>
This weekend, Something Awful gives its readers a little tour of The Spearhead Forum and some of its more colorful fauna. I’ve borrowed the screenshot above from them. Hagslave entrainment! Yeasty oblivion!
The Spearhead Forum is if anything a little weirder than The Spearhead itself. It is also the main stomping ground of a fellow named Zebert, who has many, well, innovative ideas about how to solve all the problems of the world (e.g. forbidding education for women, prohibiting gatherings of more than four women at a time, removing the voiceboxes from baby girls at birth).
The Something Awful folks have gathered up quite a few of his most intriguing posts, and many others of equal value. Head over there now and enjoy.
>Why don't they ever post some actual thoughts and writings of MRA's? Here they just search for the most laughable commentary and ignore all of the real and pertinent issues in the MRM.
>GODDAMMIT here we ago again. How are they different Drewcakes?
>Why stop at a laryngectomy? Why not amputate their limbs, too? Sounds like Zebert's perfect woman. Can't speak, can't move, can't resist.
>Why don't they ever post the actual thoughts and writings of the Three Stooges? They just show them slapping and hitting each other and ignore all the real and pertinent issues of the Stooges.
>Those "solutions" remind me of something. Ah, yes – the Taleban. Maybe the MRA dudes should visit Afghanistan is search of inspiration?
>I enjoyed how Something Awful pointed out the oddity of MRAs being simultaneously anti-woman and anti-gay. They will expound for hours on how men are so woefully unappreciated, and then immediately snarl and snap at any man who appears to appreciate men too much.
>Young V3NOM needs some help: "but all I want to do is kill everyone who has wronged me, excused those who have wronged me, or failed to offer a solution.."This is a guy who's out buying ammo, I figure. Or will be soon. He's asking the forum for guidance…and thanking them for making it clear that yes, everyone is out to get him. http://www.somethingawful.com/d/weekend-web/spearhead-forum-misandry.php?page=6
>The hell? …they sure dialed the crazy up to eleven and ripped off the knob. Many thanks to the goons and David for fulfilling my lulz quota for the day. One thing I can't quite fathom is that this comment received 34 upvotes on The Spearhead. I know bigoted and violent rhetoric is pretty much the norm in the Spearhead's comments section, but they still manage to surprise me.
>Creepy is a very accurate tag here.Something else occurs to me as I read Something Awful's post, though. What kind of life is it to spend all your time wrapped in such bitterness, loathing, and hatred, to be honestly convinced that the kind of stuff they're spouting is true? It's not a life I would ever live. I find myself mingling pity with being creeped out.Even in the depths of Twisty-Faster-esque misandric non-feminism, I've never seen anything near such loathing for an entire group of people as I do there.
>JFP, do you have the url for that comment? That sounds like a discussion I need to read.
>These men appear to loathe women but really I think they are stuffed to the gills with abject hatred of themselves. All the ways in which they say they reject women in their lives (some of which are illegal such as discrimination in hiring) are only making their own lives harder and more miserable.
>Drew-are you going to denounce the material in the screenshot that JFP linked to? How about any of the regular MRAs or the people who claim they are not MRAs but act exactly like them? How can we take you seriously if you do not marginalize the people making such vile posts.
>What kind of life is it to spend all your time wrapped in such bitterness, loathing, and hatred, to be honestly convinced that the kind of stuff they're spouting is true? It's not a life I would ever live. I find myself mingling pity with being creeped out.They do deserve pity, if you're feeling charitable enough to feel it for them. They didn't get all the privileges they feel they're entitled to as white men, and they're looking around to see who to blame for it. Women are an easy target.
>David, here is the url for that quote JFP showed. http://www.the-spearhead.com/2011/02/22/the-high-road/It's a quote near the end of the comments section. Honestly, it scares me and I think those opinions need to be exposed to the light of day.
