Given the enmity towards women in general, and feminists in particular, that’s omnipresent in the manosphere, it seems logical to assume that most of the dudes lingering around MRA, PUA and MGTOW sites online would take a certain secret pleasure in seeing women suffer.
As regular readers of this blog know all too well, oftentimes the desire to see women suffer is not so secret: some MRAs and others of their ilk literally laugh at women getting cancer, declare that rapists should be given medals, openly fantasize about “beat[ing] the living shit” out of women, and tell feminists who complain about this sort of shit that they’re “so pernicious and repugnant that the idea of fucking your shit up gives me an erection.” (Those last two examples come from Paul Elam, one of the MRM’s most influential bloggers.) Still others send rape and death threats to outspoken women online.
But good news, folks! It turns out that not all manosphere misogynists want women to suffer. Why? Because suffering is an ineffective way to put women in their place. That, at least, is the argument of a fellow calling himself Höllenhund. In a comment on Susan Walsh’s Hooking Up Smart blog, he offered this argument:
Making women suffer wouldn’t achieve anything in itself – I’m pretty sure the overwhelming majority of the Manosphere would agree. Women are normally solipsistic and they fail to understand their own urges and don’t comprehend the connection between cause and effect. They’d never understand why they’re suffering in the first place.
So, basically, in his mind, women are dumber than dogs and thus harder to train. Even worse, the suffering women can sit down in the street and cry, and countless “white knights,” hoping to win their approval (and get in their pants) will rush to their aid:
Suffering only motivates them to fish for male sympathy (and thus investment) through crying and whining, to blame ‘ bad men’ for their ‘misfortune’ and thus play the game of ‘let’s you and him fight’. That’s how it has always been.
So making women suffer is largely pointless. I’d go further and say it’d actually be detrimental to men because it encourages white-knighting and intra-male competition. …
And some of the ladies even seem to sort of like it:
Not to mention the fact that many women actually seem to find some sort of twisted pleasure in suffering, that all this’d simply serve to justify more anti-male legislation and whatnot.
Poor Höllenhund doesn’t have much hope that women will ever see how totally terrible they really are
[T]he notion of making women ‘admit their faults’ is pie-in-the-sky as well. Again, I’m sure pretty much everyone in the Manosphere would agree. You have a bigger chance of seeing pigs fly.
If women are to recognize their faults in this SMP [Sexual Marketplace], they need to have a realistic picture of both their own sexuality and the SMP in the first place, plus they need to have empathy for beta males …
Er, you’re lecturing us about empathy?
Sorry, on with the rest of the sentence:
plus they need to be imbued with the sense of morality without which the very concept of ‘fault’ is meaningless.
And lecturing us about morality too?
I think we’ll sooner see Haiti become a dreaded military superpower.
I’d rather see that than live in a world in which women were so self-hating that they actually believed they were guilty of whatever unnamed sins Höllenhund attributes to them.
NOTE: I found Höllenhund’s comment because the blogger at Pro-Male/Anti-Feminist Technology cited it as a prime example of the sort of brave “truth telling” that will get you banned “on feminist sites that supposedly support men.” And yes, it apparently did get poor Höllenhund banned from Hooking Up Smart. I’m not quite sure how Susan Walsh, a traditionalist devoted to slut shaming in a thousand different flavors, counts as feminist, but that’s not the point. The point is: I’m regularly accused of “cherry picking” comments from MRAs. In this case, Mr. PMAFT picked the comment for me.
It’s getting much harder dealing with you fuckwits and having to hear how horrible I and other feminists are when we do a hell of a lot more than MRAs do. I recently donated to this organization…
Thanks for sharing. The phenomenon where someone thinks donating or any other ethical action gives them a free asshole pass is called “moral balancing.”
Being on the receiving end of profane insults is something that I don’t tolerate. If you ask me a question, then omitting the profane insults is the price that you must pay if you expect a civil response in return.
