Categories
$MONEY$ hypocrisy I'm totally being sarcastic irony alert misogyny MRA racism that's not funny!

Men’s Rights Redditors find “ebonics” hilarious

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.”

 

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

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

537 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Rutee Katreya
8 years ago

(Also, an economic institute is not a social science institute, to refrain from the usual scathing critique of economists that social scientists usually have ready for them)

princessbonbon
8 years ago

Plus since women make better leaders than men, according to the scientific Forbes Magazine (or an unsourced study they have) , this means that all women are going to eventually become like anti-DNA or something.

LBT
LBT
8 years ago

RE: Kendra

Oh, I forgot Kitt and Kronk! Earth Kitt has an awesome voice! (May she rest in peace.) I knew her music first and had a gleefest when I found out she did Yzma. I mentally categorize Kitt as a singer over a voice actor, though.

And I actually didn’t much care for Princess and Frog. I watched it PURELY for Keith David.

RE: Viscaria

I will have to check that book out!

Shadow
Shadow
8 years ago

@Kendra

I LOVE Patrick Warburton. Dude’s voice is just MADE for comedy

LBT
LBT
8 years ago

Also, I’m getting annoyed with this conversation. It’s depressing me making me think that all I want is a piece of ass with a wallet. Okay everybody with a partner, bragging time! What attracted YOU to your partner? If you’re single, what attracts you in general? I WANT GOOSHY SQUISHY FEELINGS.

For instance, I was first attracted to my husband because of his kindness and generosity. When he had a ton of shit on his plate, plenty of reason to focus only on himself, he reached out to me when I was doing poorly. He also helped me move past abuse with patience and understanding, even when I was in the very start and had a lot of shit to chuck out of my head. It also doesn’t hurt that his smile could melt a glacier.

Oddly enough, he was completely broke when I met him.

Xanthë
8 years ago

To riff off of Shadow’s point, demonstrating an evolutionary heritage for psychological development of traits influenced by genetics isn’t on firm ground when you don’t have 99.99% of past human generations of people available to include in your sample – even if there are more people alive now than at any previous point in the past.

princessbonbon
8 years ago

I want Crush of his fat ass, stellar good looks and brilliance. (I want smart kids because I know I will not be able to pay for their college.)

I have been told by those around the two of us though that I am the only one who finds him that hot. Everyone else thinks he looks like a dweeb.

So I retort “yes a hot sexy dweeb.”

princessbonbon
8 years ago

*because of

dang it

CassandraSays
CassandraSays
8 years ago

In terms of immediate attraction it’s all about looks for me. I’m pretty visual. After that I’m tactile, so touchy-feely men make a much better first impression, and really focused on how well I get along with the person and how comfortable being around them is, how easy it is for us to talk to each other.

The first time I hugged Mr C. he felt like home to me. I know it’s corny as hell, but still true. It was a combination of warmth and kindness and friendliness and something that just felt oddly familiar about him. That’s been a consistent pattern for me, that the men I go for A. feel familiar and comfortable to be around on a physical level right away and B. feel like someone you’ve known for a long time almost as soon as you meet them.

pecunium
pecunium
8 years ago

Ruby: Oh, so now it’s psudo-science if you don’t like the results? Studies from America, Austria, and Germany aren’t enough to convince you if you don’t want to believe it.

OK… one more time.

These

Aren’t

Studies.

It’s not that we are dismissing studies because we don’t like them, it’s because YOU AREN’T GIVING US ANY FUCKING STUDIES TO READ.

Honestly, I don’t even need these studies to know women are more attracted to men of means, like I don’t need a study to tell me that men are more attracted to beautiful women.

Which is the real crux of it. You don’t give a shit about the science, you’ve made up your mind, so any goddamned thing that supports you; EVEN WHEN IT’S BULLSHIT, is good enough.

I take back what I said to Red Locker.

You are worse than our run of the mill asshats. They at least pretend to be persuadable. Even NWO will respond to what one has said. It’s the same old gibberish, but he tailors it to the most recent response to get his attention.

