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.
In terms of cartoons for kids that were originally made for little girls, but are also good for little boys, if he likes anime-style art he might like Fruits Basket.
You claimed responsibility for it as well, when you were initially called on it. Realizing now the folly of your endeavor?
Regarding My Little Pony, it’s not perfect. There was a ridiculously racist pair of episodes, and I am NOT A FAN of everything they’ve done so far with Zecora (Though the Pony of Pop was pretty excellent). Really, everything they’ve done with ethnic minorities has been horrid.
…Sadly that’s totally normal. So it’s still pretty good for kid’s programs. Racism aside (and while they’re not discussing their failures they seem to be just not really redoing them, though I haven’t caught up on S2 totally yet) my biggest problem is bronies. I don’t mind adult dudes enjoying the slow in the slightest, but I mind their attempts to appropriate it. I liked Transformers Animated without saying it was for adult women, why can’t you just enjoy a show for little girls instead of trying to say it’s all about the dudeliness? =/
And you know, all that said, I still love MLP. Would recommend for kids, and it’s perfectly enjoyable for adults.
Hmm… the top sentence in the block quote was said by David, the bottom by FactFinder… the whole thing wasn’t supposed to be italics…
@FactFinder/IdeologueReview:
“but it isn’t really relevant to what we’re talking about.”
Well, it is when we are talking about your identity as FactFinder, and that email happened to be another piece of evidence that you were the one who drafted that horrid opening sequence for your game. Pretty relevant I’d say, and not even in Roscoe’s “I’ll do a three step stream-of-consciousness and pretend its on-topic” way.
You claimed responsibility for it as well, when you were initially called on it.
Could you link to that? It’s okay if you can’t, I know you feminist types are busy and tend to skip over things like proof when it takes too long.
@ Rutee
So this is like when a bunch of anime fans decided that since they liked it Naruto must have been created for adults, not children, despite all the toys released to go along with the show? That was one of the funnier fandom wanks that I’ve ever witnessed.
@kirby – I was actually hoping he would release my whole email address, or a screenshot of it. Things did not turn out as well as I hoped.
Right now I’m imagining some future disgruntled My Little Pony fan, insisting in some future thread that Dave denounce the anti-pony comments on this present thread and insisting that he’s not derailing because the OP was about kittens, which are totally the same thing.
Right, your rage at the possibility was totally staged at the time.
At no time did David release any private information, he just noted that it was the same one.
Or perhaps that since a couple of commenters use anime or manga style avatars, that automatically makes it relevant.
For full effect we have to find a way to make the thread misandrist too, though.
Kirby already did, dude. You were no better at deception then than you are now.
But hey, keep talking about how ‘feminists don’t like proof’ when you can see dozens of links to scholarly articles by regulars here in any serious discus
For full effect we have to find a way to make the thread misandrist too, though.
Well, you know, the very existence of this blog is misandrist, so there you are.
Also, my browser flags “misandrist” as a misspelling. That’s misandry.
Aw, don’t laugh at his attempts at gaslighting. He’s already depressed that he can’t get his game released.
IR, please please disavow Preggo punchout. My sick kitten demands it!
@Rutee:
Unfortunately, at least in that thread, he never claimed responsibility for the game directly. He just admitted that it was his e-mail address linked to the profile upon which it appeared. When David asked:
“If you publicly link your name to a particular web site, most people are going to assume it’s your web site. Could you simply answer with a yes or no — is it your web site?”
FactFinder didn’t post in that thread again. *scary ghost story music* Technically FactFinder has this one (unless someone else digs up a link later on).
My cat is snoring. I’m guessing that means that she’s completely indifferent to the existence of Preggo Punchout.
He did say that the site was a “troll site” but never said whether or not it was his troll site… So really, the answer could be anything!!!
At least, it could be for someone who can’t put two and two together to make four. 😛
“peririck” is not a very common user name. The first link in Google search brings up the site. Hence, if I used my real email address, a more determined feminist could just write to the most popular email sites and see which ones get a successful delivery. It’s a bit of a stretch, but not impossible.
It’s clear my privacy was not David’s primary concern in this case. He even went on to speculate on my real name, using the correlation between my email and the site. It’s a good thing I don’t use my real contact info on this site.
@Kirby: Yes, and the reasonable response to all that is “He’s responsible, and too mealy mouthed to be totally up front about it, and too proud to fully back away from his stupid idea.”
Dude, david didn’t give an IP address, RL address, or RL name, and you clearly didn’t care about the association at the time. Don’t pretend now that this is some MASSIVE BREACH OF MY PRIVACY OMG (Especially not since the email was either publicly available on the DA Page, or your actual email wasn’t really compromised at all)
@IdeologueReview:
O_o erm… So what? You mean this?
“I didn’t “release” even part of your email address. You publicly linked yourself to that deviantArt page, which appears to be under the name of a real person, presumably you. Though maybe it’s a fake name; I don’t know, and I don’t care. -David”
How hard is it to admit it was your site? Really… If you know its that bad, and wish to distance yourself from it, you can get bonus cookies by saying something like “Yeah, I drew that up a while ago, but now I realize how stupid it was” or summat. Unless you don’t think it was stupid, in which case you shouldn’t care about linking yourself to it.
As David said, nobody had to do much to go from your name (FactFinder) to your DA site (which contained a name). It’s hardly a privacy issue when you yourself put it out there.
With regard to the DV issue, it’s really irrelevant whether an anti-DV organization caters exclusively to women, exclusively to men, or to both. What really matters is the level of access to services as a function of need in a given geographic area. If men are under-served using these criteria, then that situation needs to be rectified. Segregated vs. non-segregated facilities in this context is a red herring.
(This is, of course, setting aside the very important points raised by both Ami and DSC regarding trans people’s access to DV services. It is sadly true that trans people are among the most under-served populations for social services generally, and DV is unfortunately no exception.)
I feel like an archeologist… This is what will happen in the distant future: hackers will scour the dredges of the internet, searching for lost knowledge and ancient sites, piecing together fragments of browser history.
Too bad it isn’t a setting suitable for an Indiana Jones movie. “Indiana Jones and the Fragmented URL”
Where was the email “publicly available on the DA page?” It says the site was last accessed 21 weeks ago, which was before David started fuming about it. I see no email address posted on the page.
Now, Rutee, as I said “peririck” is not a very common username. By releasing part of my email as “evidence,” he enabled feminists like yourself to find the email address and any linked info.
My motivations were my business, but David proved that he would violate someone’s privacy if it furthered his dogma. Why don’t you release the part of your work email address before the @ if it’s not that big a deal? We’d love to hear from you.
If they find Preggo Punchout they’ll say “see, that’s why that particular group of humans died out”.