In light of some recent discussions here, I thought this cartoon seemed relevant. I got it from my new favorite Tumblr blog, Comically Vintage. It’s astounding how many of the comic panels posted there — especially those from melodramatic 60s-70s romance comics — apply to the arguments in and around the manosphere today. Perhaps because the world in which these guys live is as imaginary and out-of-date as the fantasy world of 40 or 50 year-old Romance comics.
And while we’re on the subject, here’s a bonus cartoon. Here, crawling from the primordial soup, is the world’s first PUA! (Granted, he hasn’t quite worked out all of the tenets of modern Game, but, hey, he’s still a lizard. Just as human evolution took millions of years, evolving something as complex as modern PUA theory takes time.)
That “homely” guy doesn’t look all that homely. I mean his ears stick out and his forehead is a bit high but he’s far from hideous.
Drawing ugly people is fun because you get to distort and caricature their faces. I don’t see why this artist didn’t take advantage of that.
The “handsome” guy also doesn’t look all that awesome to me. His head seems to not be attached to his body quite right. And that look on his face says either “It’s important man business, you couldn’t possibly understand,” “Metropolis is in danger,” or “Oh god, it feels like this turd is gonna come out sideways.”
…yeah, I would definitely go for Mr. Smiley McBigears.
David, do you ever read the Comics Curmudgeon? I ask because … well, you seem to like comics, and he has a great site where he makes fun of comics. I think there’s a wealth of cultural-gender information in, say, Mary Worth and the Lockhorns and Beetle Bailey and Apartment 3G — none of it particularly useful for this site perhaps, but nonetheless fun to read.
Comic #1: The ugly guy looks like Danny Kaye to me. I always choose Danny Kaye.
Comic #2: Oh, the Lizard People. Say, I wonder if that’s George W. Bush! … or Queen Elizabeth?
I just noticed Mr. Handsome’s collar is too tight. It seems to be squeezing his neck something fierce.
“handsome and commands attention or homely with personality?”
These are my choices??
Yeah, Mr. Homely doesn’t look so homely. Actually, replace the blond curly hair with brown curly hair, and it would almost be an exact rendering of a guy I absolutely loved to have sex with. I’ve since moved on, but I always think fondly of the sex that we had.
Mr. Handsome looks like he’s carrying a briefcase that has a gun in it. He’s one late report or empty coffee carafe from killing someone. I’m assuming that “commands attention” really shouldn’t be a stand in for “creepy as hell”.
And yeah, Dave, if you don’t read it already, The Comics Curmudgeon is pretty awesome too.
Holly’s right about the Metropolis/turd facial expression. He looks like he’s just about to mansplain something. My personal theory: a good personality is kind of like magic. And, like magic, a good personality requires work. I give a hard time to the PUAs–because they 100% deserve it–but Roissy has some not bad ideas about how to break the ice with women. And the whole concept of demonstrating higher value (or “DHV” to use the lingo) actually makes sense. But I would apply it to men and women equally and without the asinine misogynistic assumptions of the PUA leaders. Consider David Bowie: dressing up in high heels and lip gloss took unbelievable confidence in the 70s (in other words, DHV). It’s pretty much an “alpha” move (and damn close to what Mystery does in a kind of Bowie-lite way. Really, it’s saying, “Ha! I laugh at your conventional masculinity”). It all boils down to having confidence in yourself. Men (and women) can do that without assuming that women (and men) are incapable of knowing what they actually want. Since assuming that women are completely dishonest with themselves about their deepest desires (and therefore kinda stupid) is the essence of Roissy’s philosophy, I’m going to call bullshit. But he is totes right about steak and pinot noir.
Ugly Guy looks like a cross between Archie Andrews and Alfred E. Newman. Perhaps that was the look they were going for, as a reflection of his attractive personality — boy-next-door with a quirky streak.
And I agree, Handsome Guy has got mob enforcer written all over him.
Alternate caption for comic #2: When Douchebags Ruled the Earth. (Not that they don’t still rule the Earth.)
… Is this a PUA’s wet dream or something? I just don’t get how insulting someone is supposed to get them to like you…
This is an ironclad example of women’s entitlement. Evn in the ’50s, when our society was not so misandric, very clear elements of women’s arrogance were there. How else would you explain this?
@ kirbywarp
That’s how an alpha male proves he’s an alpha male. Women hear the insults and find themselves irresistably drawn to the alpha male. That’s human nature, my friend.
@MRALC
… Yo serious, aren’t you… So candlelit dinners, moonlit seranades, poetry of beauty and love… none of these compare to the irresistable sexiness of the verbal equivalent to a punch in the face?
I thought being an Alpha meant you were eight feet, rich, or have semen on your face (or whatever it is “Facial Alpha” means).
