Courtesy of MGTOWforums.com, here’s a little collection of some of the evil dastardly tricks that women pull on the poor oppressed men of the world. Obviously, most sensible guys know that “housework” is a scam; so-called “housewives” spend most of their time on the couch eating bon bons and watching The View.
But did you know about Arson Night? Or the Cheerleader Ring Drop? Read on, and become enlightened Knowledge is power! STAY SAFE, GUYS!
If a man give his woman 100 dollars a week for food shopping, she will spend say 60 on food and keep the rest. When he enquires why there’s no food in the house come Friday he will get bitched at for not trusting her. And made to feel guilty for accusing her, even though she has deceived him.
They like to lay in bed, and pretend to be sick or sad (which means you won’t be coming in there) and text all their boyfriends.
When they say they are going out with the girls, they could be out doing Anything. This ranges from doing hard drugs to stripping to boinking strangers to sitting alone on a curb to arson. You can never be sure.
How about when they try their version of the Jedi mind trick on you. You know the thing they brag about in private. Trying to make something that’s her idea, seem like it’s *your* idea so that you’ll do it. And then pat you on the back to boost your ego like a trained dog when in reality you did what they for *them* all along.
Sooo many guys fall for this. Suddenly they’re buying crap they don’t need or moving the inlaws in because the woman made it seem like *he* wanted it. Classic.
Short Hair: The Beginning of the End
Women spend so much time on their appearance… why?
That’s right, to catch a sucker into paying the bills. Once the contract is signed, and the babies are popped out, she has you by the balls and doesn’t need to pretend anymore. Next she’ll wear more “comfortable clothes” and cut her hair short. It’s the beginning of the end.
And, yes, The Cheerleader Ring Drop:
In 11th grade high school, I was in the wrestling team. One day, during a water break, this cheerleader next to me started getting panicky and asked me if i could help her find her ring. She “dropped” it and did this just as an opener, i suppose. I ended up ‘being’ with her and it quickly diminished; she was bunk. Another cheerleader came up to me while i was with her and told me “what are you doing her?, you’re way too good for her!”
Luckily, the fella calling himself Tha Big Daddy C-Master, who started the thread, has a simple solution to all this. Well, two simple solutions:
You can always turn the other way, or just use a woman. Human toilets and all.
I couldn’t have said it worse myself!
JTK, just go! Be free! Fly away, verbose and dull MGTOW!
Samuel, it’s really obvious it’s you, now go your own way again.
Lauralot, you can’t just break down the numbers like that. The superheroes are all manginas or pussy-whipped he-bitches, and serve the “elite” (other superheroines, their love interests, etc.) to the detriment of their own lives.
History shows us that the oppressed often outnumber the oppressors. It’s akin to looking at medieval society, and claiming the lords were oppressed because they were outnumbered by serfs.
Batman, Superman, Spider-Man… they’re peasants. Serving their lord, that bitch Catwoman.
My husbands best friend is a life time bachelor, fifty years old. He doesn’t hate women, in fact if Kave is busy and we’re not the two of us go out together. Happens at least once a month. He’s just not the marrying or long-term relationship type. His parents (who are like second parents to both of us) don’t give him any flak about it, no one does.
The closest I’ve ever seen anyone question his bachelor status in fifteen years of close friendship was my father. I found out a couple of months ago my dad has always assumed he was gay. No big deal to my dad even though Kave and him go away together on golf vacations at least once a year, he just assumed he was. Besides being a bachelor our friend much like my husband has other stereotypical gaydar characteristics, love of fine food and wine, shopping, they both read GQ etc.
I’m sure every poster here has a friend or relative like him (or her). What makes you different JTK is your need to broadcast your status and why to the world. That isn’t a healthy mindset in my opinion. You don’t come across as a happy person.
I’m… I’m not sure I understand, JTK. Are you saying that you don’t want to marry a woman? I hadn’t gathered that from your thousands of other words on the subject. Perhaps you can write out a treatise explaining exactly why you’ve made this decision, so that we can all be on the same page.
This is sarcasm, by the way. Please, please don’t actually do that.
“Women as a whole weren’t outraged, (I’ve read the comments on the youtube video).”
I actually laughed out loud.
