The smirky MRA douchebag thingsarebad didn’t win a lot of friends when he used to comment here. Ironically, it seems that he’s not doing that much better over on Reddit’s Men’s Rights subreddit, where his comments tend to garner about as many downvotes as upvotes. Yes, it is possible to be too much of a douche for even the highly douche-tolerant Men’s Rights subreddit.
Anyway, all that is a sort of rambling prelude to my main point here, which is: thingsarebad has figured out that whole “lesbian” thing, and wants to share his results with the world. Also, feminism. His science is tight.
Confused a bit by that explanation? Would you like a much, much longer explanation, replete with fake statistics he’s “mentated” out of his ass? Well, prepare yourself a stiff drink and take a look at this megacomment of his from earlier in that same thread.
We’ll just wait here while you digest all that.
Done? Share your thoughts below, or check out the ShitRedditSays discussion of it all.
Or just watch this video of a rather portly cat climbing into a vase.
Hey, I promised a kitty video to someone in the comments here a couple of days ago. I may be a little slow sometimes, but I am a man of my word.
While I’m at it, here’s a bonus vid of a kitty and a Kleenex box.
TAB: As clearly stated, they were guesses for the purposes of demonstration.
Why do I keep having to repeat things I already said? Come on people.
In plain English, “I made it up, and defended it as true.”
In other words (also plain English), you lied.
At least you admit it, now.
“One guy. Being cited as an authority on lesbianism.”
One example, one of many.
I never said the statistics were accurate, I always always clear that they were “guesstimates” for demonstrations purposes, so no, I never lied because I never insinuated they were hard statistics. It’s really simple.
I developed a model, a theory, that is all. Kind of silly to call me a “liar” for it lol.
Yeah, that thing you just made up is crazy interesting!
An actual model needs actual evidence; pretending your out of your ass guesses are a model is indeed grossly dishonest.
Which is why you followed up with more. Oh wait.
MRAL: MRAL: FYI: Futrelle has begun to censor me when I debate, so keep that in mind.
Define censor? Are you alleging he is removing substantive aspects of your words? Or are you rather saying you have to wait to see your sterling prose glowing on the screen?
Oh, I see. You have been (in some contravention of past practice) being reasonable. Dave has been, for some reason; unstated, suppressing you.
Conveniently there is no one’s word but yours for this. Dave has admitted to moderating you. I can believe he has chosen to keep some of your comments behind the veil. I don’t, from past experience, think this is 1: malicious on his part (I’ve been “censored”. I know why he did it. I disagree with what he thought I was doing, but I don’t think he made an unreasonable decision) 2: because you have been so brilliant as to put paid to all the rest of us; demanding that Dave keep you from posting, so that, “the echo chamber” can continue.
So, I’ll accept that you are not getting to say anything you want to say… here. Nothing stops you from blogging about it on your own. You could emulate factfinder and put up a blog to mock Manboobz. I will even predict that, should you do this, it would be better than his.
I also admit this isn’t paying you all that great a compliment.
I can see, from the commenters on this blog, that people’s true faces are shapes of various hues that form symmetrical patterns on a white background. I have determined from this that everyone other than me wears human being masks to hide there true faces on the street. Interesting indeed.
Many LGBTs adhere to a victim ideology that allows them to treat people who are different as evil oppressors, and therefore ask for special treatment and special focus. They’ll throw around words like “homophobia” and “transphobia” just like feminists, another victim class, throw around “misogyny”. They’ll demand special events for LGBTs but scoff at special events for supposed “oppressor” classes like men or whites.
As someone who truly believes in equal rights and responsibilities, I fit in quite well at the LGBT group at work because they truly focused 90% of the time on acceptance rather than preaching hate. I even organized a benefit for the local AIDS walk which raised hundreds of dollars. But you people can continue blabbering about how I hate gay people if it makes you feel better.
MRAL, it’s David’s blog, you twit. He doesn’t have to pull string to “censor” you. You of all people should not be calling anyone else deformed.
I think I get the MRA fascination with lesbians–it blows their tiny minds that women could not be interested in men at all. Not hate men, just not on the radar, so they make up absurd theories with fresh-baked-from-the-ass stats. Nice sense of entitlement, guys.