If Robert Webb (5’10”, hardly looks like Jensen Ackles, and may be famous in the UK but his character in the sketch isn’t) can be an Alpha just by being insulting towards women, what’s to stop you from becoming an Alpha?
I mean, you’ve regularly insulted every woman who posts on this blog; do you think they’re all masturbating to your comments 24/7?
Pay no heed to the Lance Corporal.* He’s just a parody troll.
*Veiled Penis Reference.
@Johnny Pez:
I would have thought so, until I saw his/her/its blog… *shudder*
Wait, is Lance Corporal the same as Lieutenant, or have I misaimed my insult?
I know, it’s so bleeding arrogant for women to think that they actually get choices on who they want to date! How dare women prefer attractive men? Women should just forget that they matter, and selflessly sacrifice their desires to make angry, bitter and insecure men feel good about themselves. Because if a woman isn’t actively making three men happy at once, she’s failing.
@ Spearhafoc
They’re not the same, but I think you can count on the Corporal reporting for duty whenever the Lieutenant is around.
Also, I’m pretty sure that Men’s Rights Acivist Lieutenant up there is a troll too.
I think I’m going to have to disallow Mr. Acivist though. Too sneaky.
EDIT: Oops. He’s real. At least as real as the real MRAL, because they’re the same guy. (Assuming MRAL is a guy and not a group of women. Inside joke.)
We all know every poster here is a separate group of women.
Except me, that is. I’m a troop of magical fairies.
I’m a class of home economics students doing a research project!
Bee and Absinthe, forgot to mention: I actually just discovered the Comics Curmudgeon a couple of days ago. Pretty entertaining. I may have to do a post about Miss Buxley at some point.
My husband has ears and hair kind of like Mr. Homely, but not the huge forehead. Or, I should say husbands, since I’m a small group of sheep herders.
FYI, did you guys know that Ricky Gervais agrees with me about fat people? Boom.
I wonder how you can determine anything about women, much less their “arrogance,” from cartoons drawn by a man depicting men.
I guess the arrogance is in thinking we deserve a man who’s attractive to us in some way, instead of…
…Actually, I’m not very clear on what we’re supposed to do here. If we screw anyone who asks, we’re sluts. But if we don’t screw anyone who asks, we’re spitting on men. I wouldn’t even know how to be a good girl if I wanted to!
Exactly. Trying to force women into no-win situations is the entire point.
(P.S. I don’t give a shit what a fat British comedian thinks about fat people. Boom.)
Well, duh! That’s because women are evil. But it’s a hopeful sign that you recognize your own innate evilness.
Evilosity?
Eviliciousness?
wev
Wait, I figured it out!
It’s all subjective! The way to be a good girl is to sleep with me (that is, not me Holly, but me as in “this particular MRA”) with absolutely no demands made and no questions asked, and only with me.
So to be a good girl to MRAL I have to sleep with only him, but to be a good girl to NWO I have to sleep with only him, and so forth.
It’s still impossible in practical terms to be beautiful enough and undemanding enough to please these guys, but that’s the basic principle. A woman should be sexually totally open but solely in service of one man… and that man should be, you know, me.
It’s sorta similar to the Creationists who do the “if I haven’t seen an animal evolve in front of my eyes then you haven’t proved evolution”… the ppl you refer to are like “if you dun sleep w/ me, then you haven’t proved that women aren’t alpha wanting golddiggers” xD (except we’re all fat so I dunno why they would want to xD Sucks to be them I guess 😀 And awesome to be me! >:D )
Actually I don’t have that much of a problem with sluts.
But it’s less that I think a woman (sorry, wyymyyyn, is that enough Ys?) should be fucking me whenever I want. It’s more that I have a problem with wyyyyymyyyyn constantly treating most men like shit on their shoe, like they’re too good to even given non-movie star men the time of day. Even if they themselves are not great looking. The entitlement is staggering.
“The *self delusion* is staggering.”
FTFY
Seriously though, I have met no one in the real world, and no one online (save you), who has the same experience with women. Either you are the most profoundly unlucky man in the entire world, or you take little things like not immediately saying “hi” in an enthusiastic manner in an elevator as evidence that half the population of the world is out to get you.
All the feminists here spell it “women,” MRAL. (The argument for “womyn” is actually an interesting one in some ways but not worth getting into here.)
As far as I can tell, MRAL, anything other than fucking you whenever you want–or at least fawning over you and treating you like you’re their best buddy, daddy, and boyfriend all in one, no matter whether they know you or what’s going on in their own lives–is “treating you like shit on their shoe.”
Let me ask this: if a woman you don’t know walks past you on the sidewalk and doesn’t look at you or react in you in any way, is she treating you like shit?