WHo wants to bet that JTK will NOT be able to stick the flounce and will return with his “final last absolutely I promise this time” post again…..and again…..and again….
that sure is a lot of words to say you think girls have cooties
NWOslave, I think one reason that people here think that your life is not happy enough is that you have said both that women and even girls that wear revealing clothes cause you to feel teased, and that to you being teased is actually preferable to rape. So we are faced with the choice to either believe that you have lied about your preference (as an aside, I find that assuming that people with whom I am having a discussion, particularly an online discussion, are lying is in no way productive) or that you are suffering.
You say that you are happy, yet you also say that going to the mall has the high potential to cause you to feel the pain, helplessness, and fear that are typically associated with having a person who’s traits (including sex) you have no control, preforming sexual acts on you with out you consent (the nature of the acts you also have no control over and could therefore include sodomy.) To me, your feeling happy in this state seems deeply tragic, as if you have never felt the sensations that I refer to as happiness. You are happy, despite feeling that being teased is worse than rape and feeling that you are teased when you see girls in capri pants. If I suffered from those feelings from such common stimuli I would probably be an agoraphobic basket case.
I don’t know if your feelings can be altered, but it seems more likely that you could find a way to get passed your feelings of pain, terror, shame, and helplessness upon seeing a 16 year old girl’s calf than you could find a way to prevent yourself from ever seeing one.
Incidentally, NWO – What’s with saying “life, liberty, property” like it’s some little meager consolation prize you should take, and then meekly shut up?
The point, since at least the Enlightenment, has been to treat these as (literally) revolutionary ideas with far reaching, radical implications. What do they mean to you, exactly?
(I didn’t throw in vote, because it’s context dependent. A vote in what system? I am, though you insist I’m pretending, an Anarchist, so a majoritarian democracy such as ours doesn’t fly for me. Also, what would we be voting on? What I would say, however, is that the idea expressed in theory, if not practice, by votes for all is the idea of Lockean equality – Equality of Authority – something transformative and radical, as are the concepts of life, liberty, and property that according to Jeffersonian logic derive from equal creation.These are heavy things with far reaching implications.) Saying “all you get is life liberty and property” is a pretty major head scratcher.
Well, JTK, since you are an idiot, I am safe in assuming that that most people you interact with are likewise on the shallow end of the IQ pool. Any child can realize that marriage is wrong for you because you have nothing to offer to a spouse.
Here’s something I don’t understand about people who claim that the haters of women and the haters of feminism are unrepresentative of the MRM: if men are being persecuted by women and/or feminists, isn’t hatred an eminently reasonable response? Not everyone hatestheir persecutors but saying that someone does is hardly the vilest thing you can say about them.
Slavey:
Why would you want that? Isn’t it better for no one to be violent towards anyone?
Polliwog:
Not everywhere in the U.S.; Florida is one of at least a handful of states that specifically say it’s still rape even then.
And I don’t entirely disagree with that, since sex is not inevitable, and the rhetorical question “her ID checked out, Your Honor, what could I do?” does have an answer.
(On the other hand, it seems to invite honey traps, and while I like to think there’s at least some chance of jury nullification in that case, that doesn’t make it okay)
Slavey:
Yes, but if it were true, it would be bad. The isolated incident you’re going to bring out as a counterexample — and there’s a reason you can only ever find the one — is bad. I disapprove of it. It is better for what hate there is to stop happening than for there to be (as you seem to see it) equal and opposite hate from (in your apparant view) the other side.
Viscaria:
But Spear defined “sexual assault,” leaving Slavey free to assume “rape” is defined as “anything a woman doesn’t like.”
Of course, he’s free to believe that anyway, but it doesn’t make it true.
Dracula:
Sort of like how he relates to women.
Lauralot:
Or that men should be feminized with jewellery.
ithiliana:
The Daily Show has its unfortunate moments of treating women as decoration, or treating men doing anything remotely “feminine” as ridiculous and totally this-never-happens funny, (though only moments). Both of them, especially Stewart, rarely have female guests for serious discussions, though I suspect they’ve each had Elisabeth Warren and Eleanor Holmes Norton on more than Olbermann has had both combined. But I paid too much for my television to refuse to watch anything that’s not 100% clean.
Slavey:
That’s probably the most transparent usage of the equivocation fallacy I’ve seen.
Slavey:
Only a misogynist would say the opposite
No one said this
No one said this
No one said this
The negation of this statement is literally a definition of misogyny.
In some ways this appears to be the case, or at least it’s difficult to prove otherwise, but overall, no one said this.
In many ways, yes
No one said this
An oversimplification, but not outright false.
