>
Don’t let it be said that the dudes of the manosphere aren’t ready for Valentine’s Day. Oh, they haven’t been ordering little teddy bears and giant bouquets of flowers for their sweeties. They’ve been getting ready to throw a fit at the very notion of the ersatz holiday.
Marc Rudov, a self-described MRA, “relationship expert” and all-around asshole, has been trying to organize a boycott of VD for several years now. “There’s nothing romantic about coercing men to oblige female entitlement,” Rudov recently told AOL News. “Valentine’s Day artificially and unilaterally caters to women. It’s the media’s annual male-bashing fest.”
Over on The Spearhead, grizzled MRA veteran Zed has written not one but two articles attacking VD, which he describes as “Extortion of Insincere Materialistic Tokens of Affection Under Threat of Emotional Violence Day.” Meanwhile, Paul Elam — never one for subtlety — has one-upped old Zed, denouncing the holiday as “a socially coerced day of hyper-entitlement for a generation of princess leeches.” Endorsing Rudov’s boycott, Elam seems especially incensed by the omnipresent “Every Kiss Begins With Kay” ads that clutter the airwaves every year as VD approaches.
One commenter at The Spearhead summons up his inner comedian:
There’ two types of VD. One is a potentially serious affliction that can be caught from sexual relations with a woman. Symptoms include tiredness, lack of sex drive, acute pain in the groin region and loss of work productivity. It’s difficult to treat as the parasite responsible is very demanding and difficult to get rid of.
The other is a bacterial infection treatable with antibiotics and rest.
 |
| Marc Rudov: Trying to hypnotize you with his teeth. |
It’s almost cute, all this energy and anger. These guys seem to really think that they’re the first people to ever have an issue with Valentine’s day, the first people to ever get irritated by “every kiss begins with Kay.”
But, guess what? Lots of people hate Valentine’s day. I generally find it pretty annoying myself, and the Kay commercials, which basically suggest that the women of America are jewel-hungry prostitutes and the men their johns, set my teeth a-grinding. Granted, I’m generally been most hostile to VD when I’ve been single, but when a couple of years ago I discovered that my then-girlfriend was a really really really big fan of the holiday (and not a fan of my more laid-back approach to it) it was actually one of the things that led me to break up with her a few weeks later.
You know who else hates Valentine’s day and the blizzard of retrograde sexist advertising that accompanies it? Lots and lots of women, especially those of the feminist persuasion, who generally don’t take kindly to the insinuation that women are diamond whores. Indeed, a couple of weeks back, hundreds of the mostly women of Reddit’s TwoXChromosomes subreddit happily upvoted a topic with the title “If I see one more freakin’ “Every Kiss Begins with Kay” commercial I am going to find whoever is responsible for that nonsense and take a big fat poop on his face. “
Hell, Valentine’s Day hatred is everywhere. In the London Times, Helen McNutt — a woman, if her first name is any indication — spelled out “20 reasons it’s okay to hate Valentine’s Day.” Meanwhile, the Onion News Network ran a hilarious piece on the “Annual Valentine’s Day Stoning Of a Happy Couple .”
And if you want your VD hatred live and direct, you can always monitor Twitter for bitter anti-VD tweets.
Indeed, VD hatred has become so omnipresent that the folks at Slate, hoping to gin up some pageviews with some well-timed contrarianism, ran a piece — get this — actually defending the holiday. “I’m almost afraid to say it,” the piece began, “I have plans for Valentine’s Day. … If I’m lucky, there may even be chocolate and flowers involved.”
Like a lot of VD haters, I have plans for February 15th. They definitely involve chocolate, bought at a steep discount.
—
If you enjoyed this post, would you kindly* use the “Share This” or one of the other buttons below to share it on Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, or wherever else you want. I appreciate it.
*Yes, that was a Bioshock reference.
>"There's a certain amount of truth to above. If a woman tried to use me as a walking ATM and bossed me around like a serf, I'd tell her to take a hike and never speak to her again. Who needs to be treated like that? I'd rather be single and proud than be looked upon as dogmeat."You know what? I feel the same, but I don't have to fear and loathe men or women to do it. Imagine that.
>Gross assumption about MRAs in general. Not every one of them thinks that way. But we know how you view them, nevertheless.I swear your feminists and your hypocrisy never cease. You really make the majority of the MRAs out there look reasonable by comparison. I'ms serious.I think this is the chief MRA fallacy, the thing that will keep them from ever being able to effectively change anything (since, as I said before, the goals of many MRA and many feminists are actually the same. I think they'd manage to get some good things done, like paid paternity leave, and that's just to start, if they were actually able to get along). "Every MRA is an individual person, and you can't judge all of them by what one [or ten or twenty or a hundred] says! Oh, but all feminists are the same. And they're all hypocrites."
