Categories
alpha males antifeminism homophobia misogyny reactionary bullshit that's not funny! the spearhead

Christopher Hitchens is no more, yet women remain unfunny: The Spearhead pays tribute

Hitch also enjoyed smoking.

As you may have heard, Christopher Hitchens – writer, drinker, atheist, shit-stirrer – died the other day. He’s gotten tributes from people all over the political spectrum. Over on The Spearhead, the fellows are paying tribute to his life. Well, not so much his life as to his opinion that women just aren’t funny – apparently their vaginas get in the way, or something.

Here a fellow named Rocco offers his fond remembrances of the man:

I applaud him and wish him to be considered by the big man upstairs to have done the world a service by publically opposing the political machine that is feminism by telling a simple truth.

Woman aren’t funny and men do alot of the great stuff they do like music, art and war to impress women.

Maybe this is why women will never invent anything, why bother.

Twenty upvotes and one downvote for that. Presumably that one downvote is from God, who’s probably spent the last couple of days just going around downvoting anything positive said about Hitchens.

Keyster elaborated further:

His point being that not only do women not need to be funny to attract men, they don’t need to do anything else but simply be women; dress nicely, wear a little make up and perfume – – pleasant personality or the ability to engage in substantive conversation is completely optional.

Everything men strive for is to attract more women.

Everything women strive for is to be more like men.

See the conflict?

Attila added this:

This Cuntry has become so PC- that it couldn’t produce someone like Hitchens- as much as I may disagree with some of his views. He had a functioning mind- and an evidently rigorous education. Can anyone name anybody like him in the public arena? The fact he could throw words like “dyke” around with ease in the middle of his perorations shows a great deal of confidence (he wouldn’t let himself be bullied).

Hitch, this part of your legacy lives on!

But it’s a little-noticed comment from Nutz that highlights Hitch’s most impressive accomplishment:

Well, he was drunk in a lot of his interviews. Personally I thought he was great and one of the things that made him remarkable–he’d be drunk in an interview or debate and still soundly spank the other person with his wit.

Whether you loved him or hated him, agreed with him or disagreed with him, you’ve got to admit: he somehow managed to accomplish more while staggeringly drunk than most of us accomplish stone-cold sober. And that’s something, I guess.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

173 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
CassandraSays
CassandraSays
9 years ago

Haven’t seen PoshNosh. I assume it’s a food show? I like food shows. I just need to remember to not ever read the comments since it’s on YouTube.

PBS and BBC America must give a rather weird impression of what’s on TV in the UK given that BBC America seems to be aiming at a rather older than average audience, if you go by the advertising, which is usually a good indiction of who the numbers show watches the station. My ex has started calling it “television for retired people”.

(I’m about to get told off again, aren’t I?)

blitzgal
9 years ago

When I read that I thought “I can’t possibly have forgotten something like that’ – and, sure enough, this “first episode” turned out to be the first episode of series eight.

Unless they misnumbered the series on Netflix, Frank attempts to “seduce” the neighbor with agoraphobia because she gets a fat state check and he wants in on it. She ties him up and then pulls out a giant black dildo. You don’t see her use it on him; you just see him react negatively to seeing it and then in the next scene he’s limping to the table because he’s in pain.

It could’ve been the second episode, but it was definitely in the first series. In both the American and UK versions.

ithiliana
9 years ago

Molly Ivins: totally feminist, totally hilarious, and totally spot on about Texas (I admit to a preference to written rather than stand-up humor).

CassandraSays
CassandraSays
9 years ago

Of course every culture has sexual hangups. The public attitude towards women talking about sex in an unapologetic way really is very different in the US and the UK, though (notice that I’m not the only person saying this), and Brits tend to swear more (a lot more, actually). If you consider that crass then that’s fine, but that was kind of the point – standards and expectations are very different, and I think it affects comedy, especially what’s acceptable coming from comedians who are women.

blitzgal
9 years ago

PBS and BBC America must give a rather weird impression of what’s on TV in the UK given that BBC America seems to be aiming at a rather older than average audience, if you go by the advertising, which is usually a good indiction of who the numbers show watches the station.

