Recently, in the comments to my Secret Life as a Group of Women post, our old friend evilwhitemaleempire offered this intriguing theory as to why I started this blog:
Your just a runt.
You put up that picture of Charles Altas so folks will think your not.
Your entire adult life has been about coping with the aggressive sexual displays of bigger, taller, more attractive men by throwing anti-male grenades at them. That’s why your a feminist. … you support the false rape/harassment industry because it acts to jail all those better men you can’t compete with.
You and your mangina ilk are what you have always been since high school. Nerds who think they can win the cheerleader if they can get the football captain jailed as a rapist.
I can’t fault his logic here, though evil here is making several incorrect assumptions that call into question his conclusion. One, I don’t actually support sending innocent men to jail on false rape charges, even if they were the captain of the football team in high school. Two, even in high school, I was never interested in the cheerleader type; as a nerdy alternative-music-loving slacker guy, I was much more interested in the girls who listened to The Jam rather than Journey. Also, the high school I went to was basically a high school for nerds; even the cheerleaders were a little nerdy. We didn’t have a football team; our basketball team was legendary for the length of its losing streak, while our chess team, meanwhile, racked up victory after victory.
But enough about my high school. The key point here is that manosphere dudes have somehow managed to convince themselves, despite massive evidence to the contrary, that sexual attraction is a very simple and straightforward thing: men want cheerleaders and Hooters waitresses; women want jocks and thugs. These are iron-clad rules, and apply to everyone, including the nerdiest of nerds and the feministest of feminists. (By everyone, of course, I mean cis heteros; manosphere dudes have no real theories about lgbt sexuality, and tend to forget it exists.)
So evil assumes that I (and presumably the rest of the feminist guys out there) have adopted feminism as a way to get into the pants of the cheerleaders who wouldn’t date us in high school. On the flip side, manosphere dudes often assume, bizarrely, that feminist women are all secretly obsessed with boning thuggish jocks.
In reality, of course, people tend to be interested in and attracted to people basically like them: gym rats go for gym rats, nerds for nerds, goths for goths, lawyers for lawyers, and so on, and so on, and scooby dooby doo.
To illustrate this point, I’d like to present some relevant anthropological data, in the form of video footage of the “aggressive sexual display” of one “alpha male” of a certain subspecies of homo sapiens. You will notes that this mating dance has attracted the attention of a female of the same type — and not a feminist. Unfortunately, as far as well can tell from the video itself, the dance did not result in successful copulation. In the end, our subject finds himself competing against the aggressive display of another male of the same type.
In the days of yore, when starvation was more of a threat than it is today, women we’d now call fat were thought of as prosperous and beautiful. To be skinny was to be sickly and starved, unlikely to survive the next winter – especially if there was pregnancy or nursing babies to be considered. Why would a man invest his resources in a woman who might be too weak to survive carrying, bearing and nursing his children?
So, no, I don’t buy that men are just naturally attracted to size 2s and a woman who dares to be a size 12 or 14 is ugly, unworthy or unattractive. There are plenty of men who love ‘fat’ women, and don’t feel degraded by it. Being fat is no different than being blonde or having green eyes – it’s just a physical characteristic (yes, yes, concern trolling about health – well, white folks are likelier to get skin cancer and black folks are likelier to have sickle cell anemia, and no one calls them morally inferior for it).
thank you mra’s for once again completely erasing the lived experiences of most feminists. I don’t know maybe relationships with non feminists work like this, I just know that inside of the feminist movement they don’t. Being a socially awkward nerd is valued in our community.
Hey David,
I just took a stroll around The Spearhead looking at the articles. Bad mistake… Very very bad mistake. However, it did get me thinking (apart from the “Oh god why” and “You… You can’t be… Seriously?”); why not highlight some articles as well as the comments?
I know some MRAs bemoan your use of their own comments as critism, and in a sense they are right. Comments are supposed to be seen by the group, and therefore can be much more vicious. (Even sites that tend to host what I find to be agreeable material can have piranha infested comments sections). But articles are supposed to represent the best of the best, the stuff that outsiders are supposed to use to judge the movement. Why not show even this material is misogynistic garbage?
I proffer this recent little gem as an example of what unchecked assertions can to do a mind. (And remember, as with anything on the internet; once it has been seen, it cannot be unseen)
kirbywarp,
that is possibly the worst thing I’ve ever read. I am so sorry I clicked on that link
My boyfriend is military (AF) and I see a lot of alpha military dudes (mostly army) with supposedly omega fat wives. It’s a phemomena that many around here seem to have noticed. I myself also know a few very alpha police officers and some of them have older, fat (omega) wives.
OMG what are these omega women doing marrying alpha males??? That’s not supposed to happen!
I read your link Kirby and my goodness, they really have no connection to reality.
Or pay attention to the fact that since Title IX requires both sexes to be equally treated, colleges will be stepping up their efforts to recruit young men and for a woman to be admitted over a male she will have to do even better then she does now.