Cause I did that to, like, eight hundred guys today. Only I just called it “walking down the sidewalk.”
honestly I see more anti-feminists use “womyn” than I have actual women xD They should just call it the Men’s Ryghts Movemynt xD Myn’s Ryghts Actyvysm! XD
This rly IS like wrestling XD It’s like Chyna or Rhyno! xD
Whyn dyd thys bycyme a Welsh langyage syte?
MRAL, you know that Ricky Gervais’ comedy partner, Stephen Merchant, is 6″7″ tall?
So he may be with you on the fat thing (despite being himself fat until very recently), but he’s consorting with the enemy (tall guys).
Dydn’t yyy hyyr? Y ys thy nyw vywyl yvyrybydy’s ysyng! Yt mykys yyy syynd 100% cyylyr, ynd yt syvys yn kyybyyrd spycy!
Tho personally *I* treat guys like s- just for fun… (occasionally I make them lie in mud so I dun have to get my shoes dirty, and then I WALK AROUND THEM xD) but I’m hot, blonde and Asian xD What’s the rest of you’s excuse!? >:O
Y yyyy yy yyyyy yyyyyyy yyy yyyy, yyyyy yyyyy yyy yY yy yyy yyyyyy yyyy yy! yY
Z. Yeah, I went there.
Well Stephen Merchant is actually so tall that he’s probably disadvantaged. As I said, above 6’4 is not optimal. I suppose I should specify that only “reasonably” tall guys (6’1 to 6’4) are “height alphas”, the rest of us are disadvantaged. Of course I’d still rather be 6’7 than 5’8.5, but regardless, Merchant’s not an alpha.
Also he gets kind of a pass anyway because of Wheatley.
The funny thing is, “womyn” actually has a point. The word “women” being a modification of “men” suggests that women are modified men, that men are the default–something that was explicit in older forms of English where “man” literally meant “person” as well as “male person.”
It actually is a little screwy to act like men are normal and women are deviations, and using words that treat them as two separate entities, neither a mere variant on the other, is not as silly as it sounds.
However, the word “womyn” does look all goofy and is easy to make fun of, and as feminist battles go that’s not exactly a super-pressing one, so I’m fine with using “women”–as is every other feminist on this site. I’m just trying to point out that “womyn” doesn’t need to be an automatic object of derision.
Ys: Ancient Ys Feminized
Ys III: Feminists from Ys
Ys IV: Emasculation of the Sun
Ys V: Kefin, The Lost Clit of Sand
Ys VI: The Cock of Narcissism
1000 Ami points to who gets this >:D
Yus, Holly, I didn’t mean that it was something to be derided, but I just find it funny that the y spelling seems to be a big freaking deal deal and obsession for anti-feminists than it actually is to most feminists I know xD (not that there’s no point to it 🙂 )
I’m pretty sure that “man” and “woman” are etymologically unrelated. I’m not going to waste my time looking it up, but search “werman and wyfman” or some shit. I don’t know the details.
Personally, I want to offer to our next feminist/illuminati/Jewish/Kryptonian/Angelcatbunny elders meeting that rather than doing womyn, we should just introduce myn and women as the way to do it 😀 Why should WE have to bend over backwards for the loser class? >_>;; All books must be burned and replaced w/ books that have the correct spelling of “myn” >:D Let it be written, let it be done! (spellcheckers will be first obv! >:3 )
Stephen Merchant had a long-term girlfriend (I guess they broke up now? no doubt due to his total dealbreaker height), so at least during that time, I don’t think he gave a shit whether he was an alpha or not.
1000 Ami points to who gets this >:D
I know it isn’t Poul Anderson, because that was only four volumes.
MRAL – You sort of have a point. Here’s the etymological history:
In Ye Olde Englishe, “man” meant person. “Wer-man” meant male person, and “wyf-man” (“wife”–ouch) meant female person. Then we dropped the “wer” and made “man” and “person” synonymous (again, ouch), while turning “wyf-man” into “woman.”
So yes, there is misogyny in the etymology–men became referred to merely as persons, while women remained modified persons.
Also, one could argue that the etymology isn’t as important as the current words, in which “woman” currently exists as an addition of letters onto the base word “man.”
I don’t really give a shit if you call me a “womyn” or not–frankly, I’d rather be called a “person” when my gender isn’t immediately relevant–but I just wanted to point out that the word “woman” is a relic of historical misogyny.
@Holly
Womyn only looks screwy because it isn’t in common usage. Think of how odd shakespear looks today, or how crazy modern dialog would look in the 19th century.
@MRAL
I didn’t buy at first either, but I did look it up. Man or mann was used by default to describe an adult male, but could also be used to describe a genderless person. Woman litterally meant “female human”, a derivation of “man.”
You know my opinion? I honestly don’t care. Even if I use the word “woman,” I personally don’t use it to imply that women are modifications of men. But if enough people want to start using “womyn” instead? Eh, its not something worth quibbling about.