Racists – victim blamers extraordinaire — like to pretend that their racism isn’t their fault, that they’ve been driven to their racism by the bad behavior of some members of the group they’re bigoted against. Do a search for the phrase “I don’t hate blacks, but” and you will find thousands of examples of this “logic” at its crudest. “I don’t think blacks are ignorant just the NIGGERS,” one YouTube commenter writes, encapsulating the racist “logic” in a phrase.
Misogynists are fond of making similar “arguments” about women. As one commenter on the Scott Adams blog puts it:
I don’t hate women, but I have a pretty low opinion of women overall. I think they have poor priorities, they have poor analytical skills, they tend to be disorganized, they tend to be impulsive, and they think the world revolves around their feelings. I don’t think all women are like that, but it’s the impression I have of the gender in general, and I don’t like those traits.
Naturally, variations of this general argument (such as it is) abound in the “manosphere.” “Misogynists are not born they are made,” writes MRA/MGTOW elder and proud misogynist ZenPriest in an oft-cited rant titled “Hate Bounces.”
“Once, a long time ago when the world was young, I loved women with all my heart and soul,”ZenPriest (also known as Zed) writes. But then along came feminism, which ruined women so thoroughly that poor ZenPriest found himself more or less forced to become a woman-hater:
I began to see women as vicious creatures whose only agenda when it came to me, or any man, was to see how much they could get from the man – then when he had nothing left to give because they had taken it all, toss him out with yesterday’s garbage. In short – as nothing but users. …
I took to avoiding women, particularly groups of them, because I could never sit quietly and put up with the bashing and would always challenge it, which ended me up in a lot of fights and added greatly the count of times that I got called “misogynist.”
Gosh, why would anyone who “see[s] women as vicious creatures” get called a misogynist?
[A]fter 3 decades of listening to it, and hating it, and trying to keep the animosity which had been building in me over it … I caved in and began to really hate women. …
I will not allow most women in my house unless I have known her a long time and she is old enough to have escaped being infected with the plague of man hating or is escorted by someone I trust, nor will I enter theirs except on the same conditions. If I pass a woman stranded on the road, I will not stop to help her because it is as likely as not that she will be afraid of me. …
I changed from a man who loved women and thought they were just about the greatest thing in the world, to a man who can’t stand them, or anything about them.
And of course it is all the fault of women and their alleged incessant man-hatery:
Man bashing and man hating harms women, because it makes men hate them back – eventually. A puppy returns love for love, but if you beat it will eventually turn mean and will one day turn on you when you raise your fist or your stick (or the club of words) to hit it. Men are no different.
As this last bit makes clear, this “she made me do it” logic is the very same logic used by abusers to justify their abuse.
Now our old friend JohnTheOther has offered a similar blame-the-ladies explanation as to why he’s developed what he calls an “indifference to female opinion.” In his telling, the straw that broke the camel’s back was some unnamed feminist who had the temerity to use the word “neckbeard” in an internet posting.
The culture of easy, casual insult by women against average men, creeps, neckbeards, mother’s-basement-dweller and so on, has a effect which might not be recognized by women. Guys generally don’t need to be told they’re held in contempt as a group, our wider culture makes this sparklingly clear. However, individual instances of circumstantial ad-hom have the very real effect of making men not care about women’s opinions.
Yeah, that’s why these guys don’t give a shit about what women say.
Naturally, Mr. TheOther feels the need to tell us that 1) he doesn’t have a neckbeard and 2) he has a (presumably human) girlfriend.
Am I a neck-beard? No, I’m clean shaven, Im not an online gamer, I have a girlfriend, a career, I dress well et-cetera. But whenever I see some casual, throw away comment like creeper, neck-beard or other minor belittling insult used to describe average men, it cements my not giving a shit about the opinions of women.
After being criticized for his blatant misogyny by a commenter in the Men’s Rights subreddit (virtually the only MRA site online where misogyny is ever called out), Mr. TheOther altered that final bit to read “it cements my not giving a shit about the opinions offered.” He evidently thinks that changing the wording of this one sentence, and complaining about “quote-mining” will convince readers that the misogynistic argument set forth in detail in the rest of the post somehow isn’t misogyny. (And, on the Men’s Rights subreddit, that ploy seems to have worked.)
Naturally, like so many misogynists, Mr. TheOther insists he’s really not a woman-hater:
I don’t hate women, I don’t believe in any “back to the kitchen” nonsense, or any other female-targeted belittlement. What I’m talking about is my personal attitude towards women’s opinions, their utterances, their writing, their thoughts, their contribution to society. If you are a woman reading this, that means your thoughts, ideas, speech, writing and so on.
Well, that clears it up. You don’t hate women; you just don’t give a shit what women think or say or do. Obviously there’s no bigotry in that!
Utterly dismissing “female opinion” because some woman called you a neckbeard: Men’s Rights activism at its finest!
That second NWO link manages to hit so many conservative talking points on just the front page, makes it hard to figure out wtf he was going for, but I’m going to pretend he’s attempting to rant about the decline in white births. To which I have only one thing to say — non-white babies outnumber white babies for the second time.
kiki — the person who posted the first answer messaged me about debating going to the tautology (the one about non-euclidean geometry and lovecraftian horrors).
“I’m pretty sure most people are math whizzes compared to someone who things 70% and 50% are the same thing.” — yeah a 5 year old can tell which is more cookie, this isn’t that hard of a concept (hell, a 3 year old can probably go “bigger half!” and have a tantrum about “it’s not fair!”)
@hellkell
Agenda?
If you don’t like it it’s an, “agenda?”