Netflix has a lot of British television available. I tend to only watch BBC America for the newest Dr. Who, although they edit the episodes so waiting for DVD is better. I like British crime shows. Luther was crazy but good, and I like Waking the Dead but they need to release the most recent series on DVD. Unfortunately that means that most of the breasts I’ve seen on British TV have been on corpses.

CassandraSays
CassandraSays
9 years ago

I’ve been avoiding TV for a while since everything that I actually want to see can be found online or on Netflix, so why pay for cable? And there’s nothing at all on network TV that I want to watch.

hellkell
hellkell
9 years ago

Luther was excellent. Idris Elba… damn.

Cassandra, Posh Nosh is a send-up of food shows and upper class Brits.

I’d never thought of BBC America as tv for retired people, but now that you mention it, I can see it. Lot of game shows and Graham Norton.

“Chef” was one of my favorite Brit-coms.

blitzgal
9 years ago

Of course every culture has sexual hangups. The public attitude towards women talking about sex in an unapologetic way really is very different in the US and the UK, though (notice that I’m not the only person saying this), and Brits tend to swear more (a lot more, actually). If you consider that crass then that’s fine, but that was kind of the point – standards and expectations are very different, and I think it affects comedy, especially what’s acceptable coming from comedians who are women.

I don’t mind crassness. Like I said, I’m still watching Shameless. And I pointed out that the best American TV is on cable. The first episode of Deadwood featured about a hundred utterances of the word “cocksucker,” but that show has some of the most beautifully written dialogue in recent memory.

I just don’t believe that the mere presence of sexual content automatically elevates the medium. That was my main point. 95% of popular culture is crap. The really great stuff is only a small percent of the whole.

CassandraSays
CassandraSays
9 years ago

About the DSK thing, I’m still not sure how much of the reaction in France was “powerful men are not to be criticised by the ordinary people” and how much of it was just that he was a French person being prosecuted in America and how dare you do that to one of ours, etc. A bit of both, probably.

CassandraSays
CassandraSays
9 years ago

I really miss Chef. Did you see the episode where he was driving around the countryside smuggling contraband Stilton?

blitzgal
9 years ago

Oooh, and the updated Sherlock Holmes series from England is also excellent. Can’t wait for series two.

CassandraSays
CassandraSays
9 years ago

“I just don’t believe that the mere presence of sexual content automatically elevates the medium. ”

No one said that it did, though. The point (and it’s not a new one, many people have made it before) is that when foreigners are exposed to American TV they’re almost always surprised and confused as to why broadcasting standards for sex are stricter than in many other places, especially in terms of nudity, but there’s lots and lots of violence. It is confusing given that the idea behind having broadcasting standards and rules is to protect people from potentially problematic and upsetting content, so the question then becomes (again, not a new question), why is sex more problematic than violence?

CassandraSays
CassandraSays
9 years ago

There’s also the related question of why sexualized violence is more acceptable in movies than sex that shows female orgasm, but that’s a much more international problem.

blitzgal
9 years ago

Also, our Puritan roots come from y’all over there. 🙂

The violence thing is weird, and I don’t like the way violence and sex are tied together. You see it much more in horror, but there are threads of it even in basic crime series like Criminal Minds where you have to sit there and watch extended periods of torture on women in a way that’s almost fetishized.

It’s that vocal minority thing again. Tiny groups of fundamentalists who wield boycotts like a weapon to force networks to bend to their will.

blitzgal
9 years ago

We wrote the sexualized violence comment at the same time, so we’re on the same page. 🙂

hellkell
hellkell
9 years ago

Cassandra, I don’t remember that ep. It was years ago that I saw any of them, but guess what’s now in the Nexflix queue?

