My favorite incoherent MRA blogger at the moment is our dear friend Christian J from the blog What Men Are Saying About Women. In recent days, Dr. J – famed inventor of the MRA two-dot ellipsis – has delivered up some truly inspired prose. I’d like to share some of the highlights (by which I mean lowlights) from a few of his recent posts.
Here he is, attempting to explain the “hookup culture” of the youth of today:
Women dish it up on a platter in line with their feminist education (free love/free sex mentality) to the alphas as they turn them on, the most, in the hope of either pretending to be carefree and casual about it all or they just have a high sex drive that requires servicing on a regular basis. It’s not that difficult..
No, no, not difficult at all.
Here he is talking about, er, pussy power, and somehow stumbling on to the subject of international finance:
The girls ofcourse have been trained to think that they can get away with just about anything as they possess the magic “V” which has a very high trading component as well as a social exchange rate, not unlike the Euro or an open ocean oil exploration license, but the magic “V”is more mobile and comes with it’s own carrier and operator, batteries not included though. Perfect really, when you think about it.
Here’s the opening sentence of a post of his about chivalry, and how feminists all secretly love it:
As feminism gets messier and even more morose, one does have to wonder what efforts those masterminds of insanity will do to cover their obvious and blatant erroneous experiments on human biology.
I don’t know if it’s even possible for me to get messier or more morose.
Here he is waxing poetic about the dreaded mangina:
[N]o one really considers them to be anything but a waste product, whose relevance is yet to be determined. A pretend girlie-man if you like, who wavers between reality and the dream state of their female masters. A neutered sycophant living on a different plain where reality and fantasy mix to form their delusional, ethereal world..
And let’s finish up with this muddled attempt to call feminists a bunch of lying liars:
We have on numerous occasions, demonstrated the continual lying and misinformation that the feminist hegemony consistently wallows in without what they believe is, in any fear of contradiction.
I have no idea if the second half of that sentence is the result of some sort of grievous editing error, or if he actually thought it made some sort of sense. With Christian J, it’s impossible to tell.
Megan McArdle anyone?
shes an mba. that is a whole other trainwreck.
The hooking up culture generally tends to take place within the lower tails of men’s and women’s respective bell-curve distributions. The bell-curve distribution for men is wider and flatter, with more extremes from extremely degenerate to extremely intelligent. So women’s multiple sex partners, within the context of hooking up cultures, are going to be decidedly more retch-worthy than those of men who are more likely to select from a taller, narrower bell-curve. But do not take this to imply that it is ok for one sex to have multiple partners but not the other.
It matters because I have to live in the devolved culture where thug-spawn impact on my quality of life.
(DISCLAIMER – Apologies to the less gifted among us, for my use of big words. I find it more economical to write this way).
Apologies to the less gifted among us, for my use of big words. I find it more economical to write this way
yeah… as someone who cares a lot about verbal economy it doesnt work that way champ. never use an uncommon word unless youre absolutely certain its the right word. (hint: it probably isnt. theres a reason its uncommon)
fortunately theres a perfect word for people who dress commonplace mutterings up with superfluous language to make it seem deeper- theyre called posers.
Statement assumes facts not in evidence.
Well, you do, so why shouldn’t we?
There aren’t enough criminals, even in the US, for this to be as major an issue as you claim. And the US is the developed country with the highest number of criminals per 100,000 members of the population. Your idiotic point is even less tenable elsewhere.
You’re not a very good writer, are you? A good writer knows it isn’t ‘economical’ to just use large words. Convey meaning with the fewest, least words you can. This doesn’t mean ‘big words’ are bad; it means they are to be used with caution.
It’s really not the big words; it’s the utter dearth of interesting ideas. It’s the concentrated levels of pure trite under the verbiage. It’s like hacking your way through dense jungle growth only to find a petrified turd in The Temple of Doom.
In short, there’s no there there. But continue to insist that it’s all Pearls Before Swine, if it helps preserve your fragile self-concept.
