Apparently, or so I’ve learned from the manosphere, every single thing that women do is designed to torment men. Yesterday, we learned that women with jobs are leeching off of men just as much as women without jobs.
Further proof of female perfidy can be found in a recent post on the popular manosphere blog In Mala Fide with the provocative title Provocative Female Attire is an Assault Against Men. Guest poster Giovanni Dannato lays it out for anyone who needs convincing:
When a woman walks down a crowded sidewalk in revealing clothing, she is forcing herself on every man nearby.
The woman fully understands the powerful biological drives of men. She knows they cannot ignore her, not even if they want to.
Amazingly, the fact that a woman might show some cleavage does not automatically mean that she wants to have sex with every single man who sees her.
She has chosen to advertise herself to everyone passing by, but she is looking only for a few men. The wealthiest, the most famous, the most powerful men she can attract. …
There’s an old elementary school custom…when you bring something tasty to class, it’s understood that you should put it away unless you intend to share it with others. …
Likewise, a woman who puts her goodies blatantly on display is making false advertisements. Nobody supposes or expects that she could share herself with her entire audience—not even if she wanted to.
That’s right. Women are like gum. Or that pizza Spicoli had delivered to him in class in Fast Times at Ridgemont High that the mean Mr. Hand forced him to share with everyone. And if you gum-pizza-ladies are not willing to share yourself with every horny man (and, presumably, lesbian) who happens to notice you in your slut uniform, you are committing a terrible infraction.
Oh, sure, wearing a totally cute outfit is not specifically against the law, but, as Dannato reminds us,
looking for refuge in explicit written law is inherently disingenuous. …
[W]omen exposing themselves without intent to reciprocate the attention they attract is impolite and inconsiderate – an act of aggression in which they use the power of their sex as a weapon.
So how can men defend themselves against such evil feminine perfidy? By yelling “hey, whore! How much?” or “can I squeeze those titties?” or “Can you give me directions to Pussy Avenue?” Because street harassment – sorry, catcalling – is
a defense mechanism used by lower status men against women flaunting themselves publicly – for the benefit of millionaires only.
What else are men supposed to do?
[M]en are effectively strapped down, gagged, and muzzled while females can flaunt and taunt with impunity. For many men this pretty much sums up every single day of an entire lifetime at school and at work.
And women won’t even admit that when they put on a cute outfit and leave the house that they’re doing it to torment men.
Western Women don’t just abuse their incredible sexual power, they pathologically lie about their inability to understand the effects and implications of their actions. In fact, they seem to derive a sort of sociopathic pleasure from being able to sow unpleasantness and discord without consequence – all while playing innocent. They express their contempt and hatred for men even as they troll the populace for providers. Their enormous power comes without responsibility and they love it that way.
And now these evil women have come up with an even-more-dastardly-than-usual way to torment men “[i]n the most vengeful, derisive, and mocking way they know how.” Yep, you guessed it: The SlutWalks. Large groups of women tormenting men with sexy clothes in unison!
Apparently overwhelmed by contemplation of the sheer feminine evil of the SlutWalks, Giovanni ends his post abruptly at this point.
I admit I don’t have the patience to wade through the comments. If any of you do, please post any of your findings below.
EDITED TO ADD: Ironically, Ferdinand Bardamu (the guy behind In Mala Fide) aids and abets the evil sexy-woman assault on men with his own retro porn site Retrotic. NSFW, of course. And if Dannato’s post is to believed, not safe for straight men generally.
NOTE: This post contains sarcasm.
@random6x7
Women marry up, men marry down. Or, if you prefer denial of facts in feminist lingo. Ideology good, facts bad.
But that’s not what men and women do. They both marry across. Socioeconomic status has one of the highest correlation coefficients for mate selection – as high as religion and and age. (Diamond, Jared, 1992, The Third Chimpanzee, New York: Harper Perennial, p. 101, before you ask).
“Ideology good, facts bad.”
Isn’t that you’re motto?
NWO: You conveniently skipped the bit where I talked about the responsibility thing going two ways. As in: I have to control my base impulses around men until I get permission to do anything with them. So do you. So does everyone. It doesn’t fucking matter what I’m wearing. Or what anyone else is wearing – we all have to wait for permission to do sexual things with each other. See how it works?
One question before I go.
Since it is a biological fact. Women dressing and acting sexually is merely devolving down to an animalistic state to signify readiness for mating.
Can women control their sexuality?
What does it matter? You won’t respond to anyone, anyway.
NWO’s definition of “fact” is idiosyncratic, to say the least.
Of course we can! We can put on different clothes.
Silly NWO, thinking women couldn’t control which clothes they wear.
It’s not a biological fact. Women in other cultures run around wearing little more than a loincloth, and rape is unknown to them. How does that happen if your assertions are “biological fact”?
When I take over the world, it will be illegal to make biologically deterministic statements about human cultures unless the person so doing can name at least five non-industrialized societies for which it holds true.