>David, here is the url for that quote JFP showed. http://www.the-spearhead.com/2011/02/22/the-high-road/It's a quote near the end of the comments section.Ah, it's a small portion of a comment by Peter-Andrew:Nolan(c), what a surprise…
>@ JFP: That "I'm not condoning this or encouraging it, BUT it would be easy" reminds me of OJ Simpson: "If I had killed them, this is how I would have done it…"@ triplanetary: Just be clear, I don't pity them because I think they're victims, in any way; white American heterosexual men, as a group, are the most privileged people on the planet. But the way they feel is no way to live their lives, and I can't help pitying them even as I fully acknowledge they brought it on themselves. Pity is very different from sympathy or empathy.
>@AydanI pity them, too, the same way I pitied Azula at the end of Avatar: The Last Airbender, when she was paranoid to the point of delusions, unable to trust anybody, her whole sense of self shattered upon realizing she wasn't in control anymore.And there I go, confusing cartoons with real life again.
>You know, I know a lot of married people – from people my folks' age (late '50s and early '60s), to people I know who married shortly after high school (early '90s) to my friends my age who married in the last 10 years or so – and I can't think of a single marriage like the one described in the screencap. Sure, there's jokes about such things, but when one gets down to the real nitty gritty, it doesn't really take hold. I've known people in those sort of relationship, but rarely does it last into marriage. I do know of marriages wherein both participants live with a permanent loathing of the other, but never this kind of tyrannical beat-down sort of thing the guy describes. That's just weird.
>And it reminds me of studying abusers, and how they feel their privilege as a need. They don't need to suffer an abuse, or an act, to feel abused: what they whine about is the absence of luxury. They're used to and expect to be waited on hand and foot. Anything less, and they feel—and claim—-that they're being abused.
>Heres a legitimate concern of MRAs. No Fault Divorce. Women initiate divorce of married couples with children 70% of the time. The default is women get the children, this is easy to see because men have to "fight" for equal custody. Over the last 20 years around 40 million men have done this and 80% of the time they lose. At a cost of around 20k to fight for the right to retain equal custody of their children men have spent 8 billion dollars over that time and 4 out of 5 times they lose.Now for the men who lost the going rate is $200.00 a week for the child he is forbidden equal custody of. Now barring the high end money makers the vast majority of men make very little money. Barely enough to stay afloat, (myself included). So for instance say both of the divorcees make $15.00 an hour for a take home of $450.00 a week. Well the man now only gets $250.00 a week, while the woman gets %650.00 a week, plus State assistance, plus she gets the child as a tax deduction.Now say the man who is subsisting of $250.00 a week loses his job. The Bradley Ammendment states there is NO excuse not to pay. This man will now be imprisoned, further, each state recieves 10s of millions of dollars from the federal government to incarcerate these unemployed/dead beat dads. The first thing the State does is suspend his license, then jail him for 6 months. When he is released he will be jobless, homeless, penniless, no drivers license, have a criminal record and he will owe the State $5200.00, because the State paid for his child support while he was in prison. And the best part is his own taxes were used to kidnap his child, have the Stae extort his money while denying him equal custody, then imprison him.Well who lobbyed for this hideous injustice? We all know the answer. Surely men didn't run to the polls begging for the "privilege" to pay for this kidnapping, extortion, incarceration scam. Now I'm sure you'll say some men run out on their families, which is no doubt true. However, there have been and still are 100s of thousands if not millions of men in this country who HAVE been treated to this fine batch of laws. How much sympathy do you think these men will show to your vaulted feminism when you show them none?If you say well I'm not like that it means very little. When the Bolshevics starved 20 million peasants and burned their one room churches do you think the peasants said Oh well that particular communist is a good one because he or she isn't like that? Well that one didn't advocate starving me and only wants to take my freedom, or my money, or my children? So if you pluck a tastey morsel from the feminist tree like Title IX, or Gee I might like to use that holla back thingy some day. All the while claiming you would never kidnap a mans child or falsely accuse a man, it doesn't work that way.Why not bring out a few of the finer quotes from the Dworkins, Steinens, Solanos, ect. and really slice them up? I mean like 2 or 3 hundred comments to show us all the high morality and equality mindedness of feminists? Unless of course you really are like that.
