Hey, everybody, here’s another massive list of ridiculous comments from the Reddit’s Men’s Rights subreddit on the subjects of women, feminists and feminism. Some, er, highlights:
Never trust a woman. When you are out and they are around, go the other way. Your life may actually depend on you crossing the street or not taking that elevator or not working late in a office with another lonely woman.
Women are keen to assert all of the benefits that modern society affords them, but at the same time quick to twist their hair into pigtails and play the “I’m just a girl” defense when the traditional benefits of being a woman would suit them better.
Misandrist feminists want gender based apartheid, and the male population culled to lest than 10%
Feminism does NOT create strong women – it creates dependency and a stunted intellect.
In the feminist community, bigotry is met with a groundswell of support, and is very rarely called out.
That last one is just a teensy bit ironic, given that most of the comments above were heavily upvoted – in other words, “met with a groundswell of support.” Further evidence of this irony: oh, just the hundreds of misogynistic statements from MRAs I’ve linked to on this blog.
For links to the original comments in context, see the full list on Reddit. Props to the Redditor known as Squibbling for having the patience to assemble all of this.
“No you can’t meet him! I already told you, he only reveals his face to those he kills!”
Ahh, the color-coordinated outfits should have clued me in.
Try this analogy. Imagine you are a martial artist, and you lack a sparing partner. You meet an individual at a party who studies the same martial art. Now, no matter how much you would like to spar with them, no matter how much you think you would gain from the experience, and no matter how long you have been without a sparing partner, it is never acceptable to simply attack them without their consent. Even if this individual is wearing a gi, even if you have spared with them in the past, even if they have sparred with everyone else at the party.
I would like to add that, if you are sparring with someone and they tap out, it is not acceptable to keep beating on them.
“I dunno, those ninja outfits are a bit snug sometimes.”
must be feminist indoctrinated Ameriskanks influencing them
Bagelsan, I do believe I’ll be using that ninja excuse from now on as well 😛
Ninja bf – aw yeah!
Also, I know it’s been said that sexual frustration is not the end of the world, but NWO seems to conflate sexual frustration with sexual arousal of all kinds. And, sexual arousal is nice. And, call me strange or whatever, but a little bit of sexual frustration can be kindof nice, that delicious waiting until your partner gets back from a holiday, or the flirty glances all night when you know you have to wait until next week cos contraception or whatever*…I agree a lot of sexual frustration is not cool, but seriously, why do we have strip clubs if sexual frustration/arousal is like the most maddeningly upsetting thing ever?
*Sorry, my examples are monogamous relationship ones – that’s how I roll and my brain is too tired for more example-making
On the whole topic of men just gotta rape anything delicious walking by. All the men in my life have a functioning prefrontal cortex and they know how to use it—just saying.
“short skirt=coercion”
There’s a new one for the Book of Larnin’.
NWO, why do you hate men so much? You obviously consider them animals who can’t control themselves. Pretty misandrist of you.
You know what I think of every time I see these lacking in prefrontal cortex guys talking about sex? (Well, other than “wow you are creepy”.) I just keep thinking that sex with them would be like being mauled by an angry bear. Except the bear would have a grudge against you prior to the commencement of the mauling, and the ability to whine about how your frantic attempts to escape mauling were terribly unfair.
And then the bear would try to file a lawsuit against you for not letting it eat you. And a thousand other bears would join in to say “yeah, why don’t people just stand still and let us maul them? people are such assholes”.
Note – Most men do not remind me of angry bears. Most men are just fellow human beings who happen to have a penis. These guys, on the other hand…well, see above comment about prefrontal cortex.
Simon: Why can’t Keith Edwards just be quiet and leave us alone or at the very least just tell his ideas to people who freely WANT to listen to him?
What, did he lock you in a room and force you to listen to that and write it down?
Or did you find it on a website somewhere?
Honestly I don’t see anything wrong with that statement; rapists can be (often are) “nice” people, who have caring relationships. They sometimes have them with their victims. A lot of it has to do with what rape is, vs. how rape is understood.
Simon: I have a fair bit of sex. Hard as it may be for you to believe, I have it with partners who are enthusiastic. A fair bit of the time they are asking for my consent.
Why do you think it’s hard for me to believe that might be the case???
Because you said Maybe it’s just the truth, that men wouldn’t practically have any sex when they would refrain from sleeping with women that just “going along with it”.
If that is what you think is the truth, that men would have practically no sex if they weren’t willing to have it with partners who are, “just going along with it,”, then you seem to find it hard to believe that there are lots of men who aren’t doing that, but having it with women who are enthusiastic.
I don’t know what to make of the “you’re not in a position to ridicule,” because 1: I am not ridiculing, I am disagreeing. 2: I have evidence, empirically I have lots of friends who are, according to them, having eager; and enthusiastic sex. They are male and female. Some of them have had it with me, some have told me about it (my former housemate, female, has had a lot more sex than I have in the past three years; with a few more partners than I have (I think, I wasn’t really keeping tabs, and she didn’t always share identifications). I know some of her partners, and have been to parties where dozens of people were having just that sort of sex. Some of those parties had explicit rules about getting consent, free and obvious, for everything.
So you can think, all you like, that I don’t have evidence. You are wrong. What I don’t have are stats. Which means I may be unable to convince you, but you also have no chance to convince me; because you don’t have stats, and you haven’t offered evidence.
You have, in fact, admitted to ignorance, “How much men or women want sex is a secret shrouded in mystery for me,” It’s not a mystery to me. They want it a lot, or it wouldn’t be the subject of so much interest. The mystery for me is how much any specific person, with whom I might like to have sex, is interested in it; with me.
Anecdotal evidence, contrary to your assertion, does help. It tells me that women like sex. It tells me that if I let them know I am interested we can discuss it, and if we have a similar interest we can fuck.
Collect enough anecdotal evidence, under controlled conditions and you have data, but the plural of anecdote is data.
“Your desiring an attractive women no more gives you the right to rape or harass her than my desiring a Ferrari gives me the right to steal or vandalize it…nor to harass or assault the owner for making me want it.”
Hear! Hear!
Which is where analogies like NWO’s fail. It’s why he is evil. He would argue (at length) that property is precious, and sacrosanct: but he also argues that women aren’t.
So women are less than property to him, and he thinks this is treating them fairly, and justly; he even believes it is a Christian viewpoint.
Well to Hell with him.
In all fairness to bears, they have waaay more of a functional prefrontal cortex than these guys. And unlike these guys bears tend to be better at actually Going Their Own Way (as long as you hang your food up.) 😀
Funny, I manage to be sexually attracted to people in public and not attack them. I also do not have a desire to rape people, quite the opposite, in fact. I suspect that is true of most men as well. Someone who genuinely wants to horribly violate the bodily autonomy of another, or just flagrantly doesn’t give a shit about doing it, is an evil piece of shit (the vast majority of people with rape fantasies do not genuinely want to rape, this comment does not include those people).
Wow Pecunium, you really take this internet arguing thing seriously, don’t you. Yet for all the verbal diarrhea you spew, you haven’t actually said much. My point was, if men can be blamed and told ‘women fear them’ because a tiny percentage of them are rapists, why shouldn’t we have an event where black folks are told white people fear them because a small percentage of them have, at some point, mugged a white guy? Of course we shouldn’t. It’d be absurd in both cases. Unfortunately, one of them is real.
As for Schrodinger’s rapist, I repeat… statistics show that in 85% of rape cases the victim knew the attacker and was often in a relationship with him. The “violent rape by a stranger” is comparatively quite rare, so why blame and demonize all men for something a tiny fraction of them will ever think about, let alone actually do?
Not that I’m expecting a straight answer to these, of course. You seem like the kind of person who doesn’t care about the issues so much as ‘winning’ internet arguments by dancing around the issue and using fancy wordplay.
I actually understand what that guy means. A lot of women will never give the kind of ‘enthusiastic consent’ feminists talk about. The most they’ll do is “let” the guy have sex with them. If a guy waits for every woman to throw herself at him before he agrees to have sex, he’ll probably go without for a long time, not to mention a lot of women who actually wanted it but couldn’t/didn’t want to be that assertive about it might end up thinking he wasn’t into them after all.
Knowing the attacker isn’t tantamount to knowing ahead of time that your friend/father/date/teacher/co-worker is going to rape you. Moreover, what’s this with “violent rape”? Is there any other kind? The fact that you betray this very entitlement — that a prior “relationship” somehow creates an excuse for forcing women to have sex and renders the violence non-existent, and the rape not “rape rape”, in short, that men are kinda sorta entitled to force themselves on “their” women, or women improvident enough to be acquainted with them — this is the very sort of mentality that cultivates rapists. No one here is demonizing all men; but when you put the onus of figuring out which one of her relatives or acquaintances is going to assault her entirely on the woman, you are forcing women into a corner where we have no choice but to assume, for our own safety, that all men are rapists.
Amused: I was referring to women being told they should be wary of strangers, and of men being told they’re guilty for making strange women uncomfortable by existing within close proximity of them. What’s this talk about friends and relatives? That’s actually in agreement with what I was saying.
I have never, ever heard of a man told to “feel guilty for existing in proximity to a woman.” I HAVE, quite frequently, heard men told, “Hey, just so you know, when you do X thing, it often makes women uncomfortable. So if you don’t want to make women uncomfortable, you probably shouldn’t do that.” Somehow, that gets twisted in a few guys’ heads into, “OMG someone is criticizing something I might once have done! As I am constitutionally incapable of self-reflection, I will just decide that said critics are horrible bitches who want to make me feel guilty for simply BEING.”
For the record, I am totally cool with guys not feeling guilty for the stupid shit they did that made women uncomfortable. I do not see anything terribly productive about their potential self-flagellation. You are welcome to dismiss your past mistakes with a laugh, as far as I’m concerned. I just want those past mistakes to stay past mistakes, and not mistakes that are repeated over and over because it’s easier to yell “nuh-uh!” than to say, “Oh, I didn’t actually realize how (for example) cornering someone in an enclosed space to hit on her could be read as threatening. I see that now. I will do my hitting-on in spaces where she can actually escape in future, since even though I know I wouldn’t take advantage of the enclosed space to trap her there and hurt her, she has no way to know I’m not someone who would, and so it makes sense for her to be somewhat nervous.”
Potato, potahto. When men are accused of being creepy and oppressive for walking within 10 feet of a woman on a street at night, or taking an elevator, or as I said, generally existing in proximity of a woman, and then told it’s their fault for making her feel uncomfortable, I’m gonna have a problem with it.
That’s very magnanimous of you, but what you go on to say sounds like “I’m willing to forgive guys for their mistakes as long as they acknowledge that I’m right and they were wrong”. Sorry, no.
*sigh* I don’t know why I bother trying, but one last stab…
There’s no “right” and “wrong” here. If Alice has panic attacks every time someone whistles “Yankee Doodle,” and she tells Bill, “Hey, just so you know, I have panic attacks when people whistle Yankee Doodle around me,” then he probably shouldn’t whistle Yankee Doodle if he doesn’t want her to have a panic attack. That has nothing to do with blame or fault or guilt. It has to do with common freaking sense. If a large number of women get nervous when cornered in an enclosed space by a strange dude, then you probably shouldn’t corner women in enclosed spaces unless you want to make them nervous. You can yell, “But it’s not FAIR that people react to the things I do!” all day if it makes you happy, but people are going to go right on having reactions to the people around them, and if you genuinely don’t care enough to take minimal efforts not to make the people around you afraid or unhappy, then, yeah, that’s creepy. It doesn’t matter how inherently innocent “Yankee Doodle” is; if Bill continues to whistle it around Alice while fully aware that he’s freaking her out, Bill is acting like a douchebag.
Bill continues to whistle it around Alice while fully aware that he’s freaking her out, Bill is acting like a douchebag.
No he’s not. It’s not Bill’s responsibility to be aware of all of Alice’s little quirks and phobias and accommodate for them. It’s her responsibility to act like a grown-up human being in control of herself and her mental state.
As Samuel L. Jackson would say…English, motherfucker, do you read it?
if Bill continues to whistle it around Alice while fully aware that he’s freaking her out
I don’t CARE how stupid someone’s reason for being afraid is. If you know you are making them afraid and you continue behaving that way anyway, you are deliberately making them afraid, and that’s a dickish thing to do.
(Also, wow, could you be a little more repugnantly ableist? Phobias are now equivalent to “quirks” and “grown-ups” don’t have them (or PTSD, or anxiety disorders)? Please, next time you run into a war hero who suffers from PTSD, tell him that if he were a “grown-up,” he’d never get freaked out when something flashes him back to watching his friends get killed, and insist that you are ALLOWED to keep singing the song that was on the radio when his Humvee exploded and took off both his legs and it doesn’t make you the least bit dickish. Jesus Christ.)
…are you shitting me.