Also, males having to sit still and behave has been standard for decades (I would say centuries but I do not know about prior to 1850ish) in schools. This is not some new invention thought up by women who are out to “get” boys.
In fact in the past, the ideal was absolute silence of the students and this was enforced by corporal punishment or dunce caps. And it was not the women who protested the removal of corporal punishment but the men:the males liked the idea of corporal punishment as their main tool for discipline.
So this idea that out of nowhere in the 1970s boys had to start acting the way they are expected to because feminism was taking off is not born out by history.
One of the schools I happen to know about is the Groton School that was established in 1884 and well, it was uh, spartan in its treatment of boys and the exercise that was a hallmark of the school did not start until the afternoon. So if the issue that boys cannot sit still, well they certainly did not care and would punish anyone who stepped out of line (Dean Acheson was one of the ones who would step out of line a lot.)
If that is the quality of scholarship they have, it is poor at best.
I love how MRAL’s worldview makes no sense in regards to his conclusions. If alpha women fuck alpha dudes, beta women are fucking beta dudes, and stoners (omegas) are fucking fatties (omegas), it seems like everyone is mostly getting laid by those of similar social status and that higher status men and women have equal advantage and lower status men and women have equal disadvantage. If anything, the fact that MRAL thinks only men can up their status with achievements or skills makes it a system that favors men heavily over women. It does not follow that, even if his weird system existed, it would involve oppression of men by women. NEWSFLASH MRAs, someone refusing to pity fuck you is not oppression.
“Men’s Rights Activist Lieutenant”
So, I assume you belong to the “Sex-Obsessed Woman-Worshiping Gamer Cult” branch of Men’s Rights Activism? Such a key role in gaining men rights.
You and your ilk are NO different than Futrelle or The Conscious Men. You’re just using a slightly different tactic.
@Law1204:
“OMG what are these omega women doing marrying alpha males??? That’s not supposed to happen!”
If I remember right, this was another angry point for the MRAs. The very idea that “omega” women were able to get alpha males (the original statement was much cruder) infuriated them.
But then these are the same scum who think George Sodini should be an object lesson for women.
All this talk of alphas, omegas, betas…I was veggin’ in front of the tube when a special on wolves came on. Turns out that alpha male, omega male stuff was nonsense gained from observing captive animals thrust together under all the stress that captivity fosters. In the wild, pack members are family, with the patriarch and matriarch running the show.
Wonder if that’s true for any other animals that were assumed to have alpha/betas/omega structures.
If the PUA terminology was lifted from wolves…whoooooops, your psuedoscientific veneer is garbage. Sorry. ;p
Lady V-it is also why women do not lose weight as easily. We had to have the extra weight to carry the babies so our bodies refuse to give up the fat. Men do not have that concern.
You know my favorite bit of scholarship out of the whole thing?
“During 2010, over four million boys, one in five of school age, were victims of feminist rape. (Note 1)”
Aaaaaand note 1:
“According to the Childstats.gov website, there were 42 million school age children ages six to seventeen in 2010 throughout the United States. About half of these children are boys representing a potential victim pool of 21 million boys. One can estimate 20% of boys have exposure to feminist teachers resulting in 4,200,000 victims of abuse. This is a conservative estimate.”
So, basically, if a teacher is feminist, she will rape a young boy… Also the 1/5 number is ONLY represented by the author’s estimate of 20%, and has nothing to do with the actual cited data. (facepalm)
I had a history teacher in middle school who was quite feminist, as exemplified by her constant yammerings of “all girls rule” and “all boys suck.” You know what didn’t scar me? That. We all knew she was joking around, and she didn’t base her grades or who she called on in class based on her ideology. If anything, the girls in the class got a self-esteem boost, while the boys were unaffected (at least I was). And to these people, I was subjected to rape? Ffffffffffffuck that.
The only teacher I had who brought politics into the classroom was the government teacher. Which is kind of part of the job.
Just catching up here.
I tell ya, it so very convenient for me when guys like MRAL show up and exemplify exactly what I was talking about with regard to the standard MRA/PUA one-size-fits-all theory of sexuality, a theory which bears almost zero relationship to how sexuality actually works in the real world for most people.
Kirby, I do write about Spearhead articles fairly regularly. I somehow missed seeing the one you linked to, which is, to put it mildly, a doozy. You may have just given me my next post topic.
Mertvaya, it’s true. Manosphere dudes are incensed when fat (presumably omega) women get with “alpha” males; somehow this is a sign of anti-male oppression! They also get mad when women they consider super-hot (9s and 10s) refuse to have sex with them (they generally assume they themselves are betas or omegas). This is also anti-male oppression.
kirbywarp- Your history teacher…was her last name Barch? I thought she taught science.
(for those who missed this otherwise fabulous show: http://www.outpost-daria.com/ch_barch.html)
Heh, it was actually a US history class, which did delve into politics.