Every time I pass the British food section of the grocery store and see HP sauce, I think of Lenny Henry!

CassandraSays
CassandraSays
9 years ago

I always like to say that Scotland in particular must have had a party on the shore when all the Puritans set sail for America. We didn’t really care where they went in particular as long as it was “away”.

If I was going to be really cynical I’d say that the groups that want sex on TV banned in general are OK with sexualized violence because that way they get the tittilation of sex and get to see the “sluts” being punished too. No sex on TV except for lurid rape scenes and crying victims afterwards is pretty much their ideal scenario, really.

I’m also really wary of the “pervy Japan” narrative. There’s no doubt that some anime and manga is getting more and more problematic, and there’s a small and very vocal group of fanboys driving that (and other similar shite like harem shows), but I really don’t like the way that conversation is usually framed to make, say, an unhealthy interest in little girls into something happening over there that’s nothing to do with us, oh no, we don’t have that problem. I see really nasty rapey anime as part and parcel of the same phenomenon that gave us Hostel and similar crap.

CassandraSays
CassandraSays
9 years ago

I really resent the effect that the fanboys have had on anime, btw. It’s not only producing some remarkable examples of creepiness, it’s also narrowing the market and causing it to produce too much of the exact same stuff. There was one series that the ex rented that was cool, but the previews attached for some other show were so ridiculous that we named the show “Panties!”. That pretty much seemed to be the whole plot, that girls wear panties and oh look there they are again. That doesn’t offend me because it’s pervy, it offends me because it’s really boring.

blitzgal
9 years ago

I’m also really wary of the “pervy Japan” narrative.

I don’t even watch the underground stuff. This was an anime on Netflix streaming. I was looking through the anime titles and was like, “Oh, a zombie show!” (I love zombie movies, I don’t know why) It’s called High School of the Dead. First ten minutes of the show and there were at least five different upskirt shots at the most random times. It was seriously non-sensical.

I don’t see it as an unhealthy interest in little girls. The women portrayed in schoolgirl uniforms always have huge bouncy breasts as well. I see it as part of a spectrum in which women’s bodies are objectified and they are never seen as people — this is a spectrum which exists in every patriarchal culture including America. And there is some serious sexual repression in their culture just like in American culture as well. That was my main point.

Wetherby
Wetherby
9 years ago

About the DSK thing, I’m still not sure how much of the reaction in France was “powerful men are not to be criticised by the ordinary people” and how much of it was just that he was a French person being prosecuted in America and how dare you do that to one of ours, etc. A bit of both, probably.

…plus the cultural difference that in France a celebrity’s sexual peccadilloes are widely regarded as being a legitimately private matter.

A British tabloid newspaper wouldn’t be able to function under French privacy laws, and I vividly remember the late François Mitterrand’s reaction during a British political sex scandal, which was to the effect that he’d be more worried if his Cabinet ministers didn’t keep secret lovers on the side.

Which is one of the reasons they were so outraged by the “perp walk” – that would never have happened in France. Sadly, what’s far more likely is that the whole thing would have been hushed up, with the maid given a massive payoff for her silence.

Kendra, the bionic mommy
Kendra, the bionic mommy
9 years ago

I don’t see how MRA’s can say feminists don’t have a sense of humor, since there are so many hilarious feminists. I really respect comics who can make people laugh without making it at the expense of disadvantaged groups. It’s also hypocritical for MRA’s to call feminists humorless, since they “registered” Katherine Heigl for her pet neutering PSA. They can dish it out, but they can’t take it.

Integral
Integral
9 years ago

I suspect part of the MRAs’ hostility to the idea of women being funny is that MRAs don’t seem to be interested in relationships with other human beings that have any sort of mutuality. They want a woman to serve their needs, to be perpetually in the role of admiring or at least obedient audience to the MRA. It’s like they got stuck at the “Hey, Mom, look at me!” stage of development.