You don’t. You just repeat yourself. No one has “come to their senses” and decided you understand science, and have figured out what it is what women want, so you just keep saying, “YOU WON’T LISTEN TO ME BECAUSE YOU DON’T WANT TO FACE THE TRUTH!”, all the while saying that you don’t need to read any studies to tell you what you already know.

To which there is only one reply, Eppur si muove

Alex
8 years ago

@LBT,

I’m not with him anymore, unfortunately, but what attracted me to my ex was (in no particular order) his ability to be really “wacky” as my late Nana put it, really funny and weird, but also very intelligent and roughly at my intellectual level. He had an intense passion for the dramatic arts, and he was a very kind person. Also, he was really sexy when he let his hair grow a few inches. 🙂 As for later on in our relationship, I always felt safe with him; we could talk to each other about everything. Sexual activities were great. Yeah, that little thing called love. 🙂

Money? Pssshh, wasn’t a deciding factor in choosing him, won’t be a deciding factor in choosing my next partner.

katz
8 years ago

I first liked Doad because he listened to peppermint patties.

Kendra, the bionic mommy
Kendra, the bionic mommy
8 years ago

@Shadow, yes Warburton’s voice is just inherently funny. I thought he was great in Seinfeld as Elaine’s boyfriend, Puddy.

Okay everybody with a partner, bragging time! What attracted YOU to your
partner? If you’re single, what attracts you in general? I WANT GOOSHY SQUISHY FEELINGS.

That’s a great question, LBT. I married my husband because he is mild mannered, has a great sense of humor, and is attractive to me (my type is guys who are tall and heavy set, kind of like John Goodman). He also wanted to have kids and is very patient with kids, which was a must for me. I did not marry for money, because I was taught that those who marry for money usually earn every dime.

pecunium
pecunium
8 years ago

In this light, our focus on inferring revealed preferences from the actions of dating site users may be seen as akin to implicit association tests (IATs) used in social psychology to study racial attitudes and stereotyping.

Inferring… not that there was an explicit statement as to what was going on, but the researchers; who admit to having a model in mind, looked at the data to see if it fit.

Not a test, but a glorfied, “gut check”.

They admit, at the outset that there may be more than one explanation for their results.

However, as pointed out by Kalmijn (1998) and others, several distinct mechanisms can account for the observed sorting patterns, and it is difficult to distinguish between the alternative explanations.

This environment allows us to use a straightforward estimation strategy based on the assumption that a user contacts a partner if and only if the potential utility from a match with that partner exceeds a threshold value (a “minimum standard” for a mate).

This where the problem of three economists attempting to make an anthropological judgement comes in. They are assuming the actor are 1: “rational” and 2: that they can judge the criteria being used to make the “threshold value” judgements.

It also assumes the desires in a dating site is finding a “mate”, not a person to date/shag for awhile.

From sociological studies, based on the number/nature of responses women get, it is not clear the men are, by and large, engaging in any more refined sorting mechanism than, “she’s not too old for me”.

For example, we calculate the additional income that black, Hispanic, and Asian men need to be as desirable to a white women [sic] as a white man.

They can’t show this. If we assume that people are more likely to find partners attractive who are in their race (debatable, there is strong evidence that the people who surround children in the period of time they are imprinting the idea of “attractive” is more important than their own race) then the people who are interested in dating outside their “in-group” are outliers. Being significantly off the mean makes it impossible to rule out the confounding variables.

It certainly isn’t possible to do it from response rates in an online dating site.

Most closely related and complementary to our analysis, both in terms of the focus on revealed preferences and the methodological approach, are two studies by Fisman, Iyengar, Kamenica and Simonson (2005, 2006) that utilize data from speed-dating experiments conducted at Columbia University. Their results on gender differences and in particular same-race preferences are remarkably similar to ours, which is especially surprising given the different samples employed in our and their studies (Fisman et al. use a subject pool composed of graduate students). The research design of Fisman et al. has the advantage of eliciting information regarding match-specific components of utility (e.g. the perceived degree of shared interests) that are not observable in our data.

