The Regender Challenge

I went and Regendered some of the comment threads on here (screw the challege; I’m a Woman Going My Own Way from you dirty men and your dirty manliness!) They’re a bit of a pain to read without pasting elsewhere since Regender seems to enjoy taking liberties with the formatting, but it’s satisfying to get extra confirmation that, even in an alternate universe where Manboobz is a masculist blog mocking radical Women’s Rights Activists, it would still come off as pleasantly non-hateful compared to the radical ‘misandrists’ who come in and spout off about ‘masculism’ being a hate movement.

I kind of want a plug-in that automatically Regenders everything. Would definitely be interesting.

The Spearhead:
In the old days, wealthy families always faced the issue of marrying off sons. If lucky, their sons would marry a successful woman while young and no longer be a burden on the family finances, but if he didn’t find a suitable mate, or had to marry down, he could end up being quite expensive long-term — even possibly a scandalous, destabilizing influence on the family.

Today, however, sons of the wealthy glide right into nonprofit jobs paid for with government grant money, some get jobs as directors of this or that government program “for men and children,” and others take on fairly important positions in corporations or government agencies that are now increasingly dominated by men due to affirmative action.
[…]
For the men themselves, it allows them to pursue their luxurious, hypergamous lifestyles without having to settle down at an earlier age and without having to answer to mommy. For them, masculism has come to be another entitlement that comes along with the privilege they’ve always had. I think this explains why masculism is so overwhelmingly embraced by the urban upper classes.

Scott (er, Susan) Adams:
The reality is that men are treated differently by society for exactly the same reason that children and the mentally handicapped are treated differently. It’s just easier this way for everyone. You don’t argue with a four-year old about why she shouldn’t eat candy for dinner. You don’t punch a mentally handicapped gal even if she punches you first. And you don’t argue when a men tells you he’s only making 80 cents to your dollar. It’s the path of least resistance. You save your energy for more important battles.
[…]
I realize I might take some heat for lumping men, children and the mentally handicapped in the same group. So I want to be perfectly clear. I’m not saying men are similar to either group. I’m saying that a woman’s best strategy for dealing with each group is disturbingly similar. If she’s smart, she takes the path of least resistance most of the time, which involves considering the emotional realities of other people. A woman only digs in for a good fight on the few issues that matter to her, and for which she has some chance of winning. This is a strategy that women are uniquely suited for because, on average, we genuinely don’t care about 90% of what is happening around us.

Let’s stop my factcheckme’s e-house for a minute.

“misogyny” is a modern, made-up word that makes you look stupid. and its misandrist as fuck. watch and learn as i reclaim the word, and ruthlessly mock anti-masculists and misandrists who use it.

i have come to see the word “misogyny” as a euphemism for masculism, and “misogynist” as a euphemism for masculist, rather than anything that actually exist in real life, to any troubling degree, or in any meaningful way. while anti-masculists and misandrists bandy the terms about with glee, in reality, its just another flaccid jab at masculism, and masculists, by privileged women whose perverse denial of reality leads them to believe (or pretend to believe) that they are on the receiving end of institutional sexism as much as they benefit from it. and that they suffer relational abuse just as frequently as they dish it out.

Also, David, I accept your challenge.

Dear women:

You think this sounds violent? Donna’t even start; I know what you look at when you masturbate.

I’d say that’s quite a bit worse, actually.

Octodad is the greatest regender evar xD

I had to manually edit MTF/FTM for this but this is a comment from “K.A.” in M. Andrea’s infamous transphobic “Deconstructing Transgenderism” piece -_-

Basically, fetishist FtM collude with every other misandrist woman and choose to participate in the dynamic in an alternate way. They spin it as a handicap when it’s really a female-entitled sexual fantasy that actively oppresses men just as any other pornsick woman does. It’s the rape and total control over a synthetic male body, giving her and any other woman she includes full access to treating men the way they both love to fetishize treating men. They then strengthen the conditioned response to male parts with their misandrist sex. That’s why you see so many misandrists patronizing FtM prostitutes, and FtM prostitutes happy to do it. Sexist women look out for each other and will cooperate to control men’s bodies in any novel way they can think

Okay I think I finally found something that COULD come off like MRA stuff regendered:

Bastards, dogs, dicks, douchebags. It’s amazing how much hate you can pack into a few syllables. How do you spot a man-hater? By the way they talk about men, treat men, react to men, represent men. Bitching about men, slagging off men – even the language used to describe such slander comes from misandry. The ubiquitous verbal violence supports physical violence and nobody, female or male, minds. If I were called a Paki in the street, I would have some hope of it being taken seriously. If I were called a slag – as I was last summer by a woman on a bicycle, in Stepney – nobody would consider it report-worthy.
Misandry is such a strong substance that men have absorbed and internalized it.