Nobby
9 years ago

@Ullere

So the one study you sourced shows that women don’t find other women as funny as they do men, though to a small degree. Then you try to equivocate the study by saying it has a small sample size, and the findings of the study are an anomaly. But why does the small degree matter then? If it is but an anomaly. Sourcing studies to prove your point then denying the findings of the study is bizarre.

Not true at all. I said that the degree is probably larger then it actually is in the general population. This is a well known effect, statistical variances (which this is an example of) decrease in larger sample sizes. This is a rather small sample, and thus one can assume, with the lack of other evidence, that it will decrease on a larger scale. I never said it wasn’t real or that the whole effect was an anomaly. Reading comprehension much? Also, women find men funnier, but to a much smaller extent then men find men funnier, which was pointed out by the article itself. Do try to keep up.

But the idea that women find men funnier than they do other women does seem to have some validity, seeing how the only study cited in the thread so far does support this claim (along with the QI clip). The study linked here shows male comedians are 2% funnier, a huge and uncrossable divide of laughter…

It is not a “a huge and uncrossable divide of laughter”, that is just a flat-out lie. And, again, this is statistical variance. The study does not, and would not, claim to say that all men are 2% funnier then all women. That’s stupid and laughable. It’s saying that, on average, the men’s captions as a whole were that slight bit funnier. Each rater got their own score (which they did not include, sadly), which varied over the scale. Some women were funnier then some men, and vice versa.

You saying it’s an ‘uncrossable divide’ is like saying that since women are, on average, shorter then men, that no women can ever be tall, or a man ever short. That’s just plain wrong.

Lastly, the paper makes no claim to understand why they are funnier, except to say that it does not agree with the evo-psych reasoning. However considering that, as I also pointed out, women were considerable less confident in their abilities, and as most people here would agree, confidence is extremely important to good comedy, it is entirely likely that the extremely small deviation in actual funniness could be due to that rather large divide in confidence. This is an entirely rational hypothesis supported by the data, unlike your assertion of an “uncrossable divide”. And the lack of confidence and the missatribution errors (also pointed out in the article!) are caused, at least in part, by the stupid stereotype you continue to spread.

Nobby
9 years ago

Gar, quote fail. Here’s the better version:

@Ullere

So the one study you sourced shows that women don’t find other women as funny as they do men, though to a small degree. Then you try to equivocate the study by saying it has a small sample size, and the findings of the study are an anomaly. But why does the small degree matter then? If it is but an anomaly. Sourcing studies to prove your point then denying the findings of the study is bizarre.

Not true at all. I said that the degree is probably larger then it actually is in the general population. This is a well known effect, statistical variances (which this is an example of) decrease in larger sample sizes. This is a rather small sample, and thus one can assume, with the lack of other evidence, that it will decrease on a larger scale. I never said it wasn’t real or that the whole effect was an anomaly. Reading comprehension much? Also, women find men funnier, but to a much smaller extent then men find men funnier, which was pointed out by the article itself. Do try to keep up.

But the idea that women find men funnier than they do other women does seem to have some validity, seeing how the only study cited in the thread so far does support this claim (along with the QI clip). The study linked here shows male comedians are 2% funnier, a huge and uncrossable divide of laughter…

It is not a “a huge and uncrossable divide of laughter”, that is just a flat-out lie. And, again, this is statistical variance. The study does not, and would not, claim to say that all men are 2% funnier then all women. That’s stupid and laughable. It’s saying that, on average, the men’s captions as a whole were that slight bit funnier. Each rater got their own score (which they did not include, sadly), which varied over the scale. Some women were funnier then some men, and vice versa.

You saying it’s an ‘uncrossable divide’ is like saying that since women are, on average, shorter then men, that no women can ever be tall, or a man ever short. That’s just plain wrong.