Unless, of course, your purpose all along was to denigrate me. In which case, consider yourself ignored.
Oh and in case anyone is wondering, I did not donate to the women’s shelter part of the organization I just linked. I donated to palliative care, because they thought of lonely people in pain and awaiting death made me feel completely numb inside, and to where it was most needed.
What a horrible, man-hating, empathy-lacking feminist I am. Don’t worry, I’m sure you MRAs can top me by buying a AVfM t-shirt or sticker 😀
@IdeologueReview:
“You can attack me all you want, kirby. I derive a sort of masochistic pleasure from your beratement.”
Ahh, it all makes sense now. ^_^
Though that statement and Roscoes:
“Being on the receiving end of profane insults is something that I don’t tolerate. If you ask me a question, then omitting the profane insults is the price that you must pay if you expect a civil response in return.”
are both ways of escaping an argument while trying to maintain some sort of moral high ground (ish). Congrats on serving as such fine examples of tone trolling.
wow… where did this thread run off to? I’m kinda dizzy looking back at the distance we’ve traveled. Ah well. To 1000 comments!
@Kirbywarp:
What argument, exactly, are you implying that I am trying to “escape?” If you simply disagree with the statements that I have already made, or if you’re unsatisfied with them, then say so. But don’t conflate your disagreement with me into some sort of ostensibly objective observation that I’m weaseling out of a discussion. Have at it. Let’s explore any point that has not yet been explored.
http://peririck.deviantart.com/#/d3l0bz0
Link to FactFinder’s true colors
here is the text for those who do not wish to click through
Two girls in luck
by ~periRick
Voice over: Two cum-hoes
Visual: Two semi-diagonal bars zip across a black background. Both bars have a perspective, 3/4 view of the women’s eyes like a typical fighting game. The one on top has mascara and eyeliner done up in a faux-asian style. The bottom one has a teardrop tattoo and has large fake lashes with ostentatious gold eyeliner.
Voice over: One feeder
Visual: Outline of the millionaire appears behind the tinted window, visible only by the orange glow of a cigarette or small cigar. In his left hand, an average square camera is visible, about the size of a normal disposable.
Voice over: Two preggos
Visual: The millionaire and window become more distant as the view quickly pans out. The panned-out areas are darker than the rest. The two eye-bars are arranged so that they are in the respective women’s bodies as they become visible. The shading lifts to reveal two heavily pregnant women. The room is about 10 meters wide, each woman on either side, and has white or greyish tile, except for the window, and a sealed metal door. Setting has a high-tech yet retro feel to it. Could be anywhere between the 80s and modern day. Both women are shackled to the floor with one clamp.
Voice over: One breeder! *Buzzes*
Visual: A small red bulb on the top of the room flashes, lighting the entire room briefly, and the shackles pop open. The two women begin waddling towards each other, gradually gaining momentum. One pulls her fist back, eying the others’ belly, as the other prepares to knee her opponent.
Voice over: Preggo Punchout!
Visual: Blood and gore splatter effect, first “Preggo” and then “Punchout!” Everything fades to black except title, as blood and gore smear down the screen. The sound of a lullaby or other childish music can be faintly heard.
So because I’m a feminist I’ve been called immoral, evil, a nazi, a man-hater, a bitch, a dyke, fat, ugly, and worthy of death by MRAs….
and now an MRA is mad I told him to fuck off and help men?
@Roscoe:
*points at Quackers* (v^_^)>
That’s the person you should be talking to, not me.
Yes, I’m sure you really care about civil discourse. Hence Preggo Punchout.
Roscoe, to be frank, you haven’t exactly earned the priviledge to a “civil conversation”, given the crap you’ve pulled in this thread (and are still running with).
Why beg for civil discourse when, earlier in this thread, you argued in bad faith, misconstrued other people’s arguments, and in general used a very important topic (DV) just to show off in the face of reality.
Don’t pull this crap, now. You’re fooling no one.
