The other day Darksidecat introduced me to what I now consider to be the Greatest Webpage Ever (this week): Regender, a handy tool that will take any web page and, well, regender it, turning male pronouns and references into female and vice versa. It even works with names.
Following Darksidecat’s lead, I have started plugging the writings of some of my favorite manosphere misogynists into the magical regendering machine. The results are, well, instructive. And frequently hilarious. As DSC noted, Roissy and MarkyMark are perfect for this sort of treatment. As is, I discovered, MarkyMark’s longtime pal Christopher in Oregon. Here’s what happens when Christopher of Oregon becomes Christine of Oregon with the help of regender, and all the horrible shit he wrote about women becomes the horrible shit she wrote about men:
Men are whores. They are far more likely to have STD’s than women. Be aware of this. Handle with extreme care. Men are filthy, and they will lie about their infections. Condoms will NOT protect you. …
Men are walking cesspools of filth! Most of them have or will have a permanent STD infection. It is unavoidable. These are FACTS, and not the rantings of an unstable misandrist.
(I’m a very STABLE misandrist, thank you kindly)
Men are DIRTY creatures, pure and simple. Be dignified, and don’t lower yourself to engaging in any filthy behavior with them. You WILL be infected with the diseases they are carrying. A moral, dignified woman does NOT rut like an animal with one of these creatures. Sexual intercourse and oral sex are filthy, disgusting activities, and ruin a woman morally. They spread disease.
Elevate yourself above such filth of the flesh. …
Do not lust after men in your mind. Masturbate only as a last result to relieve tension. Do not lust after men sexually. It weakens you.
Goddess made woman in Her image, and men was made in the image of Satan. Squeal all you want, but history proves me right. A man is a test; a stumbling block for woman. Our life is an adventure. A journey. A pursuit of our creator, and a pursuit of excellence in our personal lives. A man and his filth is part of the obstacle course set before us. If we are wise, and avoid them, we will grow stronger as a result. We will finish the race successfully.
Men was not put here to support us as such, and we will only grow stronger if we AVOID his snares. ..
Christine in Oregon
Woah. Critics of Man Boobz often say that feminists are “just as bad” as the guys I quote. Well, if they were, the posts on their blogs would look a lot like this regendered post. I ask all of you: have you ever seen something so grotesquely misandrist on any feminist web site? I thought not.
Here’s a challenge for all of you: See if you can come up with a regendered post that tops this one from “Christine in Oregon.” You can draw from old posts of mine, or go poking about in the manosphere yourself. Post your results in the thread below, along with a link to the regendered web page you got them from. I’ll highlight the best in a future post.
@kirbywarp
1 If a woman has an abortion no part of “her” body dies. She is whole. If her body was aborted she would be dead.
2 Women also have the same reproductive right to choose who to have sex with.
3 The State DOES mandate teaching homosexuality to preadolecent children. I’ll give you the link again http://www.massresistance.org/media/video/brainwashing.html This is endorsement of homosexuality to small children.
4 Gayness is taught, also children who are molested grow up to be gay/molesters. Rinse and repeat. If it were genetic that gene couldn’t survive, it would have been wiped long ago due to non reproduction.
5 Irrelevant.
6 Men and women act differently because we are different. It isn’t “learned” it’s natural.
Point by point refutation, FTW!
Good day, I’m off to read what Marc recommended.
Bee, I’m down for arts & crafts. I’m pretty sure I have an unopened box foil here, we could get all Phillip Treacy with the hats!
Woo hoo, this is fun!
@NWO:
1. And yet the woman’s body is co-opted into providing for the fetus inside her. The automomy comes from her either choosing to be co-opted, or not.
2. Yes. Yes they do.
3. Teaching children that homosexuals exist is not the same thing as teaching them to be homosexual. At all.
4. See above. There are plenty of theories as to why a “gay gene” could be passed down, but that is irrelevant since you wouldn’t bother looking at them. If it were taught, why did homosexuality exist long before government existed to teach it, and why are there homosexual animals? Also gay people don’t abuse children any more than straight people. You just think that a man abusing a boy makes him gay, which is utterly wrong.
