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.
Not to mention vasectomies…
And in the next breath/post, most of these commenters are going to be foaming at the mouth about chicks who don’t put out enough.
DKM, yes it is a double standard. I’m going to go out on a limb here and guess that single mothers were impregnated by men. If I’m wrong, then we need to alert the Vatican about all of these miraculous babies that came to the world with no shepherds and wise men to welcome them. Once a man actually impregnates a woman, it’s too late for him to decide that he doesn’t want to be a father. She is the pregnant one, so the choice is hers to make. If a pregnant man like Thomas Beatie wants an abortion, that is also his choice to make.
Men have other options than celibacy. They can wear condoms, they can get a vasectomy, they can try the rhythm method if they want to try their luck. Once they become dads, though, they need to take responsibility for their own children they helped create. If they refuse to help raise their own children, then paying child support is the very least they could do. I wonder how many fathers complaining about child support would willingly trade places with the single mom. Would they really be rolling in the dough if they had children to raise alone with only a few hundred bucks a month from mom?
Also, dear god, I can hardly imagine what the second lady is going through. To get booted off of health insurance in the NINTH MONTH? What kind of decision can she possibly make at that point–no one will want to adopt a kid who already has a health problem, and she’s already in debt… o.o
They sure wouldn’t. My brother struggles every day and has had to move in with our parents. His ex is dragging out the divorce proceedings, so there’s no wage garnishment yet, and he gets maybe a hundred bucks a month from her. If he’s lucky.
Also, dear god, I can hardly imagine what the second lady is going through. To get booted off of health insurance in the NINTH MONTH? What kind of decision can she possibly make at that point–no one will want to adopt a kid who already has a health problem, and she’s already in debt… o.o
Note to the MRM: This is how an actual human being with a functioning sense of empathy responds to this story. Not, “whatever, she’s a woman and deserves it for having sex, also, she should suck my dick LOLOLOLOL.”
Sometimes these idiots just make me so sad. 🙁
Condoms are far from 100% realiable and effective. Besides, I am no Casanova or Don Juan, but even I know about women who secretly prick holes in them, rewrap them and wait fo results…
I also know about women who lie about “being on the pill”.
I also would like to know when the “choice in fatherhood” movement got a Supreme Court ruling–or Congressional legislation– stating that since it was the man’s DNA (sperm) that created the pregnancy, the man had a choice, at least until pregnancy, for assuming fatherhood or not comparable to the woman’s aborting (of motherhood).
The father who did that would be a cad and a disreputable, but at least he wouldn’t KILL the baby in denying fatherhood, the way abortion does in denying motherhood!
I haven’t heard of such a ruling, or such legislation, and I bet that youall haven’t either.
One sided law, if ever there was any!
What are the out-of-wedlock birth stats from 1975-2005–after feminism had its say–and 1930-1960, in the “good ole days”, when women waited for marriage (REAL marriage) before having kids?
Gee, and it’s the men who are no damn good anymore, aren’t they…
“As a man … more than one third of my earning … go[es] to feed your shoes and your bastards …” –
Oh my god, that’s why we’re supposed to be barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen! We can’t have feeding both shoes AND babies. It makes so much more sense now.
That second one is why I am okay with paying the amount I do in taxes. I would rather pay for her baby to be okay then to blow up countries that did us no harm.
But then men would not have their pretty explosions and would cry. *rolls eyes.*
I know, Molly, the pregnant lady breaks my heart too. I want to say “Girl! It’s OK! Come to Canada and you can share my midwife!” But obviously I can’t.
I’ve never felt more grateful to live in a place with universal health care.
I hear it’s under fire. Be wary.
I don’t even know what to say to all of this. I hope the situations of those two in the OP, and anyone else, get better, but… blah, I just hope so.
Is there no social or political issue so complicated that MRAs can’t reduce it to ‘women=sluts=bad, hur hur hurrrr’?
Fucking Conservatives.
Putting back “Royal” in the name of our Air Force. (At least our conservatives don’t shy away from the monarchist implications of their authoritarian policies.)
Preparing a 200 years celebration of the War of 1812 (replete with “You Quebecois should be happy we won that one, otherwise you’d be *American*!)
Saying “Fuck you, here’s a law saying you can’t strike” to our airplane attendants just after they called a strike.
Attacking our rights, like universal health care.
Fucking fuck fuck fuckitty fuck.
“Is there no social or political issue so complicated that MRAs can’t reduce it to ‘women=sluts=bad, hur hur hurrrr’?”