Another fun little fact: The author notes a huge reversal in the percentage of males and females gaining college degrees.
“There is no other social explanation for the decline of boys in education other than feminist rape and blatant discrimination against little boys.”
On the contrary, a little look at the numbers shows a big increase in college degrees of both sexes over the last 40 years(m/f 5,044k/3,537k in 1970, 7,816k/10,432k in 2007 (source)). While some sites I’ve looked at do note concern that male degrees aren’t increasing as rapidly as female degrees, the truth is that more people of both sexes have been getting degrees. (Another interesting read, with much less deceptive graphs broken down by race is this pdf)
The problem is that this may be the only valid point (shudder) brought up in the entire article. There is concern that too few males are going through to college, but the cause is unclear (some speculate that increased literary requirements in 9th grade have something to do with it, but I don’t know how credible that is). It is most assuredly NOT some evil feminist plot, and taking a real problem and insisting on a batshit imaginary cause only ever prevents a real solution from being formulated.
(of all the times to want a preview button… urk, here goes nothing)
It’s like the fact that women have sexual agency is a staggering injustice to MRAL. It’s like he started hitting on women, was rebuffed and realized, “What do mean these women aren’t going to have sex with me just because I want them to?!?! Who told them they had a choice?!? Feminists?!? Well, then, fuck feminists!!! This cock won’t suck itself!”
Urk, it would seem my last comment got eaten. Without the snark, I have two sources (the first a pdf) that show how percentages have increased significantly over the past thirty years, putting to the test this little quote:
“There is no other social explanation for the decline of boys in education other than feminist rape and blatant discrimination against little boys.”
Sure.
@David:
My apologies, I probably wasn’t paying attention.
David, you are delusional. The Greek hierarchy is practically universal, with a few exceptions. If a fat chick can get an alpha man, more power to her. This is extremely rare, but certainly possible.
This system is- overall- DEFINITELY oppressive to men because women have no pressure. Barring a medical problem (in which case she has bigger issues) any woman can CHOOSE to be at least a beta, which for. If you’re fat, I’m sorry, but you choose to be fat. You choose to be an omega. Men cannot make themselves taller or more facially appealing, it’s hardwired. It’s fucking BULLSHIT, women can sit on their fucking fat asses all day, do a fucking PUSHUP, and get all the dick they want. Men (a MINORITY no less, how the fuck does that work?) have to do everything. They approach, they buy your shit, I’m nice to you, I keep the fucking conversation going all goddamn day till she goies to some fucking retard because I’m not 8 goddamn feet tall and built like motherfuckking Brad Pitt.FUCK.
@David:
My apologies, I probably wasn’t paying attention. Also, my last two comments somehow got eaten. Perhaps it was because I tried to link to a pdf? I wonder if they got caught in a spam filter or something…
The long and short of it was that looking at actual trends over the past 30 years (on a percentage scale of 0 to 100 and divided by race) shows a marked increase in degrees across the board. Female degrees have simply increased faster.
@MRAL:
Lets let the froth and foam settle for a bit. Ok? Now answer me this: what evidence do you have that your self-described Greek hierarchy actually exists? Note that being able to point to a person and say “That is an alpha male” or “That is a beta woman” does NOT consist of evidence. Isn’t it universal only because every person can be classified, not because those classifications actually mean anything?
Wouldn’t you of all people (judging by your post) be relieved if it turned out it was all make-believe? Why not find some way to test if its true?
A test? My whole life and my observations of everyone else has been the test! That’s HOW IT WORKS. I decided a long time ago I’d rather KNOW THE TRUTH than live in a Apatow dreamland where Seth Rogen can fuck Katherine Heigl, or a feminist delusion where people hook up with others “because of compatible personalities”. Are you fucking kidding me? Don’t make me goddamn laugh.
“David, you are delusional. The Greek hierarchy is practically universal, with a few exceptions.”
I’m pretty sure just about every reputable critical and social theorist rejected the idea of universal truth long before the advent of modern feminism.
What I find delightful, is that I have practically all of the traits that one would use to define an alpha – yet I’m an outspoken feminist. Apparently, one can have his cake and eat it too, because the whole “Greek Hierarchy” system is totally bogus.
This is the reason I consider myself an MRA. I’m sick of being tossed aside callously by entitled bitches and alpha assholes. The men’s movement will fix these problems. I especially hate Futrelle because he himself is an omega, and yet has turned his back to the MRM. He’s a fucking traitor is what he is, and he will recieve no benefits when the MRM changes the world.
My experience and the experience of nearly everybody commenting here are prepared to counter your experience everyone you talk to. Such is the nature of anectdotal evidence.
What nobody can do (assuming the good faith of both sides) is counter that you’ve had bad experiences. The problem is that you are imposing an interpretation on your life that is simply false. What I’m trying to get you to do is examine the interpretation.