6. Good luck trying to decide what is nature and what is nurture. Since we don’t know, why assume that just because a woman has a vagina, she should be confined to the house? Why not let competant people prove their competance without having to overcome the hurdle of gender bias? (AA laws are used to combat that bias, when the bias no longer exists, AA laws won’t be required)
*sigh* I wonder if this is in any way productive?
The “boys in dresses” thing is NWO attacking me, because he has concluded that all my masculism is a secret feminist plot to make men more like women.
All right, NWO, I’ll bite. What are men like in personality? What are women like in personality? Please provide specific descriptions of how they are different.
NWOaf’s posts summed up: *mass of made up stuff and sniffing over being a victim of his own stupidity*
Also NWOaf, I think the word you were looking for is untoward, not unnatural. As long as nothing untoward happens, at the end of 40 weeks of pregnancy, a baby is born.
You can make a hat with us, kirbywarp! That might be productive. And fun! (Phillip Treacy!)
So I’m looking up this Michael Ruse guy, and … whatever. He’s apparently a philosopher who says naughty things about evo psych and religion to stay relevant. It’s just — why does every asswipe trying to sound deep about moral objectivism and evo psycho have to dive directly into rape? Every single fucking time, we as a nation/species/planet have to have this meaningful discussion that starts out, “Well, on the one hand, rape is bad, but when you think about it … ” No. fuck you. Why is rape always the dangling shiny thing that stupid people want to play with? Oh, lord knows we could never have an honest conversation about belief and morals without starting off by questioning whether it’s really wrong to rape someone.
“And of course it’s totally ridiculous what I said, but I just wanted to have a rational argument … ”
Marc = Scott Adams?
@Bee:
One of the most common arguments I’ve heard trying to prove objective morality is “Well, raping a child is always morally wrong, correct?” (Alternative; “If God commanded you to rape a small child, would it be moral?”) It’s supposed to be something so absolutely wrong, so viscerally reprehensible, that it can be considered to be an absolute evil.
I guess how that relates to moral relativism is that if you can show that even rape can’t be objectively classified as evil, then nothing else would be. -_-
kirbywarp: I’m glancing and reading and firing off comments too quickly maybe, plus I never have a really firm grasp on moral objectivism, since generally the kinds of people who want to talk to me about that are the kinds of people I avoid. But I think what Ruse’s deal is, is he thinks that morals are a vestigial outgrowth of human evolution. No action is objectively better than anything else, and all of our “feelings” and ethical preferences are lizard-brained responses to outside stimulation. Cheating on your spouse isn’t wrong because you’re breaking a promise and hurting the feelings of someone you love, but because of sperm. That kind of thing.
The thing about these half-scientific types always wanting to sort out whether rape is “good” or not is that (1) rape is clearly not good, and (2) trying to come up with some way that it is good is fucking using an experience that is painful for millions of people for your own “intellectual” “pleasure.” And the fact that it’s always rape and never murder (also an unarguably bad thing to do) makes me think that (3) it’s more about making people’s dicks hard than talking about morals. And (4) rape isn’t sexy.
@Bee:
I dunno what these people think.. *shrug*
I’m in the camp personally that there are no bestowed morals (by fiat from some supreme being or what not) but objective morals exist. The way I figure is that society is basically a huge complicated system (abstractly) and from that system emerge certain properties, including morality. Thus there are some moral rules that affect any living being (I just can’t pin-point what they are).
But arguing for what is moral based on its effect in society is about the best you can do. If people were allowed to murder whomever they wished, society wouldn’t be able to function, etc. It’s similar to putting people behind a “veil of ignorance” to determine what is moral and what isn’t. Obviously rape is immoral from that persepctive, since you wouldn’t want to live in a world where you could potentially be raped (given the choice).
I dunno if its as bad as wanting to “get your dick hard,” but it most probably is a situation where the people trying to prove rape isn’t immoral have never experienced it, and so are talking about something they know nothing about.