NWO: That’s the stupidest fucking question I’ve ever read. Do men control their sexuality? Or do you fall on every woman who turns you on like a wild animal? Because I certainly manage not to molest every person I see who turns me on.
Why do men “marry down”?
@Stoner
I don’t always agree with feminist authors/bloggers either. Once in a blue moon even an MRA blogger say something I agree with, once all that misogyny is out of the way. Unfortunately it is very rare to see something like this on a manosphere blog because so much of it is saturated in misogyny. I’ve never seen feminist bloggers refer to men as children, or say things like “men dont know what they want, they have to be guided” or “men just play at careers, women do the real work” (see David’s previous post to this one)
Occasionally I’ll see something that stands out as misandrous on a feminist blog. Usually other feminists will call whoever made the misandrist post or comment out. On a manosphere blog though, 99% is misogynistic. The MRM likes to say that David only posts the extreme MRA comments, but its all pretty common. I’ve lurked on MRA blogs enough to see this for myself.
@KathleenB
“NWO: You conveniently skipped the bit where I talked about the responsibility thing going two ways. As in: I have to control my base impulses around men until I get permission to do anything with them. So do you. So does everyone. It doesn’t fucking matter what I’m wearing. Or what anyone else is wearing – we all have to wait for permission to do sexual things with each other. See how it works?”
A womans impulse is to act sexually in some way to signify readiness for mating.
Everywhere in the world, that’s how nature works. It really doesn’t matter what animal you are, that’s how it works.
Since this is the case, and all women dress and act sexually virtually all the time. Women are never controlling the base impulse. You are acting like animals with no control over your sexual impulse.
Slavey:
If it’s a fact, someone other than you … oh, right, nothing you say is intended to convey meaning. Like that last sentence there, you saw that said about you, and you saw that everyone thought it was brilliant, so you’re hoping that if you say it you, too, will be brilliant. You don’t even understand that it meant something initially.
That said, in what way is what you just said at all “biology”? Though I don’t even know how to begin to have a discussion on that point with someone who believes citing a source for something makes it wrong.
Like they had their own personal Garden of Eden in Sweden
You mean Garden of Sweden.
NWO, I usually ask these things when you get political, but how do you know these things about women?
Is it from women you personally know? (sorry, I cracked myself up a bit there)
Is it from women you observe in your community?
Did you read it somewhere?
You can’t just know things unless you’re Miss Fucking Cleo. How did you get to know women’s evil ways so well?
NWO: Read a fucking book. Preferably one that contains actual facts instead of words pulled out of the author’s ass. Fuck off. And seriously, get that black hole in your head checked on – it’s going hit critical, and local authorities deserve some notice before cars and lamp posts start getting pulled toward your head.
He can’t read books. I’ve noticed that he ignores me if I cite a book, so I think he’s allergic to either page numbers or the names of publishers. If he tries to read an actual book, he’d probably go into anaphylactic shock.
@random6x7
“When I take over the world, it will be illegal to make biologically deterministic statements about human cultures unless the person so doing can name at least five non-industrialized societies for which it holds true.”
All of pre-industrialized history, all of nature. If a female of any species, can’t excite the male of that species to mate, her genes die. Biology 101.
…So do you believe in evolution now?
HOW COME WE DON’T HAVE SUPERDOGS?
And why do you think “excite the male of that species to mate” is the same thing as “entice random strangers to rape her”? Seems like females could be exerting a little more specificity there.
He mentioned that he’s had several relationships and was engaged at one poit, but didn’t say he was married.
^ That was in response to Holly
“If a female of any species, can’t excite the male of that species to mate, her genes die. Biology 101.”
So why are you yelling about how a woman being an animal is so TERRIBLE all the time? Me and my 31 partners (even the female ones) are just making sure the genes don’t die out! I’M SAVING THE FUCKING WORLD HERE, DAMMIT!
What if it’s a hot day, NWO? ever consider that women wear shorts and tanktops because its hot out? not because they are trying to seduce men? what about all those men who go shirtless in the summer? are they signifying their readiness to mate too?
I know its hard for you to believe, but women don’t always do things with men or sex in mind. Sometimes we wear less clothes for a reason as simple as the weather.
Also how come the beach or the pool isn’t a hotbed for rape or sexual assault? Really NWO, do answer.
Wrong, NWO. Human females actually have hidden a fertility cycle and are always sexually available (in the sense that we don’t have a “heat” time, not in the sense that you can rape at will). We’ve actually gone to a great deal of trouble to hide when we’re most fertile, when those times are usually when, in other animals, the males are most attracted to the females.
Moreover, it’s usually the male animals that have attractiveness displays. Female animals generally just have to show that they’re fertile, and they have their pick of mates. Male animals have to prove that they’re good enough for females to bother with them. That’s why the peacocks have the showy tails while the peahens are a boring brown. And none of that even matters, because humans don’t mate like that.