Categories
douchebaggery men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny oppressed men pussy cartel reactionary bullshit

Science Corner: Why some self-obsessed douchebags hate the ladies so much

I'd do me. Why won't those bitches?

Well, this explains a few things:

Narcissistic Heterosexual Men Target Their Hostility Primarily at Heterosexual Women, the Objects of Their Desires, Study Finds

ScienceDaily (July 29, 2010) — Heterosexual women bear the brunt of narcissistic heterosexual men’s hostility, while heterosexual men, gay men and lesbian women provoke a softer reaction, according to psychologist Dr. Scott Keiller from Kent State University at Tuscarawas. This is likely to be due to women’s unparalleled potential for gratifying, or frustrating, men’s narcissism, the author concludes. They are crucial players and even gatekeepers in men’s quests for sexual pleasure, patriarchal power and status.

More here. The actual study here (subscribers only).

Yes, like a lot of psych studies, it was based on a relatively small sample of college students (104 undergraduate men, to be exact). But after this post yesterday – and, you know, the entire content of this blog — it’s hard not to think that Keiller is on to something.

506 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Holly Pervocracy
13 years ago

“Gatekeepers.”

Oy.

I hate the idea that I’m some sort of obstacle standing between a man and my vagina.

But I agree that it makes sense in the narcissistic mindset–if you believe you deserve sex just for being your awesome self, then you’re going to have some unwarranted rage at the people who aren’t giving you that sex you deserve.

Rachel
Rachel
13 years ago

My question is, why is it such a shock to these men that I get to choose who has access to my ladyparts? Seriously, at what point in life do you decide that you are entitled to have sex with whoever you want whenever you want? Ugh.

hellkell
hellkell
13 years ago

Uh, I thought we had hamster brains–how are we conferring status now? Oh, right, that probably has something to with our hotness or lack thereof.

Make up your minds dudes, do we have all the power or none?

mediumdave
mediumdave
13 years ago

….how are we confering status now?

hellkell, I think that’s a very revealing contradiction in MRA ideology. They complain endlessly about women treating men as “success objects,” but they’ll never admit that men do the same thing. The guys who think they deserve a Megan Fox; well, they’re not really after sexual gratification, as such, are they? They’re after the enhanced status they’ll get when other people (esp. other men) see them in the company of a conventionally beautiful woman.

mediumdave
mediumdave
13 years ago

Tagnabbit! Only hellkell’s actual quote should’ve been in italics. *s8gh*

[FIXED IT! -DF]

Bagelsan
Bagelsan
13 years ago

blockquote>Uh, I thought we had hamster brains–how are we conferring status now?

You don’t operate in a hamster-based social hierarchy? o_O How do you figure out your status in the group, then? I mean, for example, this one time at college this other student was talking crap to me, so I was like “whatever; show me your hamsters, bitch” and she pulled out like, 2 hamsters from each pocket and started looking all proud, and all the other students were like “OOOHHH” but I couldn’t be having that, so I opened my winter coat and I had a billion fucking hamsters, like, strapped bandolier-style across my entire torso.

Yeah, I don’t need tell you who won that argument. Uppity four-hamster-hoes gotta learn their place! >:D

Joanna
13 years ago

Wasn’t this always like a known fact of life? lol

Nobinayamu
Nobinayamu
13 years ago

I really want to read the whole study, now.

redlocker
13 years ago

I’m waiting for FactFinder or some other person to dismiss this study as being fudged “because the scientists fear feminist criticism” or some crap.

Then EWME makes some comment that’s supposed to offend us readers.

Then NWO goes on about how all science is a lie (which is funny as hell coming from an 50+ ENGINEER who makes machines from scratch and was turned down by PepsiCo.)

Hm…did I get everybody?

chocominties
chocominties
13 years ago

You left out NWO mysteriously bringing up Title IX.

Then Mr. Al comes in to talk about how this article is misandrist and the author should be stabbed to death with safety pins, then thrown off a build–whoops, he didn’t mean to say that and he’s sooo sorry.

mediumdave
mediumdave
13 years ago

Title IX is a gubmint scam that gives female narcissists unlimited college scholarships!

(How did I do?)

redlocker
13 years ago

@chocominties: Oh, yeah. Can’t forget that.

@mediumdave: Hahahahaha.

mediumdave
mediumdave
13 years ago

[forgot to say, thanks for the fix, David!]

Joanna, it did occur to me that this study might fall into the “Water is wet, scientists report” category, but I find it just as interesting when science confirms common-sense ideas as when it debunks them (I just loved the study that debunked the famous 5-second rule.)

I think that it’s hard for non-narcissistic people to really embrace the NP view of the world. I know personally that I’ve been “burned” many times by people who’ve seen me (or people that I care about) merely as sources to supply their egos. Or maybe I’m just too trusting. 😀

Joanna
13 years ago

mediumdave

Lol! The Oatmeal also has his rendition of the 5 second rule. His annoying lack of a search bar makes it hard to find in a hurry though.

