Today I’d like to present to you a really ranty old post from Masculist Man on his unimaginatively named Men’s Rights Blog.
But let’s do this a little differently this time. Let’s make it a little contest.
I want you to take a deep breath, loosen up your tongue, and see how much of his rant you can read, out loud, in one breath. (Just don’t kill yourself in the process, please.)
Why the militancy
That question has been asked by many MRA’s and the answer should be obvious: what has moderation accomplished for us? What has “niceness” done for us? Besides getting us deeper into this mess. Why be nice to an enemy that not only wants to take everything from you but would like to see you DEAD on top of it. Not only that but if you are a father with sons the average feminist would like to see your young sons dead too …
Oh, crap, that’s as far as I got. Deep, deep breath. Here’s the rest. It took me five breaths to get through it. See if you can beat me.
just because they are male. These Neville Chamberlains would have you believe they can accomplish peace in our time by making deals with these devils and just like any deal with the devil they get burned. Not only them but the rest of us as well. Then the moderates have the nerve to tell us to shut up or we’ll play into the feminist hands. The one thing that I think of is that if we stay silent we definitely will play into the feminists hands,the same if we play “nice”. If we play nice,just as we have for the last 160 years (if you include feminism as a whole) or for 40 years (if you are focusing on 2nd wave feminism) then we will continue to get fucked. Why the militancy? Because it is hard to be nice when you are getting assfucked in court (family to criminal to civil) and it’s really hard to be nice when society blames YOU for what happens in a “he said/she said” situation even though SHE IS THE ONE AT FAULT and it’s really hard to be nice and pleasant when you try to illustrate what is happening to you and/or other men in society when everybody wants to play the ostrich and would rather not know,that is until another “he said/she said” situation arises again and then it’s boom,they back off to the races to repeat the same mistakes as last time and when they do they are applauded by the lemmings that make up society lest they are labelled “politically incorrect”. It seems they would rather kill their own families to avoid being labelled “politically incorrect”. A big problem with moderates is that they are usually staffed by older manginas or young men from single mother homes that don’t want to upset women and that there defeats the purpose of being an MRA because if you don’t upset women then you will stay silent concerning mens’ issues and the women win by your silence. TO ERODE WOMEN’S POWER OVER MEN ONE MUST SPEAK UP AND DESTROY THE FEMINSIT MONSTER THAT WANTS TO DESTROY YOU AND YOUR BROTHERS.
Instead of asking why the militancy one should ask is the militancy legitimate? and the answer is “yes”.
Post your results below!
It makes me laugh that NWO interpreted “things MRAs want/believe” as “things all men everywhere want/believe.” Hate to break it to you (not really, but, y’know), but your movement is small. Most men don’t share your goals. Is sexism and misogyny pretty much everywhere? Sure. But your particularly serious strain is rare.
I don’t know if “Schmeeg” is better or worse:
Indeed he asked for insults and indeed he is spewing misogyny. Im not siding with him. From what Ive read so far here coming from the MRAs, its hard to tell if any are parodies of themselves, both because of their ideas and the means they use to convey them. Their views of the world (especially women) is so messed up that its absurd.
But I feel that attacking his problem with the language is a bit like laughing at the kid who cant walk straight and telling him to work harder at it, basically ableism but with languages.
Yea it sucks having to withstand their hatred and violence and I understand the desire to fight back. And we can do so without lowering ourselves to their level.
Off topic but hilarious nonetheless. I think I found an MRA tree cutter.
http://youtu.be/Kvms4sP7CLk
And he don’ take orders from no wimmin.
Is it wrong that I giggled at “man accused of illegal dumping”?
Good find, Lady Zombie! (And I’m not just saying that so you don’t eat my brains.)
Please. I’m a vegetarian. 🙂
“from mars also” — Mars, PA is quite a drive from there dude, no wonder you’re so grumpy
If he’s not an MRA then he’s still a standard misogynistic jerk. Check out the update on that video —
http://youtu.be/lr6xzypb14c
The guy has some major issues and probably shouldn’t be mocked.
And he’s also probably writing on mra sites.