Hence my Hillelistic/Kantian model. Do not to unto others what you would not want done unto yourself.
Don’t make rules which can’t apply to everyone.
People are not means to ends.
Or, as I keep saying,
“You’re not special”.
NWO would have a fit if “The State” told him he had to give up a kidney for someone else, or that he wasn’t allowed to do something, but he has no problem forcing women to have kids.
His “stealing his sperm, and reproducing without permission” made no sense at all (and I see he answered none of us who said,”fine, you have have the fertilised egg, and hatch it all by yourself.”).
Marc… well he’s from some other country, where libel is a criminal offense, on a par with petty theft, or something.
AWS… well I think I said all I could about that last night.
Ami card!
Mr. Slave,
But you said pregnancy is a bodily function. That means female humans have two bodily functions that contribute to a baby being born, the production of an egg, and pregnancy. Obviously male humans have one (ejaculation), but is there another that I’m missing? What other bodily function does a male human have that contributes to a baby?
@Alex:
Clearly the male body is evolutionarily designed to procure resources to the female during reproduction. That is the secondary male reproductive function. If anything, having to go out and kill sabre-tooth t.. I mean mammoths… Is much more difficult than sitting on your cave-couch watching cave-tv and demanding backrubs from your cave-husband for 9 months.
But, but, but, but what if he, you know, DOESN’T?!? DO PREGNANT WOMEN AND THEIR UNBORN FOETUSES THEN DIE????
Ooo, so close to a thousand! Damn it, Mr. Slave, why’d you have to flounce? I was having fun!
We can do it Alex… Together, we can acheive ANYTHING!
David: seconding your points about Shakespeare’s female characters, and other tendencies. But even as wonderful as Shakespeare’s women are (and remember they were all played by men), there isn’t a single play he wrote who featured the woman as the protagonist. Male was the default, it was the human, it was the center of the unverse — it was the HUMAN and the UNIVERSAL and with very few exceptions, that’s the way things are today.
And while we’ve made some progress with featuring female protagnoists (even by male authors in a few cases, and even a few female “buddy” shows, I wonder when we’ll get ensemble shows with the majority if not all of the characters female (thinking of ads for show I never watch ENTOURAGE–five men?). And oh yeah, without having a fucking wedding at the center of it all. I want sff not romane.
The problem is that women should be forced to carry out all pregnancies to term, but the man shouldn’t have to be required to provide for them. Also the state can’t help, cause that would be socialism and therefore wrong.
So… basically… Women have to sit around and depend on a man while having a baby they don’t want. I wonder if slavy would say abortion is alright when the man *doesn’t* want a kid…
@ithiliana:
“I want sff not romane.”
Stay away from the salad bar then. 😛
Ozy: Heavens, haven’t you seen the study “Men Who Wear Nail Polish Likely to Get STDs Like Icky Wimminz”? Tsk, you are behind on your sooper sekrit feminstgayagenda reading!
Sorry for the obvious triple posting, but wouldn’t it be perfect if AWS rolled in to get the 1000th comment, then skidaddled? That would make my day.
*waiting for dramatic irony*
He would probably argue that they always do, but women pressure them.
Either or he would say women should have it anyway, but the man shouldn’t pay child support because it was HER fault (and somehow not equally his) that she got pregnant in the first place. If it was rape? Well, she shouldn’t have objectified herself to men.
Wow o_o We’re almost at 1000 posts xD 3 trolls can rly move a thread! xD
So let’s see if I got this straight,… NWO is trying to tweak ppl w/ the “pregnancy is easy peasy” thing… Marc believes that rape objectively should only be a misdemeanor and it’s our animalistic natures to believe it’s more? xD and Luke was trying to trick ppl into agree w/ a re-gendered thing but nobody bit and he kept offering it up again and again begging ppl to bite xD
Also Marc appears to have flounced and returned once he realized ppl were still replying to him xD (as usual)
And all this w/o the Rodeo Cat! xDDDD