>Women initiate divorce of married couples with children 70% of the time.MRAs like to cite this statistic all the time, as if it's some kind of damning evidence that women are just greedy bitches or fickle or something. What it indicates to me is that women are likelier to feel unfulfilled or unhappy in their marriages. Most MRAs would probably like to say it's because she's an entitled bitch, but I like to think of women as being actual people. Given the contempt that many MRAs display for women's emotional needs or women's sexuality, is it any wonder they end up being left by their wives? And when it comes to 50/50 custody… I've never been married or had children, but a lot of my friends growing up had divorced parents. Split custody, where they spent Wednesday-Saturday with one parent and Sunday-Tuesday with the other was actually really stressful for them. They had to have two sets of everything at each house, had to remember what belonging was at which house. It was hard for them to be able to spend time with their friends, because each parent insisted on 'their' time. So I'd say that 50/50 custody, while it might be 'fair' for the parents, is not in the best interests of the child. Truth is, *someone* has to get custody of the kids, and it's probably going to their primary caretaker. And because our society is the way it is, that's going to be the mother. I think the Bradley amendment is silly, but I also think that parents need to be responsible for the children they have. And if that means sacrificing custody of your kids so they can have a stabler life, that is a noble and meaningful sacrifice. There might be some women who get divorced and get into vindictive and bitter custody fights… but those women probably aren't feminists. I know a divorced couple, where they both identify as feminist, and they don't even *have* a formal custody arrangement – it's just whatever is best for their daughter at the time.
>So you condone and support the idea that the best solution to the issue of fathers' rights is to murder wholesale thousands to millions of women, children and men who you assume refuse to support you in your quest to slaughter thousands to millions of women and their children NWOslave?Because that is what you are saying. You think the issue of a man who has an issue with his ex is so severe women (and their kids) deserve to die by the thousands to millions over it.
>Matt, I agree that normal marriages are nothing like what was described by Aker's story. My husband and I live like best friends with romantic benefits, and neither of us worry about who has more power. Some of those MRA's obsess on who is dominant and submissive in a relationship. Why not have a normal marriage where both are equal partners? I am guilty of occasionally nagging about the yard or taking out the trash, but I would never say anything rude around his friends. I don't consider the statement "Hey our yard looks like a jungle, honey" to be the equivalent of Chinese water torture. During pregnancy, I would whine about my husband eating food I wanted from the refrigerator. Sometimes my husband gets grouchy too but it is only rarely and it never leads to personal insults or either of us feeling beat down and despondent. I suspect that because Aker posts at the Spearhead, he is greatly exaggerating the marital problems of his friends. Even if what he is saying is true about the mean wife in the story, he shouldn't generalize that to be the case about all wives. I've seen men and women hurt each other in relationships. That's just life and it's not a gender issue. His comments about the Chinese water torture and calling husbands "hag-slaves" make me think he is a major drama queen.
>@Lady Victoria von Syrus…Your comment proves my point. Not one iota of sympathy for the millions of men who have been and are in prison for the crime of being poor.You say men aren't meeting womens emotional needs, yet men apparently don't have any emotional needs. I guess women have met their husbands needs and HE is a failure.SO if a man works and a woman doesn't, she is the primary caretaker, if they both work, again, she is the primary caretaker, if she works and he doesn't, once again SHE is the breadwinning primary caretaker.That "silly" Bradley Ammendment. Who was it that lobbyed for that winner I wonder?It seems men are broken, arent they?
>@Elizebeth…I don't understand your comment. How does equal custody translate into murdering women and children?Funny also how you say women and THEIR children. Are men just a financial tool for women and THEIR children. Why not say men and children for a change?