Lastly, the paper makes no claim to understand why they are funnier, except to say that it does not agree with the evo-psych reasoning. However considering that, as I also pointed out, women were considerable less confident in their abilities, and as most people here would agree, confidence is extremely important to good comedy, it is entirely likely that the extremely small deviation in actual funniness could be due to that rather large divide in confidence. This is an entirely rational hypothesis supported by the data, unlike your assertion of an “uncrossable divide”. And the lack of confidence and the missatribution errors (also pointed out in the article!) are caused, at least in part, by the stupid stereotype you continue to spread.

Monsieur sans Nom
Monsieur sans Nom
9 years ago

@ Monsieur sans Nom: Why do you think that lesbinas/bi women are funnier?

I think it has to do with the fact that many of them have masculine qualities to their personality and not just to the way they dress. From what I see, men in general are able to laugh at themselves more than women. Can’t a woman believe that men and women should have equal rights, well at the same time not taking being female to be such a big deal? A lot of straight gals come across as very insecure and self-conscious; which aren’t conducive to being funny.

Amused
9 years ago

@Monsieur Sans Nom:

From what I see, men in general are able to laugh at themselves more than women. Can’t a woman believe that men and women should have equal rights, well at the same time not taking being female to be such a big deal? A lot of straight gals come across as very insecure and self-conscious; which aren’t conducive to being funny.

Oh, really? That’s not the logical conclusion one would draw from reading uber-“masculine” men’s comments here or on linked MRA and MGTOW’s blogs. But then, it’s not like there is ever any logic to self-serving sexism.

hellkell
hellkell
9 years ago

Monsieur Om Nom Nom, most of the MRAs who come here have a complete inability to laugh at themselves, coupled with taking themselves far too seriously.

Bee
Bee
9 years ago

A lot of straight gals come across as very insecure and self-conscious; which aren’t conducive to being funny.

I disagree with the entire narrative of women being unfunny, of course, but this in particular strikes me as an odd thing to say. There are loads of (male) comedians who base their entire schtick on being very insecure and self-conscious. They don’t have self-deprecating humor where you live? Richard Lewis, Woody Allen, Brian Posehn, Conan O’Brian, Larry David, Gary Shandling, Rodney Dangerfield … how much time do you have? The list of comedians whose act is actually based on being insecure and self-conscious is as long as Milton Berle’s cock.

In fact, depending on who you ask, most comedians are insecure. And, I dunno, this ongoing debate about whether women are funny … I think it has a lot more to do with an audience’s expectations and perceptions surrounding gender, sex, and humor than on anything that the class of women as a whole are or are not.

Monsieur sans Nom
Monsieur sans Nom
9 years ago

Monsieur Om Nom Nom, most of the MRAs who come here have a complete inability to laugh at themselves, coupled with taking themselves far too seriously.

Oh I have no doubt about that. What makes you think I’m a MRA? I am not.

ithiliana
9 years ago

Nomless: You may not be an MRA, but you are a misogynist, so, it’s easy to see how people could become confused.

hellkell
hellkell
9 years ago

Nom Nom, oh, sorry, it must have been your flagrant misogyny that had me thinking you were an MRA.

Amused
9 years ago

I applaud him and wish him to be considered by the big man upstairs to have done the world a service by publically opposing the political machine that is feminism by telling a simple truth.

Well, ironically enough, that’s funny. Though I’m sure the amusement wasn’t intentional.

Preliminarily, there is no “man” upstairs. Although referred to by a generic “He”, the Judeo-Christian God has no gender. In fact, Biblical Hebrew frequently refers to God as “they”, though gets translated into most languages as “He”. “They” is likely a lingering trace of pre-Abrahamic polytheism, but it certainly muddles the issue of whether God is a “man”. And in any event, the scriptures tell us “He” isn’t. If you are going to bring God into this, misogynistic dumbasses, at least learn your basic theology.