Slavey:
I don’t watch it either, but I don’t know if they’ve ever talked about that.
The show Sharon Osborne was on was The Talk. They mentioned it a handful of times at most.
Whatever source of information — not that you use sources of information — is telling you that The Talk is nonstop penectomy discussion is simply wrong.
ozy:
Which, it should be notied, Slavey supports.
Also wanted to point out this by JTK:
Color me puzzled. You went your own way, but came to what you thought was a “serious” feminist site to have a dialogue? Well, if that’s the case, then you hadn’t really gone your own way, correct? Also: entitlement, man. You wrote walls of text about how horrible and inhuman and pest-like women are and how much you despise us — and you wanted a discussion about that with us? You expected us to flatter or horrifically inflated ego and dignify your bigotry with a serious debate? You wanted us to put our own humanity in doubt by taking your claims seriously?
“MGTOW men are not seeking to get a rise out of women or entertain them to be an entertaining troll, we are just seeking gender separatism.”
How does coming to a site whose commentariat is majority female and talking to (well, at) them great length achieve the goal of gender separatism?
Unless you’re trying to persuade women to find men so offputting that we decide to go our own way too. That might be successful if we thought all men were a lot like you, but since we do not it just leaves us baffled and bored.
clearly jtk was confused by that thing in the sidebar that says ‘misogyny. i want to have a serious discussion about its merits.’
Meller: Why not assume that these stories are the norm, and for every one that we read about, there are dozens of other such feminists torturing and exploiting men because of simple greed, viciousness, and misandry?
Because it’s not plausible. That was easy.
And, you’re wrong. Not all those songs were written before the middle Seventies.
That was easy too.
NWO: If there are women like that hten women are like that.
Care to sauce the gander with that too… if there are men like that then men are like that.
Shall we say that about rape? How about Abuse?
If there are men like that then all men are like that?
Bullshit. You may hate people so much you won’t individuate them, but I don’t.
JTK: Your list, contradicts itself.
14. A man never engages in conspicuous consumerism.
Does not go with
20. A man must always drive a cool car or motorcycle.
By your list, you aren’t a real man.
1. A man always uses logic when faced with a problem.
3. A man never complains about problems or misfortunes.
Mellerlove: Your ideas for womens’ education are pathetic. They aren’t education, they are slave training. That’s not equality, which means I’m not for it.
Try again deary.
NWO: How stupid do you think we are? You were saying just saying, in this very thread that, “Instead of promoting feminizing men into your frilly dress strap-on debauchery, you should be dragging everyone of these women out into the street and beating the ever loving crap out of them.”
Streets, women, beating: all in your own words.
Your statements on rape are 1: If the woman provokes a man then she deserves to be raped (the whole, sandwich in front of starving people analogy) and 2: that eight year old girls are flaunting their sexuality at the beach.
Since to flaunt is to be deserving of being treated as a slut, and sluts deserve to be raped any eights year old who, “flaunts” is deserving of being raped.
as i’ve said before, most of owlslave’s rants would become immediately more understandable if he would just admit that the only way he knows of responding to a problem is violence
NWO: Name a woman who ever got bloody for a man?
Jeanne D’Arc
Let me summarize spear.
I asked for a MSM news article where women could do more for men. Love men more. Support men more. Help men more.
No one can find one.
that I am willing too admit proves me wrong, not even one of the most popular magazines in America.
FTFY
hellkell: NWO seems to think I’m part of some hivemind. He’s wrong. I was a soldier. I am not non-violent, even if I am somewhat pacifistic. But yes, if I’m wrong, he’s wronger. He’s wrong, even if I’m not. And I’m a feminist.
That’s the part that really sticks in his craw. I ought to be some sort of conservative conspiracy nut looking for excuses to beat women up, and I’m not.
NWO: I don’t care if you are scared or not. If you think beating anyone, because they disagree with you (no matter what they are espousing, be it feminism or anti-Rothchilds (sic) nonsense), I’ll be swinging in the defense of the unjustly attacked.
So I’m willing to get bloody for anyone being unfairly attacked. If a woman were to attack you I’d be swinging at her.
But you don’t get it. You can’t concieve of somone with ideals, not ideology: You will “escalate” against women because you hate them. You don’t care if they are right, merely that they do things which you are against.
That’s where we differ. I have principles I follow, and you have an agenda.
“Name a woman who ever got bloody for a man?”
Mulan! =D She totally fought along side her husband.