David,
have you managed to figure out yet that feminism is KILLING WOMEN? All these young men who are growing up without a father in the house are beating and killing women in rapidly increasing numbers.
Maybe your women readers would like to browse through our forum we are keeping on the rapidly increasing violence of men against women because the men know there is no path to justice.
Keep up the good work of promoting feminism and denouncing the rule of law and “equality before the law”. Please do more of it.
Why? Because the more men like you denounce “equality before the law” the faster we will see more women killed and the sooner we are able to point to even more dead women the sooner the women might figure out that feminism kills women.
Me personally? I will care no more and NO LESS about beaten or dead women than women cared about me and about my fellow men who have been criminally abused by women.
We will “do unto others as they have seen fit to do unto us”
And when the HATRED of women is reflected back at them they get really upset.
GOOD!
http://www.crimesagainstfathers.com/australia/Forums/tabid/82/forumid/123/scope/threads/Default.aspx
Our trolls should meet each other —
ideologuereview — “I mean, homicide rates against women are at an all-time low and men are still far more likely to be singled out by murderers. In fact, crime rates in general are down, which would imply the tangible evidence of hate is also down.”
Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c) — “Maybe your women readers would like to browse through our forum we are keeping on the rapidly increasing violence of men against women because the men know there is no path to justice.”
One of you is clearly wrong. Is specifically saying he doesn’t care about beaten and dead women, while implying he wants to see this happen, a ban-able offense? If not, this is a pirate ship, and you are not the captain, so why do you want to board it anyways?
Nolan is on permanent moderation; I let his comments through some (most?) of the time to remind everyone how awful he is.
Requesting permission to tell him to walk the plank then 😀
Argenti, I don’t believe in destruction except in self-defense, and I think people and organizations in general should be subjected to coercion only when they coerce others. It’s okay, though, I know that lies and deceptions are common rhetorical tactics for the naive. I don’t hold it against you personally.
Feminism doesnt beat or kill women.
Abusers and murderers do. Most of them happen to be men. Coincidence?
Wasn’t Peter being arraigned or something?
*lies and deception
Yes, I wrote something wrong. I’ll go ahead and post the correction before someone starts shouting about it.
@Tenshi – So are the murdered. The way you put it makes it seem like women are being singled out by murderers, and might confuse the simpleminded individuals here. The contrary is actually true.
ideologuereview — did I say which of you was wrong or that both those statements could not be factually correct? And when it comes to domestic violence murders, women are the primary victims, do read that meta-analysis Pecunium linked.
From that meta-analysis —
“According to the FBI, female victims represent about 70% of all intimate
murder victims. About one-third of all female murder victims were killed by an intimate
compared with 4% of male murder victims (see, for example, Kellerman and Mercy,
1992; Bachman and Saltzman, 1995). (What this suggests, of course, is that both women
and men are more likely to be murdered by a man; efforts to end all types of violence
ought to properly focus on the association of masculinity and violence, the legitimacy of
violence to men, and men’s sense of entitlement to use violence.)” (page 13)
@peter pan
Victim blaminggg….whats that?
This should be bookmarked so it can be trotted out the next time some fool says MRAs aren’t violent.
“Maybe your women readers would like to browse through our forum we are keeping on the rapidly increasing violence of men against women because the men know there is no path to justice.”
Cause we all know that every single man who has ever harmed a woman did so only because society forced their hand. Riiiiiiiiiight. People that do this many mental gymnastics always come across as morally bankrupt but this one seems a few sandwiches short of a picnic.
Well, here’s a Turing test for FromMontreal.
Bonsoir Mr. DeMontreal. Comment trouvez-vous le travail de Mr. Charest? Est-ce que mes solos de casseroles sonnent doux a vos oreilles? Etes-vous un admirateur de Marc Lepine comme le reste du mouvement masculiniste au Quebec?
@hellkell – That’s not even bad for Peter. You know how we were all having a good laugh about Peter’s “common law court” where he’s going to try everyone who was ever mean to him in his high school’s auditorium? I’ve been picking through his book again, and that whole story got a lot less funny when I got to the part where, if that whole court thing doesn’t work out for him, he’s just going to murder them all. Oh, I’m sorry. I mean “dispense summary justice”.