I find it disappointing that a Web site that is devoted to mocking the corrosive invective of misogynists is populated by people who consider corrosive invective to be some sort of contribution to enlightened debate. It’s not.
By the way, I try to keep personal insults out of all my discussions. Does that make me a “tone troll” everywhere I go? Is the fault mine that I don’t validate someone’s verbal abusiveness against me?
If you take a stand against hateful rhetoric, why don’t you go all the way to the logical conclusion of that position (which is a more civil and respectful society)?
Bostonian, you should have added a trigger warning. Some of the more sensitive posters here might have PTSD. I know you can’t go back and edit your revealing posts, but just be sure to remember that in the future.
@Rutee Katreya: “Yes, I’m sure you really care about civil discourse. Hence Preggo Punchout.”
That wasn’t me.
@Kirby
Nooo don’t send him back to me lol…but yeah he should have addressed me but I’m done with his crap. Made my point nothing else to say.
Oh but I actually did forget to mention I’m also sick of the insinuation that because male DV is not as recognized that somehow all women and feminists accept women beating men or automatically think he deserved it. No we don’t. Hitting someone is never acceptable unless its in cases of self defense.
Ok now I’m done. 😛
@Roscoe:
Maintaining a calm demeanor and ignoring an opponent’s frothing invective is not tone trolling, its being the better person. Throwing a hissy fit when your opponent dares to use a word you find offensive rather than ignoring it or walking away is tone trolling. There’s a difference… see it?
Yes, I’m sure you really care about civil discourse. Hence Preggo Punchout.
Hey, I’m supposed to be the one who made that. It seems you need to sort your social justice arsenal so you don’t pick up a buggy whip when what you were reaching for was the G̛̰̲̰̗̹̿̒͗̓ͭ̈́ͫ̉́O͎̲͎͙̞̭̯͇̊̃̓̊̚͘̕Ḍ̥̣̣̩̌ͯ̾̈̆̿̎͗͘ͅ
@Quackers:
Roscoe is like a ball bouncing wildly around the court (as CassandraSays said earlier), and I play a mean squash. >:D
There is a trigger warning on the site FactFinder:
“I discuss, and quote from, some pretty extreme stuff here; also, the comments section is pretty much unfiltered, so be prepared.”
Big red and white letters, Trigger Warning right above it, upper right hand side of the front page of the site.
Also, you are the one who wrote the “game pitch”, which is in “development” right now, according to you.
You are disingenuous to the end.
@red_locker: “Roscoe, to be frank, you haven’t exactly earned the priviledge to a ‘civil conversation,’ given the crap you’ve pulled in this thread (and are still running with).”
I’ll be the judge of a conversation is civil enough for me to engage in. Not you.
“Why beg for civil discourse when…”
I’m simply setting boundaries, and enforcing them.
“Don’t pull this crap, now. You’re fooling no one.”
So it’s pulling crap to engage people in good faith and without descending into name calling, as I have done? If you have an argument to make, then make it. If we haven’t covered it yet, then I’ll address it. Or is a personal insult “required” for you to make your remarks effectively?
Have something substantive to say? A point? Anything?
I just wanted to remind everyone of who they are dealing with when you show up. No one should ever take you seriously as a debater on any subject.
@Bostonian: “Also, you are the one who wrote the ‘game pitch’, which is in ‘development’ right now, according to you.”
That wasn’t me.
I was not addressing you.
@Roscoe:
“Have something substantive to say? A point? Anything?”
Nah, at this point I’m just faffing about. It’s kinda fun that you want to make your final stand on language, another effort to rewrite your history this entire thread of remaining blissfully off topic.
Don’t worry though; I’m sure you’ll find some way to spin this whole thing to convince yourself that you really won in the end. *pat pat*
Hey Roscoe, here is the very first line of the comment you’re quoting from.
“There is a trigger warning on the site FactFinder”
Reading is fundamental.