The contest for the Most Ironic Use of the Term “Nice Guy,” When Applied to Yourself –otherwise known as the MIUTNGWAY Award – is heating up. The previous front runner – the Tumblr guy who compared his inability to get laid to the Holocaust – now faces a serious challenge from a Redditor calling himself DogmaDog.
The other day Mr. Dog wandered into a discussion of the SlutWalks in the Feminisms and offered his two cents: he declared them “stupid,” and suggested that they won’t really help victims.
And then he started in on his own tale of woe.
I know I’m going to be shit on for saying what I’m about to say, but please hear me out.
Not a promising start, Dog.
I’ve never raped a woman, and I’m the ‘nice guy’ who never took advantage of a woman.
Do you want an award for this?
But a girl I was infatuated with in high school blew me off and treated me disrespectfully. She ended up being raped one night, while intoxicated. I do not know how I am supposed to feel about it.
As Don Draper would say, “what?”
How do you think you’re “supposed” to feel? Did you accidentally dislodge the part of your brain responsible for basic human empathy?
Apparently, the answer to that is “yes.”
[H]ow do you suppose I am supposed to feel about this woman I knew who got raped? I mean, I’ve never taken advantage of a woman, but I don’t understand how my ‘friend’, this girl I went to high school with, could go out and party all the time, and in turn treat me, her classmate, as though I were an inferior person for not enjoying the atmosphere of drunkenness at high school parties.
As it turns out, you’re an inferior person for an entirely different reason.
That girl was a mean girl, no? And by being disrespectful toward men, and prejudiced toward men, wasn’t she asking men to behave badly toward her? The only men she gave attention and physical affection to were the ones who hurt her back.
So let me see if I get this: she didn’t go out with you, a “nice guy,” so she was therefore “asking” to be raped?
Naturally, this being the Feminisms subreddit, and not The Spearhead, some of the regular commenters took exception to Mr. Dog’s victim-blaming and his complete lack of empathy for the victim – especially strange, since Dog, who says he is suffering from an (unspecified) mental illness, considers himself “a victim, in my own way,” of prejudice towards those with mental health issues. This experience, alas, has not given him any sympathy towards other vicitms.
Indeed, it seems that DogmaDog didn’t misplace his sense of empathy after all; rather, he threw it out of the house and got a restraining order against it. Responding to someone who suggested he show a little empathy, Dog lashed out:
Your empathy can go suck a dick. Empathy does nothing to help my situation. I suppose that is just the excuse people give themselves so that they can feel like they are actually doing something.
You basically called me an inferior human being because I can’t or won’t empathize for my friend who was raped. Well, ask yourself this, smart-ass, have you ever really wondered what good your empathy does? It does nothing. …
In reality, you are doing nothing but attacking me, and I may or may not have a ‘complex’, even though I don’t know what that is, but I can guarantee you, I HAVE NEVER RAPED ANYONE!!!
The sound you hear is me banging my head, ever so softly, on my desk. Empathy is what connects human beings to one another, what allows them to understand one another on a deep level.
When people are suffering – as you are, Dog, in dealing with your mental illness – a little bit of empathy from someone else can make all the difference in the world.
If you can’t feel even a little bit of sympathy for this woman you were once “infatuated” with, you’re not a nice guy at all; you’re an even bigger asshole than those drunken high school partiers you disdain. You may never have raped anyone — as you’ve repeatedly insisted, as if this should win you a prize – but “in your own way” you’re thinking like an abuser. Your lack of empathy for the victim, your continued bitterness towards her for turning you down, your sense of wounded narcissism; none of this is healthy, for you or for anyone who comes into contact with you.
You need help, dude. Please, please get it.
woops, obviously I am late to the party. Ignore!
“I am pretty much a vile person. I treat both sexes equally badely. Asking me to use special children’s language when speaking to women, so that the “delicate” sex is not offended, indicates that YOU do not respect women.”
Ah, the ‘misanthrope’ who never uses this kind of bile on men. Yes, yes, we’ve heard this song and dance before, there’s a TV Show about it, called 2 and a Half Men.
“Whew, thank goodness I’m wrong. For a minute there I thought men were thrown into debtors prison which was abolished long ago. I mean it would be pretty cold of women to have men tossed in prison for 10K a year while costing 120K a year which would pay 11 years of child support. Plus the cost of police work and such. You’re talkin probably the entire 18 years of support for 1 year of prison for a man losing his job.”
