>
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.
>Wytch, bad example. Ms Strange was referring to a specific male in her comments. She holds contempt for you the singular, not you the member of the male gender.So please find some actual sites that show routine contempt for men, not a specific person such as yourself.
>Oh Witchy. I’m starting to see why you are incapable of letting go of the misperceptions about feminism you so doggedly cling to. It must be very useful to you to be able to pass any hostility directed towards you, the individual person, as hostility directed towards men in general. If a woman is hostile towards you, you can pretend that her hostility is due to her feminism, which in your mind is synonymous with hatred of ALL men. If I call you a coward, you can pretend that I must think ALL men are cowards and therefore you are safe in ignoring my criticism. You see, this is why I went out of my way to explain to you that I regard you as an individual, not a representative of the male gender. Happily, my experience with the male gender is that most men are not as cowardly and dishonest as you are. I am calling you a cowardly loser because you claim to have tons of evidence regarding this alleged widespread trend of generalized man-hating by feminists, but every time you are pressed to provide this evidence, you refuse to provide it because you are, in your own words, convinced that your evidence will be “dismissed”. This should not be an obstacle to providing evidence unless you are a coward who can’t stand criticism, or unless you are actually lying about the existence of this evidence. To make it perfectly clear: the fact that you are a cowardly loser with a fragile ego has absolutely nothing, zip, nada, zero to do with the fact that you have a penis. Your attempts to pass your own personal failings off as failings possessed by all men is noted and recorded as further evidence to file under “Support that Witchy is actually very sexist towards men as well as women.”
>Er, "support FOR THE HYPOTHESIS that Witchy is actually very sexist towards men as well as women."Left out a few crucial words.
>"So please find some actual sites that show routine contempt for men, not a specific person such as yourself."–ElizabethThis isn't an actual site? Please.BTW, SS is projecting. She can bite me—pathetic feminist loser. I fight against cowards like her. She's not even worth contempt.
>" . . . but every time you are pressed to provide this evidence, you refuse to provide it because you are, in your own words, convinced that your evidence will be “dismissed”."—SSBecause that is exactly what you will do. You ARE that evidence I need—you contemptuous feminist. So, what is it like to be the topic I'm talking to task? Still in denial?
>"taking to task"
>"This should not be an obstacle to providing evidence unless you are a coward who can’t stand criticism, or unless you are actually lying about the existence of this evidence."—SSAre you honestly that fucking stupid? The resounding answer is "yes."
>Wytch-no. The reason this website is not an example of misandry is due to the fact that it is aimed at a subset of males. Not the gender itself. Just as when Ms Strange was criticizing the specific person of you for failure to provide links or comments from feminist websites showing they routinely claim all men are evil or bad or whatever negative claim du jour, so does this blog criticize these specific males for doing that against all women.You apparently are unable to distinguish between the contempt that is directed at a very specific person or group and the entire gender. Might want to work on that.
>"You apparently are unable to distinguish between the contempt that is directed at a very specific person or group and the entire gender. Might want to work on that."—SSSS is projecting her cowardice and weakness on me, and YOU are in denial about it.Deal with it. I never obligated myself to links—you provide all the ammo I need. Again, she is not even worth contempt. And you defending her is suspect, isn't it?
>"The reason this website is not an example of misandry" It is. And so is SS.
>"Just as when Ms Strange was criticizing the specific person of you for failure to provide links or comments from feminist websites showing they routinely claim all men are evil or bad or whatever negative claim du jour . . ." Bullshit. I said that the stigma of being single and a man in the 30/40 range can come from feminists. Not that feminists claimed all men are evil (although some believe this).Strawman.
>"I said that the stigma of being single and a man in the 30/40 range can come from feminists."Yes you did say that. And when asked for the evidence that led you to believe that, you refused to provide it. So we can reasonably conclude that one of the two following options is true:1. You are a coward who, for some reason, is comfortable making generalizations about feminists, but is unwilling to share the specific evidence that led you to form those generalizations because your ego is too fragile to bear having your evidence "dismissed," or2. You are flat out lying about the existence of this evidence. Either way, your personal failures are on you, not on your sex generally. Though, as I said, your repeated attempts to deflect criticisms of you personally onto criticism of men generally are noted. And it looks like your opinion of men is barely higher than your opinion of women.
>Since you have accused me of misandry, Witchy, you have now obligated yourself to substantiate your accusation. Please point me a specific thing I said–using quotes–that demonstrates my hatred towards men generally. Provide a quote that illustrates my hatred of men in general, not my contempt for you, the individual. Witchy =/= all men. Try to remember that. Provide the quotes, and I will apologize. Fail to provide the quotes, and you have two options: first, apologize and retract the statement. Second, fail to apologize and be known as a cowardly liar.
>"You are a coward who, for some reason, is comfortable making generalizations about feminists, but is unwilling to share the specific evidence that led you to form those generalizations because your ego is too fragile to bear having your evidence "dismissed," or"You're the coward—you keep projecting and lying about me."You are flat out lying about the existence of this evidence."It's all over the 'Net. "And it looks like your opinion of men is barely higher than your opinion of women."That's the most idiotic thing you've said yet.
>http://www.city-journal.org/2008/18_1_single_young_men.html
>http://forums.plentyoffish.com/datingPosts11167189.aspx
>http://www.blogcatalog.com/discuss/entry/is-it-really-true-that-95-percent-of-single-men-are-undateable-what-are-your-tips-for-avoiding-the-bottom-95
>"http://rebukingfeminism.blogspot.com/2006_01_01_archive.html"
>See, now that really wasn't so hard, now was it? There was no need for the preemptive kicking and screaming and whining about being dismissed. I may or may not regard your evidence as convincing, Witchy, but if you refuse to provide it, I have no choice but to dismiss YOU.That's how this whole debating thing works. Glad to see you're slowly picking up on it.
>"http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,908975,00.html"
>wytch, so you're using an article by a conservative non-feminist as an example of feminists being critical of men? And if you think this site is misandric, please cite specific examples of me or any of my commenters posting things that are contemptuous of men as a whole. Examples of people being critical of individual men, or of men with a specific set of beliefs (MRAs, MGTOW) are not examples of misandry. Sally, could you cool it with the "cowardly loser" stuff and stick to the substance of your criticism?
>http://hugoschwyzer.net/2009/05/27/feminism-made-women-too-picky-more-on-male-rage-sexual-entitlement-and-backlash/
>"wytch, so you're using an article by a conservative non-feminist as an example of feminists being critical of men?"—DavidYou are right about one thing—Kay H. considers herself a social conservative. Although she mirrors the "man up" attitude I've seen and read from feminists as well."And if you think this site is misandric, please cite specific examples of me or any of my commenters posting things that are contemptuous of men as a whole."That would take half an evening. The motif is there—so is the denial
>"Second, fail to apologize and be known as a cowardly liar."—SSI apologize to no feminist. Consider yourself an attention whore and a troll.
>wytch, my last comment was in response to your comment linking to the city journal article.I haven't looked at the rest in detail, but afew thoughts:the rebuking feminism link: I'm really not sure how a diatribe by a strident anti-feminist is proof of feminists being misandrist. He offers no evidence for any of his assertions.I've only skimmed the others, but the 95% of men are undatable woman also says that 95% of women are undatable, and I didn't see any evidence she was a feminist either.Could you point out some of the specific comments in these threads you think are misandrist, and the evidence that the people beiing misandrist are actually feminist?