Ppl are queer cuz they’re taught it in school by the state mandated gay agenda. And gay people are mostly pedophiles. Also he said something about trans ppl being “constructions” but didn’t elaborate when I asked him about it, so that’s still iffy xD
I did include gay people being pedophiles, but I’d forgotten about the state-mandated gay training in public schools. And now I’m trying to remember the trans sexuality he invented for himself by sewing his dick onto his face or something…
“The hooking up culture generally tends to take place within the lower tails of men’s and women’s respective bell-curve distributions. The bell-curve distribution for men is wider and flatter, with more extremes from extremely degenerate to extremely intelligent. So women’s multiple sex partners, within the context of hooking up cultures, are going to be decidedly more retch-worthy than those of men who are more likely to select from a taller, narrower bell-curve. But do not take this to imply that it is ok for one sex to have multiple partners but not the other.”
Shorter Chuckles: “Women hook up with the same amount of partners, their partners are just UGLY and STOOPID! Take that, feminists!”
Actually, wait a second… has Chuckles discovered the origin of The Ghetto? :O
The vastly more probable etymology for “rule of thumb” is simply the once-common practice of using hands and arms to measure things approximately (cubits, spans, yards, etc). Thus, “rule” as in “measurement,” not “rule” as in “law.” It’s more probable because it’s actually related to the meaning of the phrase (a general rule to use when more specific ones don’t apply).
The wife-beating etymology is suspect because it has all the hallmarks of a good urban legend: the specifics (the year and location of the law) vary and it’s sensationalist and memorable.
Cap’n badbreath opines:
blah blah blah blah
hahaha you do realize that your words mean nothing at all, and are to anticipated regardless of who the author is or how well the argument is presented, so long as you disagree with it. It’s the textbook liberal approach to debate.
(STANDARDIZED DISCLAIMER – Apologies to the less gifted among us, for my use of big words. I find it more economical to write this way).
So Chuckie thinks dudes are ugly, and therefore women are slutty for sleeping with ugly people.
Oh the etymology might not trace back to it, but it’s a very real opinion. State v. Rhodes, 1868. But it wasn’t based on an ACTUAL English Common Law, so it was ultimately overturned.
Uh, excuse you, ‘textbook liberal approach’ guy, but you haven’t even substantiated your fact claims about the bell curve of women and men. I don’t think you want to open this up to a discussion of the poor debating that characterizes people like you.
@Shaenon yeah I saw that under the pedophile heading xD But I wanted to re-iterate it for the queer section :3
Refer to my previous comment regarding liberal debating methods. You are simply not interested, and will revert to the textbook methodology exemplified by cap’n badbreath. As badbreath describes it, any compelling argument that is presented will simply amount to pearls to swine.
(STANDARDIZED DISCLAIMER – Apologies to the less gifted among us, for my use of big words. I find it more economical to write this way).
A woman’s multi-partnered sexual history and the menagerie of degenerates that routinely transition through it, if you can conceptualize it without retching, does matter.
Conceptualize it for us :3 I’m curious for details xD
(STANDARDIZED DISCLAIMER – Apologies to the less gifted among us, for my use of big words. I find it more economical to write this way).
I like how he thinks he writes in a complicated manner xD
Now *I* write in a complicated manner! >:D
Besides, I’m the only one ppl have complained about my writing, therefore I AM TEH SMARTEST IN TEH WORRRRLLDDDDD!!! 😀
Or WURLD :3
…Which word in this post is supposed to be big? “Blah?” “hahaha?” The longest word in the post is “economical,” and that’s in the disclaimer.
I think we have another candidate for the Dunning-Kruger effect. He actually thinks he’s making a well thought-out, substantive argument. The community college professor would not be pleased.
I like how she thinks I think I write in a complicated manner 🙂
Now I’m curious o:
What did your disclaimers look like before? o:
I do? o:
Little hint there chuckeedee, I don’t think she does.
oops, forgot my disclaimer:
(STANDARDIZED DISCLAIMER – Apologies to the less gifted among us, for my use of big words. I find it more economical to write this way).
I love it when I start infecting the trolls w/ my smileys tho 😀 They can be all hoity toity but once Ami shows up, they can’t resist the happy smileys 😀
Ami Angelwings, bringing joy to the world! 😀