The regulars over on the Men’s Rights Subreddit are currently getting amused and/or outraged by the existence of a book titled “Girl, Get That Child Support,” a guide to help single mothers track down deadbeat dads and get the child support they are owed. A few of them were apparently so overstimulated by the book’s title, and a reference to “Baby Mamas” in the subtitle, that this little conversation ensued:
Note the upvotes and the (scarcity of) downvotes. And the complete lack of anyone saying “hey, you’re being racist assholes.”
The Men’s Rights Movement, the “most significant civil rights movement of the 3rd millennium.”
Shoot, you’re right. I’ve got my trolls crossed.
Careful. Bad things happen when you get your trolls crossed — I’ve got the video.
>>Can I now officially call Meller a nazi
I think ‘fascist’ is more accurate. Nationalist populist windbag also.
Cloudiah: It’s amazing how that’s as coherent as an actual Michael Bay movie.
Crossing the trolls would be bad.
Meller might not technically be a Nazi, but he’s a deeply racist right-wing authoritarian asshole who just advocated forced sterilization, so I’m not personally inclined to make fine distinctions on the matter. If nothing else, he and they are aligned in spirit.
Better idea Meller, how about we just lock your pathetic evil self up in a mental institution and throw away the key? don’t worry, I’m not a complete sadist, you can bring your dollies with you.
also is anyone else seeing all the text on the site in bold?
Not I.
Is being white(?) analogous to being a woman(?)?
Like, that’s what you clearly are, but Meller throws in the question mark to let you know that you haven’t really earned the title.
No bolding here.
That’s odd….everything is still in bold for me :/ hopefully it will go away soon
…Has Meller heard of the concept of “condoms”? You know, being a slut doesn’t necessarily mean you will make Teh Baybeez.
And what about those of us who are “sluts” (re: have sex outside of marriage, or at all enthusiastically) who also really want to have babies, preferably with a partner? I’m pretty slutty right now, but when the right dude comes around, I do plan to get married and have kids with him. People are…. complicated? And want different things at different points in their lives?
indifferentsky, you are so right about some of the people in this forum. Not all, some. I got called all kinds of nasty names and for awhile didn’t say anything nasty back. Now I fight fire with fire. I’m not going to let those asshole babies bully me into leaving this forum.
Yes, women are genetically programmed to desire men who would be the best providers, men of means. It’s been scientifically proven. And it’s not an insult to women. It shows that we are practical, that we want our children to be well taken care of. It has kept humanity from dying out.
It’s ironic that we’ve been talking about regional variations of English, because when I initially read that Meller wants to sterilize “tramps”, I read it as the British synonym for “bums/hoboes”.
Mind you, I daresay Meller wants to sterilize them too.
Ruby: You say it’s “Science”. Fine, put your money where your mouth is.
Cite the studies. Something more definitive than “common sense” or, “I read it in a magazine”.
A study, with scientists, and models, and operational definitions, and control groups, and the elimination of confounding variables.
You know, DATA.
Because right now, all you’ve got is, “I say it’s science, and you are all ignorant meanies for saying it’s not.”
Which, as you may have noticed, isn’t working.
So show is up. Bring in the big guns.
The SCIENCE!
@Ruby Hypatia,
There few things that rub me the wrong way more than gender essentialism.
Citation needed. Seriously.
@Ruby- So wait, there were investment bankers in the days of the cave man? “Thag get 10% interest! Thag hunt mammoth, sell on commodities market!”
How? We can’t really map genetic code to phenotype expressions yet, so the easy way is out. We can only rely on data gathered through human society, and that data doesn’t say what you want it to, because while women in unequal societies are indeed prone to searching for status, those in less equal societies are correspondingly less likely. to do so. On what grounds do you base this bullshit claim?
Do you know how any society besides your own is oriented? Hint to the clueless, ahistorical twit: The world is big, and there are a lot of child rearing models. Fuck, you evopsych idiots need to learn something about fucking history.
Or biology (Especially developmental biology, which does ACTUAL tests to determine what makes species’ propogate before announcing with ANY certainty that this trait makes them propogate), or anthopology, or psychology itself… jesus fuck, if you’re going to take cues on how the world works from writers, can you at least pick better ones than fucking Rudyard Kipling?
ARgh. “Those in more equal societies.”
The thing about things that have been scientifically proven is that it’s rather easy to prove them. One does this by linking to studies that prove the thing that one is asserting. One does not do this by saying “it has been scientifically proven” over and over again.
No you don’t; I mean, I recognize what you’re trying to say, and superficially it fits. You are insulted, so you insult back. Where this claim fails is that you don’t actually engage anyone, you just shout cliches at everyone who’s reading, rather than try to say anything specific to, well, anyone.
Seriously though, Ruby, calling Evopsych science tells me you need to learn what science actually is. Evopsych is modern day myth; it starts with a conclusion and works backward to try to explain it. Take this shit you keep spouting; shouldn’t that just genetically program women to have their own means, rather than depending on someone else’s? Look at the actual success rate of doing things like claiming child support (Even from people with means). IT ain’t great. It’s much more efficient to have your own means than try to claim them from a father who has means. Yet that’s not what you try and say. And that’s, you know, just western society, which is not the only family model ever (And is certainly not the fucking family model that people used 10,000 years ago.
What actual science does is it runs tests. Developmental Biology basically does the same thing as Evolutionary Psychology, but not for humans. You look at a population, notice a trend, explore potential mechanisms, and then you fucking test your claims. It’s hard, yes, but it’s also actual science, not bullshit just-so stories wrapped up in the trappings thereof. Myths change over time; the perfect electric engine that the gas companies are sitting on is a myth with different themes from George Washington never telling a lie, which was a different myth from… well, pick your favorite Fair Folk story.