And there’s no better feeling than burning others *maniacal laugh*

Pecunium
13 years ago

Holly: I don’t have a problem with you being the gatekeeper to your vagina. The same way I don’t have a problem with me being the gatekeeper to my penis.

Better still, my partners don’t have a problem with that; even when they know they have moderately blanket permission.

And I don’t assume that having had sex with them in the past I am entitled to have sex with them now (I do figure that if we are never going to have sex again I will be told).

Bodily autonomy, we can haz.

random brother
random brother
13 years ago

Hey David! How are you doing! I see you are still pussy begging the fuglies of humanity with this site. I hope you are getting some quality tail (or at least what passes for quality within feminist circles) out of your groveling. Just popping in to see if the same old man haters, degenerates and bitter lesbians (sorry for the redundancy) and other outliers to normalcy and decency are still crowing on and on about their superiority against those evil men who want, you know, rights.

Looks like you’re doing well for yourself. I see Bi’s. tris, sluts, whores and all sorts of, let me kindly call them not cis gendered, types crawling around here taking shots at men, good job bro!

It’s like you are the pied piper of man hating deviants! I never knew you could come this far.

Keep that pussy begging going and I’m sure you can keep occasionally snagging a FB (Feminist Body) 4 or 5 (which is around a 1 or 2 for normal folks).

I hope your site continues to grow so I can read more about the whining and seething hatred from the defects of the world.

Thanks Dave,

Random Brother.

PS – Since he and I got along so well, can you please make sure that “yip, yip” aka Captain Bathrobe is doing okay curled up in his mistresses purse? After admitting that he’s neutered himself, as he put it to get rid of his toxic masculinity, I always worry he might snap and bite a small child on the ankle. Thanks Dave, you are the best pussy beggar in the world.

Kendra, the bionic mommy
Kendra, the bionic mommy
13 years ago

Oh man, I didn’t know the 5 second rule was debunked. However, that probably won’t stop me from eating a doughnut off the floor in the future, as long as the floor looks clean and I pick it up quickly. I read the article and realize that a clean looking floor probably isn’t sanitary, but the deliciousness of a doughnut is greater than my fear of bacteria.

Also, I figured a lot of misogynists’ problems with women could be summed up as “sour grapes”. Yeah, I know some MRA’s call that “Code purple” in their catalog of shaming tactics. They can call it a shaming tactic, but it’s still true, and now I can point at the Sciene Daily article to prove it.

NWOslave
NWOslave
13 years ago

Amazing that site is called science daily. A more apt name would be ideology daily since no facts are ever used in the conclusions that are drawn.

I see now why that particular site is the most widely used “scientific” site linked to by the feminist community.

After browsing the site I found plenty of scientific studies. This one was headlined, “Gender-Based Violence Associated With Lifetime Risk of Mental Illness and Disability”

Heres the link http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/08/110802162329.htm

For starters you’d think a study on gender violence would include some info on violence perpetrated by women against men. Apparently that never happens.

Heres the first paragraph…”The survey of 4,451 women aged 16 to 85 used international instruments developed by the World Health Organisation. Around 15 percent of Australian women report sexual assault, while eight percent report being raped. About eight percent report physical intimate partner violence and 10 percent stalking.”

My guess is the “study” was done from women who had been assaulted/stalked/raped/injured. I’m guessing any study done of any group who have been injured in some way will show a higher rate of injury than a random study.

No matter where you go on this laughably named science daily site it’s all ideology. One would think with the title science they would actually use science to back up their claims. Unless of course it’s now the science of feminist ideology.

This would be probably the clearest example anyone could possibly give for why I say todays ideology based science/medical fields are junk.

Thanks for proving my point Dave!

spearhafoc
spearhafoc
13 years ago

What’s a “point Dave”, and why does it need proving?

Rutee
Rutee
13 years ago

Man, NWOSlave sounds like the asshats who talk about ‘activist judges’. “Ideology-based science” = “Science who’s results I don’t like”.

He’s rapidly burning my ability to feel pity for his sick ass out of him.

Rachel
Rachel
13 years ago

Ok, I have to say that this “Random Brother” character cracks me up with his categorizing the people who frequent this blog as “same old man haters, degenerates and bitter lesbians (sorry for the redundancy)” as well as “I see Bi’s. tris, sluts, whores and all sorts of, let me kindly call them not cis gendered, types.” And apparently feminists are the ones who are using shaming tactics. Too funny.

Sharculese
13 years ago

My guess is the “study” was done from women who had been assaulted/stalked/raped/injured.

You would prefer a study on the effects of gender based violence using people who weren’t victims of gender based violence? What would that prove exactly?

I’m guessing any study done of any group who have been injured in some way will show a higher rate of injury than a random study.

well yeah, in the same way a study of apples is going to reveal a higher rate of being fruit than a study of shit you can buy at wal-mart. i am not sure what your point is.

cynickal
cynickal
13 years ago

I am not the Gatekeeper. I am the Keymaster. There is no science, only Zuul!

NWOslave
NWOslave
13 years ago

@Sharculese

A scientific study on gender based violence where no men are victims means men are never victims of gender based violence. Thats some pretty good science you feminists got there.

1 2 3 21