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.
Slavey, you can’t even identify what is involved in theories of feminisms. Don’t pretend like you have logic, you don’t. Hell, you still can’t even do math.
NWO: Weren’t you going away, never to darken this doorstep again? Because we’re all just too, too stupid to understand the working of your turgid, manly brain or something?
Would that be asinine as oppossed to feminist theory? There’s the pot calling the kettle black.
It depends what you consider feminist theory xD You seem to think of it as something others do not o: So what exactly do you mean by “feminist theory”? 😀
Three more!
I’m thinking that there should be a talk show featuring NWO and Pecunium, a la Crossfire, except the premise would not be right against left but facts against fantasy. We could call it Right and Wrong. It would be nothing if not entertaining.
NWO, you and your crackpot theories are also asinine. There, you are now included in the club of people I have declared utterly nonsensical.
@rutee- state v. rhodes is the only case that took steps towards affirming the rule of thumb, but its actually pretty late in the game in terms of american judges discussing the rule. the earliest, i think, is bradley v. state, mississippi 1824.
http://files.usgwarchives.net/ms/unknown/court/bradley61gwl.txt
(the header says 1834, but thats wrong)
also in searching for that i found this interesting response to hoff sommers rant:
http://dynamic.uoregon.edu/~jjf/essays/ruleofthumb.html
CB: I’m thinking that there should be a talk show featuring NWO and Pecunium
WTF dude? I don’t know what I did, but I apologise. It can’t really have been so bad as to punish me with with having to listen to NWO in person.
I mean, think of the children, and the agonies of watching my brain rot away, as I try to think about whatever new drivel comes out of his mouth.
And my heart… the steady strain of my blood-pressure cycling as the mind-boggling stupid is introduced to the world?
Send me to the NJ DMV, every day for a year… but not that, Sweet Suffering Jesus, not that.
I’m sorry for whatever it was, and I’ll never do it again.
Oh, I’m aware that in general the legal opinion was “Wife beating is fine if it’s in moderation”, and that the RUle of Thumb was primarily a folk thing. But I gotta say, “Wife beating is fine in moderation” is not actually the standard that people are expecting when you say that the Rule of Thumb was never even close to legal… XD
oh, i gotcha.
i still like bradley better as the example, though, because even though the court didnt end up adopting the rule of thumb as the standard, if the argument is, ‘the rule of thumb has no relevance to american caselaw,’ then the earlier the discussion, the better.
@Pecunium,
I’m sorry for whatever it was, and I’ll never do it again.
I was just thinking you were the most opposite person to NWO on here–you know, the most fact based. 🙂 Of course, we could always have Ami take him on. That would be entertaining. Holly too would make short work of him. Or Nobinayamu. Or Rutee. Or any number of our other posters here too numerous to mention. Failing that, we could have Ginmar go against, NWO, but I’m thinking that would be better left to the WWE.
It was just a thought. : / We could have a bullet proof spittle screen between you two if you like. Think of the money you could make! 🙂 Come on, take one for the team! Or not.
No I’m good, Pecunium can have it. Wouldn’t want to take the joy away from him.
@Sharculese: Well, Mags is stupid. You’re right, in general, but I get the feeling that if she read that case, she’d just be like “BUT THE GUY WENT TO JAIL” “Yes, because he didn’t do it in moderation, in which case he’d have been let off” “THAT MEANS ITS NOT OKAY” “Oh boy, you don’t know how legal standards work..”
CB: You’d need a sound proof screen. I mean, watching me lose it, and start to foam might be amusing… for everyone else, but the slack-jawed horror I get to overcome before I make a comment about him; less interesting in person, at least after the first time.
Watching Pecunium slice-and-dice NWO is truly one of the joys of existence.
@rutee
good point
Ozy: I’ve made all of one reply to him in several weeks. It’s not worth the return on investment.
I have been promoted to some sort of Ultimate White Knight.
Maybe I can join the Knights of the Temple, or perhaps the Hospitallers.
Going back a bit, sorry … chuck’s simply too incoherent to respond to.
katz:
The interesting thing about it isn’t that he’s right — stopped clocks and all — but that it seems so at odds with everything else he’s said.
katz:
Are we going to have to have sex with the words now?
Yes.