Second, if you’ve decided to be religious, you should realize that God isn’t interested in rewarding anyone for doing the world a service, as much as he cares whether or not people are doing Him a service. Christopher Hitchens was a passionate atheist, so duh.

Monsieur sans Nom
Monsieur sans Nom
9 years ago

Nomless: You may not be an MRA, but you are a misogynist, so, it’s easy to see how people could become confused.

Just curious, is “misogynist” the label given to anyone who questions or challenges the predominating views of most posters on this blog? I guess I thought a misogynist was someone who actively hates women.

My opinion in general, is that in the culture I live in(aint lived nowhere but the USofA), most women take themselves too seriously whereas most men don’t take themselves seriously enough(a good example of guys that I really cant STAND are gamergeeks who tell stupid jokes constantly and think they’re clever + witty…UGH).

Alphalady
Alphalady
9 years ago

I guess I thought a misogynist was someone who actively hates women.

That’s correct, and you obviously do.

Ullere
Ullere
9 years ago

@Nobby Sorry I think you might have missed the point in my post, 2% funnier? In a caption writing competition? I’m a little surprised you took ‘a huge and uncrossable divide of laughter’ seriously. Saying that men find men even funnier than women find men is a little redundant. Women find women less funny than they do men is an accurate description of one of the findings of the study you sourced.

‘uncrossable divide’ was a joke, perhaps if you were only 2% funnier you would have got that.

‘the lack of confidence and the missatribution errors (also pointed out in the article!) are caused, at least in part, by the stupid stereotype you continue to spread.’

Oh mercy, I cause, at least in part, the lack of confidence that makes women 2% less funny? Don’t be silly.

Monsieur sans Nom
Monsieur sans Nom
9 years ago

That’s correct, and you obviously do.

Why do you say such things?

Nobby
9 years ago

@Ullere You come on here claiming that men are objectively funnier, and then are confused when i take your statement of them being objectively funnier as a joke? Perhaps you should try a bit harder at this ‘humor’ business, you’re obviously not very good.

Oh mercy, I cause, at least in part, the lack of confidence that makes women 2% less funny? Don’t be silly.

Um, yes. Stereotypes tend to affect people rather harshly, and don’t pretend like they don’t. I don’t think you personally are walking around telling people they’re not funny all the time, but spreading the idea that women aren’t funny, or are overall considerably less funny then men, hurts the confidence of people and makes them resulting less funny. How else would you explain women rating themselves on average so much harsher then men? Almost ten times lower then the actual difference found in this study?

And if you really think that a 2% difference is actually noticeable by anyone, then you’re more then a little bit delusional.

katz
9 years ago

Ullere, the first and foremost rule of humor: If other people can’t tell that it was supposed to be a joke, you fail.

But don’t worry. We’re laughing at you and Om Nom Nom anyway.

Kyrie
Kyrie
9 years ago

I guess I thought a misogynist was someone who actively hates women.

That’s correct, and you obviously do.

I don’t think the definition is just hate. For example, you can think all female have the IQ of a squirell and still ‘like’ them, for their fluffiness or sexiness.
Or you can ‘like’ them as long as they fit in you definition of ‘feminine’, are submissive enough… or even pretend they all do.
Or you can straight up despise them for being all gold-digging bitches, which is closer but still not exactly hate.

But I still agree noname has proven himself to be a misogynist.

ozymandias42
9 years ago

Damn. Apparently, as a gamergeek, I don’t take myself seriously enough to be funny according to Om Nom Nom’s ideas. Whatever shall I do. I shall have to weep into my bedsheets. Oh the horror the horror.

Joanna
9 years ago

“a good example of guys that I really cant STAND are gamergeeks who tell stupid jokes constantly and think they’re clever + witty…UGH”

Well if you’re talking about the self-concious guy gamers that use wit to condescend people, then yeah those people are jerks. But the rest of em are awesome.