>Wytch, and name what feminist here or in real life who has ever told you that was wrong to tell any woman trying to use you for money to take a hike.Seriously-name one. Show us the proof that a feminist on here or anywhere thinks that way. After reading most of the posts I do not see how you could find anyone who said "nope, you jerk, you have to be a walking ATM." Quite the opposite-they support your decision to not be used for money only.
>why is it that men can want to be with someone for no reason other than to have sex with them, but according to the MRA's and the MGTOW women only want to use them for money. Explain to me how that works with the whole model of women dating men who make less money than they do? Do you guys even think about what you're saying before you open your mouthes?
>""Every MRA is an individual person, and you can't judge all of them by what one [or ten or twenty or a hundred] says!"—LVvSThere are posters that feel fine when they act as MRAs are bitter losers compared to feminists, and no one here calls them out in the feminist camp. Why is this? Hmmm . .. "Oh, but all feminists are the same. And they're all hypocrites.""—LVvSPerhaps because so many of you respond in similar fashion? Or deny your entitlement attitudes under "equality?"The problem with that is from what I've encountered there are more echochambers among femninists than MRAs. This site is pretty close to being one—look at the way it handles certain topics. In fact, there is a certain amount of in-fighting amoung MRAs because not all of them agree on the issues the same way. If you would actually bother to read some forums (which you don't) you would see it—that is what is hindering their progress politically, not unthinking commonality.
>"Quite the opposite-they support your decision to not be used for money only."—ElizabethNot in practice, from what I've seen.Do you realize that many men find it more difficult to find a long term partner because of sticking to their guns in this fashion?
>"Wytch, and name what feminist here or in real life who has ever told you that was wrong to tell any woman trying to use you for money to take a hike."—ElizabethFeminist or not, it does not matter—if someone tried to finanically exploit me, they're on their own. Apparently, you don't read that I wasn't accusing feminists soley about this, btw.
>wytch –Uh, if a guy rejects feminists, then insists on a woman who pays her own way, he may indeed have a problem.If you want "traditional" non or anti-feminist women, you're probably going to have to pay for their dinners.If you want self-reliant women, well, you're probably going to run the risk that many of them will be … feminists!
>There are posters that feel fine when they act as MRAs are bitter losers compared to feminists, and no one here calls them out in the feminist camp. Why is this? Hmmm . .. Maybe because most MRAs act like they are bitter losers? "Oh, but all feminists are the same. And they're all hypocrites.""—LVvSPerhaps because so many of you respond in similar fashion? Or deny your entitlement attitudes under "equality?"Change 'equality' to 'Mens Rights Activism,' and you have the reason why I don't agree with the movement. My larger point is that you (and other MRAs, such as Yohan) insist that men be taken as individuals, but deny the same treatment to women or feminists. The words of one feminist is enough to condemn the whole, but every statement by a man should be taken seriously and evaluated as coming from an individual person. Whereas when I speak, I'm simply one mouthpiece of the Feminist Leviathan and can be easily dismissed as a hysterical hypocrite. In fact, there is a certain amount of in-fighting amoung MRAs because not all of them agree on the issues the same way. If you would actually bother to read some forums (which you don't) you would see it—that is what is hindering their progress politically, not unthinking commonalityBut why would I want to spend time with a group of people who hate me, look down on me and see me as the enemy, just by virtue of my gender? I have read some of the blogs on the Boob Roll, just out of curiosity. And most of what I read was incredibly hate-filled, with most of that hate being directed at me because I am a woman. And before you try to turn this back around – the MRA mindset is a chosen political stance; my gender is fairly immutable. And no feminist blog I read treats men with the same dismissive contempt as what I've read on MRA sites.
>Random question, but wytch, is there any reason you have to post like 3 comments in succession rather than just one big one? Genuinely not trolling, just curious.
>Wytch-again, no one has a problem with you doing this and those that do are probably not feminists.
>"Uh, if a guy rejects feminists, then insists on a woman who pays her own way, he may indeed have a problem."I'm not for feminist (again, which you don't get) because it's about female supremacy. I have no problem with basic equity. It's very uncommon when you find a woman that will pave her own way and doesn't hold a man up to some arbitary standard. Get real and step out of your little social bubbles.David and Elizabeth, apparently, don't understand that there are women out there that want to glean the provider benefits from traditionalism and yet the choices from alternative perspectives. Like it or not, that's reality for many people. "Random question, but wytch, is there any reason you have to post like 3 comments in succession rather than just one big one? Genuinely not trolling, just curious."—thevagrantsvoiceIt's possible that there is something I've done on my end.
