In light of some recent discussions here, I thought this cartoon seemed relevant.Ā 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 Perhaps because the world in which these guys live is as imaginary and out-of-date as the fantasy world of 40 or 50 year-old Romance comics.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.)
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 š 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 š )
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 š 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.