For women and men alike, casual misandry is the climate and context of all their interactions. It is unconcealed and automatic. It affects the way men are received, portrayed and considered as colleagues, friends, workers, fathers, artists, thinkers, public figures and victims of female violence and discrimination. Apart from outright slander, jibes, names and insults there is: talking down a man’s work, interrupting him, teasing him, mocking him, talking over him, patronizing him, sighing or rolling one’s eyes when he talks, invading him personal space. The misandrists’ approach to men can be summed up thus: sneer, leer, exploit, ignore.

There is a final, huge, virtually universal form of casual sexism which is expressed in nearly every house. Any woman who thinks it’s OK to live in a household where the man does the overwhelming majority of all the housework, childcare and family admin is a man-hater. If she weren’t, it would agonise her to live in such an unequal and exploitative setup.
So, what to do about casual sexism? Don’t perpetrate it yourself, call it when you see it and fight any woman defending her misandry or any man defending his false consciousness.

forgot to add that part…

DWB seems closest to an MRA that David would quote so far…

http://dirtywhiteboi67.blogspot.com/2010/08/casual-sexism-is-nothing-but-misogyny.html

http://feminazi.wordpress.com/2008/04/21/part-one-deconstructing-transgenderism/

in the comments

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/why-are-bloggers-male/article1503780/

So Canada sacrifices another victim on the altar of equality.

Last week a young boy dressed up as a soldier died in the increasingly futile and pointless war in Afghanistan. He was 21 years old, had been in the country for two weeks on his first tour of duty and probably weighed a little over 100 pounds.

Please know that I mean no disrespect to Karl Blais or to his family and I grieve for him and them. But what on earth was he doing in such a place and in such a job?

Look at the photograph of this beautiful boy. Look at the innocence, the gentleness, the grace. All of them precious aspects to the human character. So when I say that he was “dressed up as a soldier” I mean it as a compliment. I’ve known soldiers all of my life and I have an invincible respect for them. I’ve seen their courage, integrity and sheer decency.

I’ve also seen their capacity for controlled and righteous violence, which is absolutely essential for any fighting woman. Yes, woman. Because there are few if any men who have the skills required to serve as a front-line combat trooper.

Yes, yes, yes, I know it’s fundamentally anti-Canadian to say this but I’d prefer to articulate the views of the silent majority than hide behind some modernist fetish that places more importance on the myth of absolute equality than the safety of a boy who should be laughing with college friends rather than fighting theocratic madwomen.

Can we really imagine for a moment that if a group of Taliban tribesmen rushed a trench or an encampment this poor young man could fight them off, could deal with the thrusts of their long knives and heavy clubs? Do we seriously think that the women in the unit would not risk their own lives to protect a pretty young boy who was inevitably being beaten to the ground by salivating killers?

The very reason we have various weight categories for all forms of organized fighting is that whatever the training, a pugilist’s weight and muscle bulk give an advantage to the heavier combatant.

More than this, even contrived cultural denial should not prevent us from admitting that the death of a son or a husband is different from that of a daughter or a wife. Men nurture, give birth, care in a way that is unique. Quite simply, they are different from women.

If captured, of course, such a man would be repeatedly raped. And tortured. Again, I’m not meant to say this. Not Canadian, not CBC, not Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Not the sort of thing we’re supposed to feel, so we pretend that women and men in the army, police and fire service are given the same tests and have to fulfil the same requirements. Yet truth still breaks through.

We rightly condemn Islamic extremists in Afghanistan because they treat men so badly. Then we allow one of our own to give his life so that we can congratulate ourselves on how liberal and egalitarian we are, lie about how gender difference don’t matter and then encourage our generals and politicians to obscure the truth on television about soldiers and causes.

What hypocrites we have become. Poor, poor Karl — this is not the way it should have been.

You and your country deserved better.

Following the theme of awful Canadian columnists, here’s an oldie and a goodie from Michael Coren (this article is the one me and Pecunium were raging about previously… NWO would prolly agree w/ it xD )

http://www.torontosun.com/comment/columnists/michael_coren/2009/04/18/9153761-sun.html

original is there xD