>"Wytch-again, no one has a problem with you doing this and those that do are probably not feminists."—ElizabethMaybe *you* don't personally and I thank you for it, but many others just might.
>"Maybe because most MRAs act like they are bitter losers?"—LVvSGive me a break—so they don't have a right to complain? Or that feminists are any better in their rants and raves? Please. "The words of one feminist is enough to condemn the whole, but every statement by a man should be taken seriously and evaluated as coming from an individual person."Actually, one of the reasons why men are speaking up more is because most don't take the issues more seriously than women's issues. I'm sure you'll deny that. "And no feminist blog I read treats men with the same dismissive contempt as what I've read on MRA sites."Have to call bullshit on that one. "But why would I want to spend time with a group of people who hate me, look down on me and see me as the enemy, just by virtue of my gender?"From my end, I've tried. Nothing is ever good enough, I've been called a liar or worse, and know you are getting a small taste of what it's like to face misandry every day. One reason why I speak out is because I'm done with being treated like shit because I'm a man, and the "bitter loser" nonsense is dismissive and only serves to make us more assured that no one cares enough and feminist compassion is an oxymoron.How difficult is that for you to understand?
>wytchYou and your buddies have been asked many times to find examples within mainstream feminists sites using dismissive contempt. You've also been told you are free to create a blog about feminists like this one.You haven't, so I can only believe you can't. Why is it your experiences are so different then the men like myself that post here who have good relationships with women? The common factor in your relationships is you. It is not dismissive to call someone a bitter loser when they have stated as much themselves. Take yohan for example: he says he spent the first 1/3 of his life being teased and mocked. We call people who cannot funtion in relationships with others losers. He is now resentful and angry ie: bitter. He is then a bitter loser.
>Wytch, then stop blaming us feminist for what nonfeminists do.
>Thought experiment for you, wytch. How can I get you to like me? I am a woman in my late twenties, and I can't really change that. However, let's assume I was willing to change every single aspect of my personality to make it so that the majority of the MRA movement would like me. Or just approve of me. Give me specific behaviors.
>wytch –I've got tons of feminist sites listed in my sidebar. If feminists routinely treat men with the same bitter contempt that I so easily find directed at women on pretty much every MR/MGTOW site out there, it should be easy for you to find, say, three examples of such contempt from any of these sites in the past month or so. So have at it. Provide links.
>And there was silence…
>[crickets chirping]
>Oh, Witchy has evidence. He has links, quotes, academic articles, and books up the wazoo!But he's going to keep it all a secret, because Witchy is a coward who can't bear to run the risk of being told he's wrong. Even if it's not even in person. Even if it's just pixels on a screen. The possibility of having his precious evidence "dismissed" is just too high a price to pay. Even if it means he's condemned to wander the blogosphere with a big red metaphorical "L" on his chest (stands for "Loser who never provides any evidence for his fantastical claims but wants to be believed anyway), it's still worth it to avoid being "dismissed" by the feminists he has such contempt for in the first place.
>Oh and Witchy? Just so we're clear? I am not calling you a cowardly loser because you are a man. (Yeah, I know it's hard to believe, but not all men are cowardly losers! Not all men are just like you!) I am calling you a cowardly loser because you behave like a cowardly loser. Don't like being called a coward? Then stop behaving like a coward.
>"I am calling you a cowardly loser because you behave like a cowardly loser."—SSSelf-projection, perhaps? You need to look into the mirror. Loser. That fits you perfectly, feminist hypocrite. Get lost, attention whore.
>"Don't like being called a coward? Then stop behaving like a coward."—SSYou have no idea who you are talking to, gutless hypocrite. When a feminist made a false charge about me at the last job I worked at, I made a case against her and fought back. She was suspended for days and told not to speak to me outside of professional capacity.You feminists will not get away with anything, I assure you.
>"If feminists routinely treat men with the same bitter contempt that I so easily find directed at women on pretty much every MR/MGTOW site out there, it should be easy for you to find, say, three examples of such contempt from any of these sites in the past month or so."–DavidYou have proof on this thread already. In fact, your site is amble ammo. Are you that dense? Seriously? I mean, just look at what Sally was rambling about. That's the tip of the iceberg. Your whole site is about contempt and mockery. You said the latter yourself, and your followers provide the former. Feminism sans contempt, personal attacks, self-projection, and misandry is like Christians without Christ. Lol.