Only when they’re complaining about women being frigid and going on sex strikes 😛
Wrong you are again, Meller. Men have options. Shit, if the MRM wanted to anything other than call “slut” or “frigid bitch,” maybe they’d like to get off their dead asses and lobby for a pill for men. Knowing you all and your misandry though, you probably think men are too stupid or lazy to take it, and fuck it, it’s just easier to let the women handle it, so when they fuck up, you can blame them. Win, win!
No. Even if they have to hurt themselves to do so. Chances are very good that these guys are not part of the 1%, which means they’re getting screwed over, but as long as they can blame teh bitchez, they ignore the 1% completely.
BAWWWW WOMEN DON’T WANNA FUCK ME!!!!! EVIL WITCHES 8foams at the mouth* lolz These MRAs act like 12 year olds with entitlement issues
Knowing what we know about firstly, various forms of cancer, AIDs, hypertension and atherosclerosis, diabetes, severe obesity, arthritis, and altzheimers, and secondly, pharmatoxin corporations, I certainly wouldn’t be surprised if some biomedical research lab affiliated with, or owned by, a government or corporate entity has had one, or even several, very cheap, highly safe and effective, and easily manufactured and marketed contraceptive(s) for men hidden in their safes or computers,, but the Wall Street crowd–e.g. Merck, Pfizer, Astra-Zenica, Squibb, and other pharmatoxin monopolies safely suppressed in their corporate safes somewhere, while women are poisoned by pills, and men are shaken down by the millions to fulfill spousal support and child support orders!. As I state in almost every post, men have TWO enemies: one the bankster/globalist/media and the governments that they own, and the other feminists and their type!
Google alternative medicine, or e.g. http://www.naturalcures.com to get a brief overview of this. A male contraceptive no doubt exist–safe, cheap, reversable, and 99%+ effective–just as vastly safer and cheaper contraceptives for women also, but it. or they, are being withheld by patents, lawyers, regulatory bureaucracy, etc. for the benefit of those banksters pharmatoxin corporations, and bureaurats who have otherwise done so much to wreck our health and our economy!
Wow, the Spearhead douchebags can’t even look at something non-gender-or-feminism-related without blaming it on feminism, single mothers, or whatever else they happen to despise. Despite the fact it is CLEAR that the OWS movement is about the 1% of ultra-rich people, they think it’s about the “1%” of…men? …Even though men are about 50% of the population. Looks like the Spearhead assholes can’t even do basic math. I guess they also don’t realize that there are plenty of MEN the movement as well. Teachers, students, business owners, blue-collar workers, etc., etc. etc. are all there.
The Spearhead is pretty much the equivalent of white supremacist skinheads, though they’re focused more on misogyny than non-white people. Of course, I’ve noticed that some misogynists also tend to complain about the poor, non-whites, etc., too.
Oh man, I just found Mikey’s comment from the Spearhead, and it is in my opinion the worst.
His little plan got 51 upvotes and no downvotes. The idea of forcing single mothers into prostitution is horrifying.
Is there anyone these people don’t hate? They hate women, obviously, they hate men, they hate every ethnicity that isn’t white, they even hate children. CHILDREN, for fuck’s sake! They blame women for having children, because then they’ll have to pay child support, but they also blame women if they have abortions.
How can anyone live with this much hate, it’s incredible.
Love this. It shows how little thought they put into their “movement.”
Self professed science geek here. One of the most telling studies I ever read was one that spoke of group dynamics between men and women. The majority of the data was pointed towards “deindividuation.” Why would men band together to commit atrocities they would be much likely to do individually? (War, especially, when the issues are not a matter of survival or protection of home/family.)
Studies showed that men prioritized the situation like this:
1. Support fellow men, show solidarity.
2. Have personal investment in the reason for the activity.
Doing something as a group mattered more than what they were doing. This was such a protracted drive that men, in the company of other men, would commit acts out of character with any time they had to act singly.
Think about this:
– All the times they swear women are painting men with some unjust swath of blame because no man THEY know would do/say these things. Or yes, women are evil because there was this guy they knew that had some wicked female perpetrate [insert horrible act of selfishness/abuse/betrayal/rejection].
– Now measure that against how many women have first hand experiences with men behaving so badly that it has changed how they view the world.
Women, btw, had to agree on what was being done before they’d join the group. The researcher said this was a show of how much better men got along with men versus women with women.
That was much likely LESS to do as an individual versus group, with men.
Nevermind the moral inequity of such a plan, how will making single mothers fuck against their will *reduce* the number of children born to single parents? It’s two levels of wrong (morally wrong and wrong from a pragmatic standpoint even assuming their value system).
The mind boggles.
Aren’t MRA’s also against abortions?