Child support modification is linked in this very thread, you stupid tit. The laws that imprison men for being heavily in arrears indicate that the man MUST HAVE THE MEANS TO PAY THE CHILD SUPPORT. It doesn’t apply to the indigent.
“I choose to go my own way and not complain.
Like a Man Should. ”
But you will brag about it!
MRAL just tried to post a comment as a sockpuppet, defending himself.
Dude, if you’e going to sockpuppet, you need to do it from a different computer.
Granted, you got away with it once before, but I’m checking IP addresses now!
Sometimes, anyway. I’m lazy.
My mistake. I assumed that MRAL meant “Mens Rights Activist Loser”.
Aaaand you assumed that “loser” referred to you.
AZ, you know that tax cheats can also go to jail?
Also, I’m pretty sure that those jailed for failing to pay child support generally go to minimum security prisons. It’s not a violent crime.
Zarat: I see, you are an equal opportunity asshole. That makes me feel so much better about you.
If you can suggest a means for getting the non-custodial parent to pay the arrears they owe, which isn’t incarceration, make free with the ideas.
If you think that letting them skip on thousands of dollars of arrears, when all they need to do is start making payments (or show an inability to pay) is the right thing for the children… what was it you said… I’m not sure you’re human?
Well, sadly I know enough about humanity to know that it makes you all too human. “Fire and forget, let the women deal with the kids,” is as old as history.
It makes you an asshole, a misogynist, and anti-child. I can’t say you are a misanthrope, because you want to make it easier for men to be jerks; and anything which actually holds men accountable is offensive to you.
Anthony, not everything is about you. I know, it’s hard to believe. When you start squealing “fuck” for no reason like a howler monkey on meth, we’ll make sure you have your binky and a nap. OK?
“Child support modification is linked in this very thread, you stupid tit. The laws that imprison men for being heavily in arrears indicate that the man MUST HAVE THE MEANS TO PAY THE CHILD SUPPORT. It doesn’t apply to the indigent.”
Do you really think you can get this LIE past me? NO! The laws allow income to be IMPUTED to the father. This means the court acknowledges that there is NO INCOME, NO MONEY, NO EARNINGS — but put the man in prison anyway. Here is a direct quote, from the law that you so feverishely defend:
“It is just as much a violation of the CSRA [Child Support Recovery Act] for a non-custodial parent to fail to pay child support where his refusal to work is motivated by sloth, a change of lifestyles or pursuit of new career objectives. For most people, bringing children into the world does limit life choices by imposing certain long-term financial obligations.”
GOT IT?!? No man would go to prison if he has the ability to pay. In practice, EVERY MAN WHO IS THROWN IN PRISON UNDER THESE LAWES IS INDIGENT.
Feminists cannot clean their hands of this blood with such sophistry. Not while MRAs still breath, to tell the story of the horrors that your hatred is heaping upon the innocent.
Ok Zarat, name one actual case where a father has been incarcerated for failure to pay, without having the means to pay.
A real name, verifiable by a newspaper or CNN website, not a friend of a friend.
So, uh, just how bad WAS your divorce?
IQs seem to drop around here when facts are presented. Again, A DIRECT QUOTE FROM THE LAW ITSELF:
“It is just as much a violation of the CSRA [Child Support Recovery Act] for a non-custodial parent to fail to pay child support where his refusal to work is motivated by sloth, a change of lifestyles or pursuit of new career objectives. For most people, bringing children into the world does limit life choices by imposing certain long-term financial obligations.”
Ability to pay has NOTHING to do with incarceration. Fathers are locked up when they lose employment, because the man-hating family courts simply call it “sloth”. Can you believe it? These femi-fascists claim that a father would face prison, violence, and brutal rape because of SLOTH. How can ANY OF YOU LIVE WITH YOURSELVES?!?
Pretty well, actually. Yourself?
Zarat: Facts… they contradict you. Sloth is a term of art in the law. It means one is refusing to look for work. It’s grounds for rescinding unemployment benefits. Since there are recorded instances of men who refuse to take work, lest they be required to pay court ordered child support this law allows for means to pursue the money they owe.
Also, note that the law does not even pretend to be gender neutral. They speak of HIS ability to pay. Not his/hers. Who here still believes that MRAs are fighting for nothing? We are fighting for freedom and liberty, for basic dignity, and against a relentless campaign of feminist hatred directed at men and boys.