Alphalady
Alphalady
9 years ago

I don’t think the definition is just hate. For example, you can think all female have the IQ of a squirell and still ‘like’ them, for their fluffiness or sexiness.
Or you can ‘like’ them as long as they fit in you definition of ‘feminine’, are submissive enough… or even pretend they all do.
Or you can straight up despise them for being all gold-digging bitches, which is closer but still not exactly hate.

But I still agree noname has proven himself to be a misogynist.

I agree that the definition is not just about hate. But in my experience, virtually all misogynists are highly insecure and are pathologically threatened by women, particularly those who don’t conform the their deluded perception of what constitutes “real women”: hot, young, submissive sex bots, or doddering, equally submissive Stepford Grannies who graciously accept their useless place in society when they no longer possess that coveted “SMV.” LOL!

Monsieur sans Nom
Monsieur sans Nom
9 years ago

It’s important to keep in mind that sexism and misogyny are not the same thing; even though they’re perceived by many women as 2 sides of the same coin. I would think that the majority of women would be bothered more by sexism than misogyny. I say this because I thought that most women, especially those who are intelligent, would want to be respected first and foremost(I know that I do personally). Even if some people may not like them for who and what they are.

Feeling threatened by women certainly DOES imply the recognition that women really aren’t powerless and defenseless after all. Belittling women and mocking them implies a belief that women are the lesser sex.

FTR: I am very much a misanthropist. I suppose that technically makes me a misogynist too because women are human but don’t think for a moment that I actually “like” men as a whole.

katz
9 years ago

Misanthrope, genius.

Arks
Arks
9 years ago

The old adage rings true once again: “Men work for happiness, women are given it for free.”
For men, respect is something that must be earned, and once you have it it must be maintained. For women, respect is something you just sort of grow into. So the posters quoted kind of have it right. The struggle to assert oneself, absent in females, means that men will always be overwhelmingly more developed in their personalities and achievements than women. This is why men invented everything, why men dominate every field and why men hold the top positions in everything. A woman’s laziness and privelege impedes her self-development.

Arks
Arks
9 years ago

@ Alphalady: “I agree that the definition is not just about hate. But in my experience, virtually all misogynists are highly insecure and are pathologically threatened by women, particularly those who don’t conform the their deluded perception of what constitutes “real women”: hot, young, submissive sex bots, or doddering, equally submissive Stepford Grannies who graciously accept their useless place in society when they no longer possess that coveted “SMV.””

Horseshit. For many men, misogyny stems from their *disappointment* in womankind, frustration over women’s refusal to attempt a role outside of the submissive, docile infant. When I think ‘woman’ the first thing that comes to mind is ‘wasted potential.’ The day that women aspire to be more than glorified pieces of furniture that just sit on their mobile phones texting while contributing nothing, is the day they become worthy of respect.

Arks
Arks
9 years ago

Also, being pathologically afraid of “strong women” is silly. As silly as being pathologically afraid of werewolves or dragons. There might be some reasons why you find them threatening, I guess, but it’s not like you’re ever going to meet one.

M Dubz
M Dubz
9 years ago

@ Monsieur: Why do you think straight women are more insecure than lesbians and bi women? Also, why do you think they’re more “masculine” than straight women? And what does “masculine” mean to you? Also, why does “masculinity” make you more funny?

It has been my experience that some bi and lesbian women are super girly, and some are super butch, and some straight women are also super butch. Also, some straight women have fantastic self esteem and some bi and lesbian women have dreadful self esteem.These things that you assert, they are extremely confusing to me.

M Dubz
M Dubz
9 years ago

@ Arks, have you ever had the experience of trying to assert yourself in an argument, only to have some dude who knows nothing talk loudly over you, shout you down, and tell you that you are a silly woman who has no idea what she is talking about in an experience to shut you up? No? They you can fuck RIGHT off.

Bostonian
9 years ago

Arks said clam diver, and I will never take him seriously again.