So… a study which wasn’t based on income shows similar results, in terms of ratios of outgroup dating… so they assume that means income is the controlling factor. The use of, “especially surprising” is research speak for, “completely against our predictions”.

Again, this is a problem with economists doing anthropology (and a distinct problem with economists from the University of Chicago, given the influence of Steven J. Levitt), everything becomes an economic transaction.

For example, a man with a low attractiveness rating may not approach a highly attractive woman if the probability of forming a match with her is low, such that the expected utility from a match is lower than the cost of writing an e-mail or the disutility from a possible rejection. In that case, his choice of a less attractive woman does not reveal his true preference ordering. A priori, we expect that strategic behavior or fear of rejection should be most pronounced with respect to physical attractiveness. However, our analysis in Section 4 does not reveal much evidence for such strategic behavior.

Again, they say they expect a given behavior, and then say they can’t show this behavior is taking place.

I’m only on page five here. I don’t think this study really shows what you think it does.

Even if they are right, as to the behavior of women in the US, it doesn’t mean it’s genetic. These are economists, they are making a market-based assessment of the percieved utility of dating people. They are not making claims about the cause of such a result.

Which, of course, brings us to Cassandra’s prognostication. You’ve found a study. It doesn’t say what you say it does.

You will now throw a tantrum

You will throw a tantrum BECAUSE YOU’VE NOT READ A WORD WE’VE SAID ABOUT HOW SCIENCE WORKS.

pecunium
pecunium
8 years ago

What attracted me to my partners? Damnifino.

Looking back at almost thirty years of relationships (in which time there have been eight which were, “Serious” with a Capital S, and about the same again which were signiicant (some of them overlapped, I have not always been monogamous)…

They like me. They are smart, self assertive, they know what they want. I think they are hot. They don’t have a single body type (running from short [4’10”] to tallish [5’9″] )slim to plump. Blonde, redhaired, brunette (long to short hair too). Monogamously inclined, to very poly, straight and bi. A couple have been a bit genderqueer.

All of them have been something of a romantic. Some were in the Army, some have been pacifists (two were Quakers). All of the Capital S ones have been interested in children.

My fiancée… she has a wonderful smile, and a radiant presence. I met her at a wedding, and she took my breath away. I was thinking of her all weekend (it was a three day wedding).

She still has the radiant smile, and she still takes my breath away.

Polliwog
Polliwog
8 years ago

Holy crap, how is Ruby still going?

Ruby: if you want to post another link to attempt prove your point, please, please make it a link to an actual study. Not an article. Not a video. Not Oprah. Not the Daily Mail. An actual write-up of an actual study. Those links you are posting are not studies. Okay?

Now, on to more fun topics.

What attracted YOU to your partner?

What first attracted me was, appropriately enough, joining forces with him to chew out sexist idiots on an internet forum that we’d both frequented for a while. He was hilariously snarky, and we got to chatting after verbally smacking the morons around for a while, and ended up talking for hours. He never stopped being a complete pleasure to talk to. (And he’s still great at eviscerating dumbasses – one of these days I should see if he wants to stop by here. He’d probably have fun with the local trolls.)

KathleenB
KathleenB
8 years ago

LBT: Besides the ‘giving a kidney to his sister’ thing, what attracted me to MrB was (in no particular order) his geekiness, his willingness to join our D&D group, the fact that he was gracious when I finally figured out how to counter his incredibly annoying fencing move that opened me up to his dagger (pull back and don’t let him entangle your blade! Took me weeks to get i!), and the fact that he adored his parent’s cats. Even the really stupid one who ran headfirst into doors.

ozymandias42
8 years ago

I was originally attracted to my girlfriend because she has a teacup tattoo on her neck, my boyfriend because he had a Touch Me I’m A Save Point button on his bag, and my partner because someone described him as “he’s incredibly kind and has incredibly long hair.”

ozymandias42
8 years ago

Also, um, confounding variables?