“So, uh, just how bad WAS your divorce?”
Married, two kids. If you want to know what makes my wheels spin, google my name and Ms. magazine. I told my story once. I wish I could take it back, but hey, we all make mistakes. There was a time, long ago, when I thought some feminists were good people, and I asked for help. Lol.
Yaz wrote “Yeah, except you’re the only one saying that. The women here have repeatedly told you they DON’T think men are after one thing. But what do those bitches know, eh? amiright?
Yaz I hear what your saying. I do not believe the women. I hear that women want men to be more emotional, communicative,
I hear this constantly from articles, even when I was in college and the “campus date rape” scare was big then. Many women in my dorm room were afraid to walk alone at night. I remember a women who lived on the opposite end of our dormitory. We wer talking and she said that she thinks men think of one thing-sex. She told me some men put pills in womans drinks so they can rape them if the woman passes out. She said women are always on guard with men. Thinking back on it, she was a insightful attractive woman
I just think the woman on man boobz are not saying how they really feel in order not to offend the feminist men here
wrong post sorry
I’m pretty sure what makes your wheels spin is thread derailing and rampant misogyny. Am I warm?
“Also, note that the law does not even pretend to be gender neutral. They speak of HIS ability to pay. Not his/hers. Who here still believes that MRAs are fighting for nothing? We are fighting for freedom and liberty, for basic dignity, and against a relentless campaign of feminist hatred directed at men and boys.”
You don’t read the law very often do you? Because a huge number of laws are written specifically using the male gender as the default for all humans. It’s a recognized legal precedent that ‘he’ also means ‘she’, because why wouldn’t men be the default people?
In fact it was Darksidecat who first mentioned this in response to a law that specified ‘She’, and wasn’t applied to a man, because I’d forgotten it, I take it so much for granted.
“Ok Zarat, name one actual case where a father has been incarcerated for failure to pay, without having the means to pay.”
You are kidding right?
THOMAS JAMES BALL. Remember him? You guys made great sport of him here. He is a nut, you claim. Certifiable. Typical MRA.
Actually, he was a devoted father of three kids who paid child support FOR TEN YEARS before losing his job in 2009 (along with half of the nation). He worked at a Ford dealership, see, and autos were not selling very well. I guess that is what courts call SLOTH. Anyway, he was scheduled to begin his incarceration on June 16, so he burned himself alive instead.
Got it meathead? This is what YOU ARE DOING TO FATHERS. They prefer to burn themselves alive, rather than face the horrors of life behind bars.
He hit his kid, drew blood and refused to go to one lousy counseling session. That is why he was not allowed to see his kid. He did not go to jail, and would not have had he filed his unemployment status.
“I’m pretty sure what makes your wheels spin is thread derailing and rampant misogyny. Am I warm?”
Of course you are right. Anyone who says that it is wrong to sentence men to 14 years in prison for SLOTH (legalese for losing your job), must be a misogynist.
So, in other words, there is not one man who actually went to jail at all.
Are you, like so many of our resident MRAs, coated in some sort of knowledge-repelling substance? Because we’ve already gone over sloth. It’s not losing your job, it’s failure to look for work.
Anthony, how many names do you post under? I googled your name and Ms., Nothiing, except that I discovered that this is what you call your “war name.” I googled the name you gave for your email address when you posted as Antz. Again nothing.
Also, we never made “sport” of Ball. We simply didn’t treat him as a martyr.
Ball’s manifesto suggested that men should start firebombing courthouses and police stations. Do you agree with him? How does his explicit advocacy of terrorism affect how you feel about him?
“He did not go to jail, and would not have had he filed his unemployment status.”
This is what happened in NAZI Germany. Courts, paperwork, filing forms, all to whitewash unspeakable crimes. Do you think this blood will ever wash off? Feminism is forever tainted by this horror.
Check out his court documents, which are online now. Ball LIVED in court asking for a reduction in child support. Denied, denied, denied. All men know this; civil cours are a feminist bastion of man-hate. Denial of everything that comes from a petitioner with the “wrong” genitalia is the reason civil courts exist.
Enough of this. Why would there be a need for PRISON if fathers could simply “file a form” and get out of it? Are you people capable of rational thought? If it were that simple, NOBODY WOULD GO TO PRISON.