Manboobz is disappointing in usual, in that no argument is ever actually made against the model I came up with, just a bunch of complaining and straw man attacks. You’re a bunch of do-nothing anti-intellectuals.
I’m fascinated how you think you can make such a determination on the posters here. (My guess would be you’re using a d10.)
Like everything you’ve said, that’s a hollow assertion without anything to back it up.
Apparently, you need to post a picture to convince us of your absolute rightness.
Men and women are different. By women’s very nature, it is very unlikely that they will seek solely the sexual company of women without an external force that convinces them to. Why do you think even lesbians use strap-ons? Women’s desire for a man and his penis is very great. On the other hand, although men tend to have a desire for women and their vajayjays, it’s not to the same degree, as men are not driven so wholly on impulse as women are.
“Man even when he is selfish or evil always follows principles, woman never follows anything but impulses. Don’t ever forget that, and never feel secure with the woman you love.”
Leopold von Sacher-Masoch, Venus in Furs, published 1870
Whereas you’re a pseudo-intellectual with pseudo-research to back up your pseudo-hypothesis.
TAB: You are a colossal fuckwit.
“By women’s very nature, it is very unlikely that they will seek solely the sexual company of women without an external force that convinces them to.”
Wow, you make it sound like being gay is a choice. I think I’ll wake up a lesbian tomorrow!
You guys n gals n others are just really confused about sexuality. I can’t make you understand because you don’t want to understand. I could go on about dominance and submission in men and women and bisexuality but it’s not like you’d understand. Safe to say, after considering it all, it’s very rare for a woman to want to be solely with women unless she is afraid of being with a man for some reason, whereas it’s quite common for men to avoid being with women simply because they enjoy the sexual company of men more.
TAB, you’ve done something with no intellect. Bravo, I guess.
TAB: You are wrong.
“Wow, you make it sound like being gay is a choice.”
Sometimes it is determined primarily by nurture, sometimes it’s not. Please God will you infants stop trying to put words into my mouth.
@katz: Rarity!
JEEZ JOANNA I SAID IT WAS NOT OPEN TO DEBATE
TAB: A model needs actual evidence to support it. Your model lacks anything that qualifies it as such and is thus lacking in any form of validity. Therefore, it holds no relevance as any semblance of worth in discourse.
It is your choice to act like this is anti-intellectualism. However, there is no form of empiricism within your model. Criticizing it has literally nothing to do with an attack on intellectual discourse. It has everything to do with the lack information and knowledge on YOUR part. If anything, this is you being anti-intellectual because you do not engage in honest discourse.
Which isn’t surprising, considering your previous belief in validity for anything you say is based entirely on how you perceive how you look. Your egotism is not a valid basis for your intellectual endeavors. It is your merit and actual attempt at engagement, and it is within that that you are lacking.
TAB: Being bisexual, I’m pretty sure i can take my own experience over your your bullshit ‘hypothesis.’ But thanks for playing, don’t let the fundament constrict your posterior as you exit.
I create a model and, expectedly, no one here actually tries to understand it – it’s all attack, attack, we don’t like it! It’s just a bunch of whining. If someone would like to actually provide counter-examples to the model or discuss incidence rates, you can reply at the original thread here: http://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/m96wv/my_roommate_is_a_feminist_family_law_lawyer/c2z41ip?context=3
I’m not someone who yells and screams just because I don’t like something, but it’s clear from my experience that most feminists, and yes, most people here, are.
G’day.
The Book of Mormon, 2 Nephi 9:40-41
40 O, my beloved brethren, give ear to my words. Remember the greatness of the Holy One of Israel. Do not say that I have spoken hard things against you; for if ye do, ye will revile against the truth; for I have spoken the words of your Maker. I know that the words of truth are hard against all uncleanness; but the righteous fear them not, for they love the truth and are not shaken.
41 O then, my beloved brethren, come unto the Lord, the Holy One. Remember that his paths are righteous. Behold, the way for man is narrow, but it lieth in a straight course before him, and the keeper of the gate is the Holy One of Israel; and he employeth no servant there; and there is none other way save it be by the gate; for he cannot be deceived, for the Lord God is his name.