How do we know that the aggregate increased attractiveness of rich men in American/Western culture is not, for instance, a cultural hangover from the time when women generally could not make as much money as men and the wealth of one’s husband made the difference between comfort and penury? Or a reflection of the cultural norm that a rich man is a Real Man and a poor man is not?

pecunium
pecunium
8 years ago

ozy… why are you analysing the studies?

Didn’t you see there was a scientist involved… they are irrefutable.

CassandraSays
CassandraSays
8 years ago

You’re only analyzing those studies because you hate Ruby for being a libertarian. You can’t handle the truthiness!

Viscaria
Viscaria
8 years ago

My initial attraction to my partner was totally physical. He used to walk by my desk on his way to his own office. He had cute glasses, and a nice smile. But, hey, I’m physically attracted to lots of people, that’s not enough to get me thinking about starting something. No, what really sparked my interest was when I heard him talking to clients on the phone. He had the world’s best phone voice: considerate, easy-going, good-humoured. It was a phone voice that said “I’m a genuinely nice person,” and a nice person was exactly what I was looking for at that point in my life. Also, the sound of it was just plain sexy. What eventually brought us from mutual attraction to a first date was a very passionate discussion about Game of Thrones. Now, I think he’s the sexiest person in the world.

As it happens, my boyfriend is in better shape financially than I am, but that was not what attracted me to him. In fact, it was almost enough to make me not want to continue seeing him, since it was one of several power differences that we would need to negotiate if we entered into a relationship. We have strategies to deal with those kinds of things now, but they add a layer of complexity to our lives together. It’s definitely not a huge perk.

Holly Pervocracy
8 years ago

I wasn’t all that attracted to my boyfriend at first. I mean, hell yeah I thought he was cute, but, y’know, I think that about a lot of people.

Then I got to know him. I got to know how kind he was, how utterly direct and forthright, how shamelessly sappy his cuddles were and how delightfully nerdy his knowledge was. It was a slow build. It took me a good couple months to go from “he seems nice” to “I like spending time with him” to “I want him for my boyfriend he is amazing.” It wasn’t any one thing. It was coming to know him as a person.

It was also the fact that he invited me to build a hovercraft with him as a date.

Of course, then one day he left a pay stub out and I saw his mediocre middle-class income and my vagina dried up like a delicate mountain flower in the withering heat of a Mojave summer.

Dracula
Dracula
8 years ago

The first time I met my ex, she was sitting with her brother in his basement (I’d been friends with him for a while before I met her.) discussing the correct pronunciation of the Russian names in Anna Karenina.

She made a very strong impression on me. Specifically, of her being smart, gorgeous and interested in books and language.

Ithiliana
8 years ago

I vote we create a special award for Ruby this year: Thickest Troll Ever Who Consistently Ignores Everybody (not even insulting us) and Cannot Read: this would be the TTEWCIENEIUACR award.

I nominated her for the first award, and that it be established n her honor and given every year.

You guys rock. I have a con I’m running tomorrow, so I spend all day getting ready, all evening with our GOH, and tomorrow all day CON. So maybe see ya Sunday!

pecunium
pecunium
8 years ago

ozy: Are you trying to anaylse the studies to which Ruby has linked (or had referred to in links)?

You can’t do that. Ruby mentioned studies, by SCIENTISTS! That makes them irrefutable.

princessbonbon
8 years ago

People still get pay stubs?

Polliwog
Polliwog
8 years ago

Then I got to know him. I got to know how kind he was, how utterly direct and forthright, how shamelessly sappy his cuddles were and how delightfully nerdy his knowledge was. It was a slow build. It took me a good couple months to go from “he seems nice” to “I like spending time with him” to “I want him for my boyfriend he is amazing.” It wasn’t any one thing. It was coming to know him as a person.

Yeah, my experience is much the same. Apparently my boyfriend knew pretty quickly that he wanted to date me*, but it took me months to decide he wasn’t just “guy who is fun to talk to” but also “guy I want to talk to and also cuddle and smooch and stuff as often as possible for the foreseeable future because he is ridiculously wonderful,” and there wasn’t some clear delineation between the two, just a gradual process of him steadily growing on me every day.

