. There's nobody out there trying to hold them back. My university cracked down hard on this shit, even had security cameras installed to ensure there was no harassment or sexism going on. And you know what changed? Nothing.      The key is attacking gender issues from both sides, rather than the BS of encouraging women to enter and just ignoring all problems men have.  What exactly is there to attack? There's 50% more women in college than men. Women have infiltrated every major out there outside of STEM. Do you know how HUGE STEM is? Let me tell you how huge it is. Go look up any non STEM focused University out there (MIT or Standord) and check the faculty for STEM or other majors. You'll find out quickly that the entire STEM curriculum has fewer faculty than a single major like business.

Maybe IHaveALArgePenis should have taken an English class or two and learned what “irony” is.

Also, uh, how exactly are security cameras supposed to guard against sexism? This is a new one to me.

Thanks to Wrecksomething on the AgainstMensRights subreddit for pointing me to this mantastic quote.

 

No, YOU’RE The [Anti-Woman Slur]: A Manosphere Debate [NOW WITH TRANSCRIPT]

Today, some comedy, in the form of an 8 minute excerpt from what was apparently an hour-and-a-half “debate” between John “The Other” Hembling, noted Men’s Human Rights Activist from A Voice For Human Men, and some dude from Manhood Academy, a Men’s Rights site that’s actually a teensy bit more obnoxious than AVFM, although in a much less interesting way.

It’s NSFW, unless you’re wearing headphones, due to salty language and near-constant anti-woman slurs.

In case you haven’t listened to enough of  JohnTheOther to instantly recognize his irritating voice, he is — uncharacteristically — the quieter of the two, er, debaters here, and a little bit on the defensive.

Thanks to the intrepid work of new commenter Thal, we now have a transcript!

Read the rest of this entry

Men’s Rights Manifesto: Solve all of our gender problems by segregating men and women at school and work!

Roxy Music's Manifesto: Far superior to the Men's Rights version

Roxy Music’s Manifesto: Far superior to the Men’s Rights version

What do Men’s Rights Activists want? Based on what they actually do, it’s seems pretty clear that many of them want little more than the right to pester women with endless cries of “what about the menz?” But from time to time MRAs will step forward with little bullet-pointed manifestos presenting their grievances — and their goals — to the world.

So today let’s look at one of these little manifestos, from an MRA calling himself TzeTze Anopheles. It’s pretty revealing. And stupid. But that goes without saying.

Read the rest of this entry

Men’s Rights Redditors wonder why nobody else realizes that the ladies aren’t oppressed any more

For example, women never have to fight off flying squirrels, which are very bitey, mind you.

For example, women never have to fight off flying squirrels.

So the regulars in the Men’s Rights subreddit are currently discussing one of the most important — if often overlooked — issues of our time, which is: How come nobody but us sees that the ladies aren’t oppressed any more? Or, as  paranoiarodeo497, looking hopefully towards the future, has chosen to put the question: “What future event/tragedy do you think will happen that will make people realize not only are women no longer deprived but in fact equal to men?”

Alas, the Men’s Rightsers aren’t hopeful that anything will wake up the snoozing sheeple. BrambleEdge, for his part, worries that men will remain oppressed forever.

Read the rest of this entry

A Voice for Men UK: All Women Are Homophobic (If We Can Just Make Up Our Own Definitions for Words)

You keep using that word. I'm not even going to bother with the rest of this quote.

You keep using that word. I’m not even going to bother with the rest of this quote.

If you ever need proof that Men’s Rights Activists live in a world of their own, check out this, er, argument, found in a posting on A Voice for Men UK, the official British franchise of the American hate site we know so well :

All women are homophobic.

Whether the men being prejudiced against are gay or not is kind of beside the point – after all, ‘homo’ = man, ‘phobia’ = fear, therefore: ‘homophobia’ = Fear of Man – but, if you want to quibble over Greek & Latin etymology, perhaps we can at least agree on this: all women, to a greater or lesser extent, display the ‘symptoms’ we attribute to said condition: overt caution, fear &/or disdain of men.

Yep, that’s right. In order to find an excuse to call women “homophobic,” they’ve invented an entirely new definition for the word not based in any way on the actual etymology of the word “homophobia” (which is of course derived from “homosexual”) but on something they’ve just made up.

By this logic, the word “homosexual” would not mean “of, relating to, or characterized by a tendency to direct sexual desire toward another of the same sex” but rather “man sexual.” If we take this to mean “attracted to men,” this would suggest that all straight women with sex drives would therefore be homosexual as well. Brilliant, A Voice for Men UK.

The author of the post then uses this weird logic to make excuses for actual homophobia among straight men:

Female ‘homophobia’ is so normalized in our society that treating every man you meet like ‘Schrödinger’s Rapist’ is considered an ordinary, common sense fact of life – just so long as you are a woman. But if a man feels at all uncomfortable around another man sexually, he is presently branded an evil bigot for behaving the way all women do at all times.

A Voice for Men: they reject your reality, and substitute nonsensical unreality that allows them to say bad things about women.

Men’s Rights Redditors outraged by poster suggesting that men teach boys “about gender equality and healthy, equal relationships.”

Gender equality is MISANDRY!

Gender equality is MISANDRY!

Apparently, to a lot of the regulars in the Men’s Rights subreddit — like the hundreds who upvoted a post of this picture — the notion that men should raise their sons to respect women as equals is nothing more than foul propaganda and MISANDRY of the highest order.

And seriously, those guys in the poster look like total White Knight Beta Manginas.

Some of the Men’s Rightsers were especially offended by the white ribbon at the bottom of the poster, which they saw as a vaguely sinister reminder of a World War I campaign to shame British men into enlisting in the army. Because suggesting to your sons that boys and girls should be treated equally is the same as being guilt-tripped into becoming cannon fodder:

TheOtherBono 54 points 1 day ago (80|26)  White ribbons. Just like the white feathers handed to non-conscript men of the UK during WW1 by women to shame them into enlisting. How sweet       [–]froggymorning 14 points 22 hours ago (23|9)  What a subtle and effective slap.      MRMRising [-2] 6 points 23 hours ago (12|6)  ...and just as destructive.

Others used the poster as an opportunity to rail against … marriage. The top comment in the thread, as I write this post, is this one.

LAMFF 85 points 1 day ago (118|33)  Boys, avoid marriage at all costs. There is nothing equitable about that relationship.

Elezeid expanded on this theme:

Elezeid 10 points 20 hours ago (13|3)  Boys, if you have a child and don't stay with the mother, you will have all of the responsibilities and none of the rights. So heads up.

Caspian_Drifter responded to the eeeevil poster with a rhetorical question that unintentionally helped to underscore the whole point of the campaign in the first place:

casp

Seriously, ladies, why do gals like to go on and on about “equality” so much when your ladybrains weren’t even smart enough to come up with the idea in the first place? I mean, really, you ungrateful gals, you have a man/men to thank for that.

If I remember correctly, it was T. Reginald Equality who came up with the idea, with some help from his brother Ned (who suggested that he name it after himself).

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 8,503 other followers

%d bloggers like this: