You might assume that those Occupy Wall Street protests (and their various offshoots) you’ve seen so much little of on the news lately are all about, you know, Wall Street, and the economy, and the fact that the very people who got our economy into the mess it’s in are somehow all still richer (a lot richer) than you or me. But apparently that’s not it at all. Nope! Apparently it’s all about hating on the menz.
How so? Let us turn to the good fellows at The Spearhead for guidance. In a recent post titled Occupy Wall Street Is Just Another Vehicle For Misandry, the blogger known only as Pro Male/Anti-Feminist Tech (PMAFT for short) argues that the movement is overrun by dastardly “single mothers and other women demonstrating high levels of entitlement.” His proof: one lady he found posting her story on the We Are the 99 Percent blog who noted that she had “no job, 3 kids and cannot see a med … let the dudes pay my bills.”
You might assume that by “the dudes” the lady in question is referring to extremely rich dudes – you know, the 1 percent that the “we are the 99 percent” movement is focusing its attention on. But apparently PMAFT knows better than we do, declaring that
she is demanding men subsidize her, not rich men or billionaires (which would be questionable enough) but men in general.
Oh, but she’s not the only entitled princess on display on the 99 Percent blog. Here are two other women — chosen from hundreds of examples from the blog — that to PMAFT seem to epitomize the evils of female entitlement and man-hatred:
Imagine, women actually having the chutzpah to want medical insurance for young children! Blatant misandry at its worst!
The commenters whooped it up in typical Spearhead fashion. “Single mums want to fuck with John and expect Harry to support her and her kids,” complained Nico. “New-age gov-mediated cuckoldry.”
To the redoubtable Uncle Elmer, these women’s pleas were
symptomatic of the feminized educational system and media. Without a manly Patriarchy to call BS on a lot of these entitlement notions, we have several generations of women now sailing into the hard rock of reality. … nobody cares.
Finndistan, meanwhile, wrote a screed nearly as long as the OP, laying out his case against shoe-wearing single mothers. A condensed version:
So, single mom? Should’ve kept your legs closed… should’ve chosen a better man….
I am not in America, but my single friends who get laid by one of your friends once every blue moon are already paying for you and your friends shoes and bastards by the insane amount of taxes imposed on them with threat of imprisonment.
If these guys are the 1%; that makes you, the 99%, parasites….
You, found a dipsh%t welfare boy, made a baby, and we, the 1% as defined by you, who actually want to work and create something useful, not bastards, are getting screwed by the real 1% who steal from us to give to you, so you can buy shoes and create bastards.
As a man … more than one third of my earning … go[es] to feed your shoes and your bastards …
Single mom with shoes and bastards, bought and being payed for by my money.
Occupy Wallstreet just shows that the western man is the pinata of the western world. And then he dies.
This comment got 63 upvotes from the locals, but no shoes or bastards.
AfOR, not quite as longwinded, noted that he found the women’s pictures “hilarious,” adding:
Suck it down bitches.
If you blow me PROPERLY I’ll buy you a 99 cent burger.
This got 58 upvotes from the totally non-hateful readers of The Totally Non-Hateful Spearhead.
EDITED TO ADD:
Speaking of hateful, here’s a comment I somehow missed, from evilwhitemaleempire. Readers of the comments here will recognize him as a dickish dude who posts dickish comments here from time to time. But in this comment he really lets his misogynist flag fly. (TRIGGER WARNING FOR VIOLENT MISOGYNY) Referring to one of the women cited as “entitled” by PMAFT, who had noted that she has “no money to hire a lawyer so I can divorce my abusive husband,” evilshitemaleempire offered this advice:
Heh. If she’s telling the absolute truth about her life on that paper (questionable) then she needs to go back to that abusive husband and start doing some serious dick sucking.
And if he wants anal sex she’d better give it to ‘em.
At last count this comment had 16 upvotes and one downvote. Stay classy, Spearhead.
Get pregnant after fucking a guy and get an abortion, you’re a bitch. Don’t get an abortion, you’re a bitch. Don’t fuck a guy, you’re a bitch. Fuck more than one guy, you’re a bitch.
Work to support yourself, you’re stealing a job that should go to a much more deserving man and you’re a bitch. Expect financial or other child welfare contributions from a guy, and you’re a bitch.
I’d fuck off and die, the only obvious option left to avoid being a bitch, but I’m not that polite and I don’t want to give these idiots the satisfaction.
This paragraph is a convoluted mess. Is he talking about taxes or child support? And I note that he goes from excoriating slutty whores in the previous paragraph to slamming frigid bitches who don’t put out enough in the next. So women are evil for having sex and they are evil for not having sex. Women, you are evil, regardless of what you do.
I have to wonder what Finndistan considers an “insane amount of taxes”. Considering that American taxes have been going nowhere but down (which is truly insane when a country is engaged in even just one war, and is the thing both Republicans and Democrats rarely mention when talking about your national debt), I guess previous tax rates would have been apocalyptic.
all while completely ignoring the vast numbers of men at Occupy Wallstreet…
oh silly me I forgot, they’re all beta manginas so they don’t count *eyeroll*
and no child support for the lady in the first pic? but I thought that all single mothers were living the high life with that money?!
A woman who isn’t getting any child support and is paying her ex’s bills? Isn’t that what they want?
I guess the MRAs won’t be satisfied until she’s doing all that and happy about it.
Ugh, and if Herman Cain gets his way, we’ll all be paying a 9% sales tax on EVERYTHING (no exemptions for food). That’s right, you poors, if you can’t afford to eat it’s your own damned fault for being SO LAZY.
“New-age gov-mediated cuckoldry.”
Fathering children and leaving the support of them to the government is socially mandated “cuckoldry.”
If women’s judgement can’t be trusted, if we are only mindless consumers who haven’t resigned ourselves to the commodity we are, how long do you think it will take before they actually turn the blame back on themselves for what their fellow men are doing? Fathering all those children, etc? New class of scapegoat males on the horizon? Those “dip**** welfare boys” mentioned?
@Amphitrite
Nah, the general rule is that women are always to blame. Somehow.
It’s amazing how obsessed with “cuckoldry” these guys are… apparently they even see it as cuckoldry when a man abandons the mother of his child and refuses to pay child support.
Unless you eat every meal at Godfather’s Pizza, I’m thinking…
These are the same guys that want the option of opting out of parenthood after getting women pregnant, “choice for men”. They would throw a fit if people gave them the advice “Keep it in your pants, should have chosen a better women, should have chosen not to be a single dad if you didn’t want to pay child support”. It’s a ridiculous double standard.
I just can’t get over the idea of feeding shoes [and children]. If I fed my shoes, would they stay penned up in the shoe organizer better, and not slowly expand to take over my entry way? Is that them foraging for sustenance? If I feed my boyfriend’s shoes, will more stray shoes start to show up, expecting food? That’d be a real bummer, cause the man has enough shoes to fill two shoe organizers and then some. So many questions.
(I feel better focusing of the utter silly there than the utter wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong in the quotes themselves. There are so many dudes on that tumblr, too!)
FoSF – I feed my shoes to keep them energetic, so they don’t just turn into a bunch of loafers.
Holly – tee hee!
Okay, my joke of the day, and sorry for derailing but I love it:
What do you get if you divide a pumpkin’s circumference by its diameter?
Pumpkin pi!
LOL
Finndistan is likely from Finland, where I’m from. What he’s talking about as insane amount of taxes is 50% (for those earning over 6 million euros per year- that’s roughly $8 M) income tax and 22% VAT. Actually he does mention a thrid of his salary going to taxes, which would put him at earning over 6000€/ month. Not exactly the same as the 1%ers in America.
What he doesn’t mention is that besides welfare for people who need it, those taxes provide some benefits for him as well; free education all the way through University and professorship if so inclined, getting paid during his studies, practically free public healthcare (and that’s real, good healthcare, not any HMO type thing. Your doctor determines that you need care, you get the care, no matter how expensive), government subsidized perscription medication, public transportation in “major” metropolitan areas (Finland is pretty small, I think we could probably fit all our population in a city the size of Austin), guaranteed minimum pension, which usually is big enough to live on. On top of those of course there’s the usual stuff, like infrastructure, the justice system and so on. But you know, why would an MRA really care about that stuff?
Oh. I forgot. His handle is the oh-so-charming indication that Finland is becoming Afghanistan or a similar state.
Women choose to have sex with a particular man, or men, women make, or fail to make, the evaluation of what kind of a father he would be, women choose to get pregnant, or avail themselves of ‘birth control”, women choose (as they never fail to remind everyone since Roe v. Wade 1974) to keep the pregnancy, women choose to raise the brat or put it up for adoption, and women choose to take the father(?) to court to demand “child support” money.
Men don’t have choices anywhere along the line here except celibacy! Now, tell me where the double standard here is.
Where is there any sympathy for the men who are, as a result of this godforsaken mess those Wall St Globalist criminals are leaving us with, are often WORSE OFF off then the pregnant sluts cited above? Feminist attacks on male victims doesn’t help anybody very much. At least welfare and ‘child-support laws favor unwed floozies and their spawn from hell, but all that men see is the revival of debtor’s prison and indentured servitude courtesy of feminists!
Read the post and try again.
…Calling a woman who got pregnant by her husband a “slut” is some kind of spectacular new low.
See, this is why the MRM never accomplishes anything, besides the fact that it’s sort of fundamentally stupid and mean-spirited. It’s mostly made up of right-wingers who distrust the whole idea of collective action. If you think cooperation is for icky girls and caring about other people’s welfare is for suckers, your grassroots movement isn’t likely to get a lot accomplished. Too many MRAs have an “I’ve got mine, screw you” mentality (or, more precisely, “I don’t got mine, but I’d rather screw you than get it”) to work together.
And yeah, I love the guy who rails about slutty slut sluts in one paragraph and frigid bitches who won’t sleep with him and his friends in the next. Breathtaking.
How do we know the second lady doesn’t have a significant other anyway? The poster says “booted *us* off of health insurance”, which I guess means her and the baby, but plenty of people can be in debt *and* have boyfriends.
Wrong. Men and women have equal choices at all points except for the months that the fetus is inside of the woman’s body. Before conception, they have equal choices regarding the use of birth control, condoms, and whether or not to have sex. After childbirth, they have equal responsibilities to raise the child. If men were the ones to give birth, they would have sole decision making over what happens to their bodies, too.
“Men don’t have choices anywhere along the line here except celibacy!”
Why none of these MRAs have heard of this newfangled invention called “condoms” boggles the mind. You’d think they’d be all about it.
And don’t even start with me about this bullshit that a non-custodial parent’s financial obligations outweigh the work performed by the custodial parent. The custodial parent does the lion’s share of work in raising the child, regardless of whether it’s the mother or the father. And a couple hundred bucks a month is a pittance compared to what it actually costs to house, feed, clothe, and care for a child. My brother is the custodial parent of his two children after my alcoholic SIL abandoned them. He’s the one who takes off work to go to their school events and take them to the doctor. He’s the one who spends every evening with them, makes their dinner, packs their lunches, makes sure they’re bathed and dressed properly, keeps them entertained, and participates in their lives.
Mothers can be deadbeats, too. Gender does not matter in this issue. The custodial parent is the one doing all of the work, period.