*Humorous side-note – since, as I mentioned, we originally met on an internet forum, he apparently actually thought I was a gay man for a significant length of time before we ever talked one-on-one. According to him, that idiot-mocking conversation was notable less because it was fun and hilarious, and more because at some point during it I mentioned my gender, and he thought, “Wait, this person whom I already thought was awesome and funny and cool also probably has boobs? WHOA.”

pecunium
pecunium
8 years ago

My Ex (not married, but 10 years living together, she a quaker, and I a soldier. She put up with my beong deployed,and sick, and not so great in the head after the deployment, and we moved three times, and some other shit. I’d say what probably did us in was that I, got stuck, and lost any sense of drive or ambition. I’ve gotten it back, but on top of all the rest of stuff we were going through that was probably a trifle soul destroying, but I digress):

She was interesting. Not pretty, but amazingly attractive. I was flirting with her, at the faire (she was a boothie, I was a performer) and she said she was quite happy with her girlfriend, and had no plans to see anyone else.

I said, “ok, but if you ever break up, feel free to call me”.

Skip ahead a few years, I’ve just had a break-up, am not in the mood for any sort of sexual-interaction. I am at the faire (this faire, in Calif. had two locations, about 400 miles apart this was the Northern one), and don’t actually have any responsibilties for the day (since I’d been supposed to be spending it off-site with the woman I’d been seeing).

There was my ex. So I spent the day with her. She was safe. Only I found out, in the course of the day, that she was single, and not a lesbian. She also lived in my part of the world. So when the weekend was over I called her, and we went horseback riding, and the next thing I new it was ten years later (and she was done with grad school, and I was out of the Army and a whole lot of other things).

It was that she was interesting.

pecunium
pecunium
8 years ago

princess bonbon: Yes, people do. I get them even though I have direct deposit. It makes it possible to check my employers stated hours against the hours I was working, as well as OT, witholding, etc..

princessbonbon
8 years ago

I do not see that as a pay stub-pay stub indicates an actual check. Earnings statement makes more sense since there is no check.

Might just be scemantics since my earning statement is apparently called a warrant.

pecunium
pecunium
8 years ago

While I was waiting to get my direct deposit restarted (I transferred, and for reasons not clear had to start my DD from scratch), and the only difference between my paid by check and my, “earnings statements” is that the check in my “earning statements” has, “not a check” printed on it.

princessbonbon
8 years ago

I have to log onto the computer to actual get a gander at my warrant.

Dracula
Dracula
8 years ago

It was that she was interesting.

Yeah, that’s pretty where I was at. She intrigued me, and I wanted to get to know her better. Turns out she felt the same way. So we started hanging out, discovered that we got along really well, shared a lot of common interests, and were just generally hot for each other.

Given the context of this discussion, I should also note that she always had a lot more money than I did.

Ruby Hypatia
Ruby Hypatia
8 years ago

Hmmm, whom should I believe, scientists working at prestigeous universities or morons on a web site who call you a racist for not thinking like them? I can play that game. You don’t think like me? Then you must be a racist homophobe. LOL!

princessbonbon
8 years ago

Well I would believe you but for the fact you called the state university in my own damn backyard “prestigeous.”

ASU is many many things, but it is not prestigeous.

katz
8 years ago

Ooh, ooh, idea! You know how when we started writing poems for Pelljane, s/he eventually figured out that it was poem-writing time and wrote some too? Let’s do that here! If Ruby doesn’t make any kind of acknowledgement that we’re writing poems, then we’ll know that she doesn’t even look at the shape of the text in the thread, much less the content.

Mysteries for the ages: How did she figure out we were talking about her?

Dracula
Dracula
8 years ago

Still not responding to the actual content of anything anyone’s said, eh Ruby?

Rutee Katreya
8 years ago

I’m calling you a racist because Evopsych bullshit is predicated on white people as evolution’s golden children, you lackwit. Your ‘prestigious scientists’ either disagree with you, are non-existent, or are in the wrong field to do this shit in, in EVERY FUCKING CASE.

Not that it matters, you don’t read anyone’s posts, and you don’t care what the science says; you said as much yourself.

Shadow
Shadow
8 years ago

@Rutee

Evopsych bullshit is predicated on white people as evolution’s golden children

Is there something particularly racist about evo psych?

lowquacks
8 years ago

What if I attend* a prestigious university and think you’re being racist? How do you determine which person who has some connection to a prestigious university is more Always Right In Every Field, Or At Least More Right Than People On Man Boobz? Could it be that we could look at things without appeal to authority, perhaps?

*As a first-year undergraduate student, I’m afraid. I’m sure there are people here with more impressive qualifications than I who could say the same thing though.

lowquacks
8 years ago

@Shadow

Yes, unless by “particularly racist” you mean “racist in particular”, because it’s generally kyriarchal in prettymuch every other way too.

hellkell
hellkell
8 years ago

Finally caught up with the thread and Ruby, you can fuck off.

The rest of you have my undying adimiration for putting up with her tiresome ass.

Flib
Flib
8 years ago

Ruby. You are not responding to the others. You are continuing to just list things without engagging in any of the materials.

You know what is clear to me right now? That you have no damn clue what genetics is or how it works. Nor can you seem to distinguish how social influnces differ from biological (which goes back to your awful understanding of genetics). Stop trying to do a poor job of argument from authority and actually engage with those who are disagreeing with you.

Shadow
Shadow
8 years ago

@lowquacks

What I mean is: most studies in psychology have been done using White participants, we’ve only really started looking into doing things cross-culturally pretty recently. So the SOP of psychology has been to use White participants and then extrapolate that to humanity in general. So does evo psych go beyond that, or is that what you guys are referring to?

I took a course in evo psych in uni, but that was quite a while ago and I can’t remember much of it. What I do remember is that my prof was pretty clear that evo psych is a discipline that asks interesting questions, but it’s not the discipline that can answer them. The shit I’ve seen from when I started reading feminist blogs does not seem familiar at all, so I’m wondering if it is similar to what I learnt and I just don’t remember, or if I just had a particularly good teacher.

Shadow
Shadow
8 years ago

BTW, congrats on getting into a good uni!

lowquacks
8 years ago

@Shadow

It goes a little further than that. There’s no particularly effective way to separate genetic and environmental factors (the “nature-nurture” debate), and evo-psych as it’s commonly practised is more of a method than a discipline – “what just-so story would best explain this difference between X and Y groups?”. Anything that does that has a fairly high chance of getting kyriarchal pretty quickly.

Bear in mind that I’m not an expert and way too tired of trawling academic databases to find you any more specific examples – for some not-perfect examples, Herrnstein’s “The Bell Curve” isn’t specifically evo-psych, but does the sort of thing I’m talking about, as does anyone who seriously sees “Idiocracy” as Earth’s future.

Also, are you Australian? I’ve only ever seen Australians use “uni” as a shorthand for “university” before. Thanks for the congratulations – I’ve been meaning to brag here somewhere in a more specific way for a while but couldn’t think of anywhere it wouldn’t be unnecessary and uninteresting boasting.

Rutee Katreya
8 years ago

Is there something particularly racist about evo psych?

It’s ultimately about how all evolution set forth to create white people’s civilizations, so yes, it’s kind of a requisite. Evopsych is just so stories to explain white people’s culture, predicated on the rather universal mechanism of evolution. If evolution ultimately lead to the creation of western civilization as its pinnacle, where does that leave everyone else?

So does evo psych go beyond that, or is that what you guys are referring to?

Well, it doesn’t strictly speaking have to to be racist, but yes, because psychology doesn’t also declare white civilization the ultimate norm of forever.

Shadow
Shadow
8 years ago

@Rutee & Lowquacks

Makes sense. My interest has always been in the social/cultural side of psych so I’ve rarely come across evolutionary explanations.

@lowquacks

Not from Aus, but we used “uni” back in Africa as well. It’s been my experience that “uni” is commonly used in England as well, and places that have a lot of British media.

(I really wouldn’t miss this newfangled, resizing comment box)