Big Daddy does the same thing, if it ain’t Al Qaeda, it’s a, “regime” The Iraqi regime. The Libyan regime. The Egyptian regime. The Iranian regime. The North Korean Regime.
That’s how ya know something is bad, if CNN, the communist network news and the daily pravda call it an agenda or a regime, it’s bad. I don’t need to think for myself, I just hafta listen to the buzzwords.
If CNN says Al Qaeda, regime, agenda, war on women, drugs, terrorism, ect, I know it’s bad. If they say conspiracy theory, I laugh at those silly people. And then I go to sleep comforted in the fact Big Daddy knows best.
Important note: while condoms may make decent balloons (à la scene from Steel Magnolias) balloons cannot be used as condoms.
How insecure do you have to be to deny that women are sexual and some men (or whatever gender they fancy) turn them on more than others? It’s true, though. Also, when I think of sex, I don’t think of babies in any context…..like ever. Who does? Oh, I know, certain dudes who claim they have to date waaaay younger women because they’re so worried about having babies always go there — but we all know that’s horsehit (they’re just afraid of getting older). And when fellas are enjoying porn, I’m pretty sure they’re not getting hot and bothered over the idea of fatherhood. *chuckle*
Yes, if women pick men they’re attracted to that means someone might get passed over. So what? Happens to women all the time. Citing worldwide birthrates won’t make free choice disappear.
Damn. Misogy-waaaaaaah!
I’m I the only one here who needs a drink?
NWO in times and places where birth control is unavailable or unreliable people are forced to pick and choose which children get resources like food, medicine, warm clothing or education. In extreme conditions, they leave infants to die of exposure, or expell their children from the home. Sometimes thet sell their kids into slavery. Its happend in every culture in the world and is still happening today. Sex doesn’t just happen because we need babies. If that were the case impovrished families would not keep having more children they know they cannot support. They continue having children because sex is pleasurable and comforting.
@Argenti Aertheri
“I’m pretty sure most people are math whizzes compared to someone who things 70% and 50% are the same thing.”
The 70% had nothing to do with the 50%. The 70% was just stating a fact of out of wedlock births. The 50%, like I said just a nice round number using 100 since it’s not likely every woman in that particular make believe neighborhood of 200 women was pregnant. I’ll clearer next time. Although it wouldn’t really matter anyway, would it? Anyone not in complete agreement with the feminist, “agenda,” will be ridiculed.
Who was that schmuck that came in here the other day all well-mannered? What a fool. He actually thought he could talk civil and be treat civil in return. Loser. He didn’t realize this place is old school church. Genuflect at the door, bless yourself and pray to the all-knowing goddess within all women. Blasphemy I tell ya!
I uually need a tylenol after dealing with slavey. However, I had a really great evening with my daughter, so my tolerance seems to be higher.
@Shiraz
I feel like I need a whole pharmacy. Of course, it’s because I went over to the Spearhead and read a few “articles.” Damn, I don’t know why I keep doing it. Good thing my husband and I keep a lot of wine on hand 🙂
@Shiraz
You might not think of babies during sex, but the only reason you want sex is due to a reproductive drive.
Oh, if you need a drink be sure to not have sex with anyone you deem worthy if either of you are drunk or high. That’ll be added to the CDC rape stat of 1 in 5. And whatever you do stay away from well lit college classrooms surrounded by people at desks. That seems to be a hotbed of rape activity, a veritable culture.
I find the spearhead amusing for the most part. Heartiste is the one that usually has me cursing.
Do you think because a man put’s a balloon on his johnson it changes the reason why he want’s to have sex?
Yes. His reason changes from “reproduction” to “pleasure.” Although pleasure is probably always a reason. My husband and I are trying to reproduce right now, but that doesn’t mean it ain’t fun.
How many years from now till the burka will be in style in Europe?
Aren’t you in favor of burkas? They’re designed to protect innocent men from the painful boner-inducing sight of female flesh. The fundamentalist Muslims are on your side, brother.
Hey, Dave? Way back there was a thread pretty much devoted to me, some new world order thing or something. Had ta be a year and a half or so ago. I’m fairly certain I had written down the next three countries in the EU that’d require a bail out in the order they’d need it. I’m fairly certain I did and I predicted it’d be Spain, then Italy, then Ireland.
I don’t remember that (and if it happened you got the order backwards), but I did take the time to record some of your other predictions of the future:
–By the end of 2012, federal law will require that 50% of all CEOs be women. Male CEOs will be fired en masse, and random unqualified women will be hired to fill their seats.
–Someday a straight white man will beat up a lesbian for molesting a five-year-old. Everyone in the world will sympathize with the lesbian and immediately legalize child molestation.
–Grade schools will soon require children to pledge allegiance to the idea that women are morally superior to men.
Any of these come true yet?
Yep, nobody is ever sexually attracted to people (or, um, things? creatures?) with whom they cannot reproduce. EVER. Has not happened in the history of humanity. No point in even doing any research on human sexuality, ’cause it’s all about reproduction only, and we have all the answers, and they’re true for every single human on the planet, and even for all animals, and for people on other planets.
Will this do?
http://www.runningoffthereeses.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/magic-mike_610.jpg
NWO’s whole “women are not aroused by anything men do, just by wearing clothes at men” nonsense is that much weirder when I read it immediately after talking to a friend who just came home from seeing Magic Mike in a theater full of cheering women, and was waxing rather poetic to me about her newfound love of Matt Bomer’s butt. Clearly, she was just deluding herself into thinking she liked watching scantily clad men, and she was really there to wear clothes at the movie screen in hopes that it would mate with her. Makes perfect sense.
To be truly “untainted by feminism” we’d presumably need to look for someone born before the Seneca Falls convention, and that was in 1848, so the answer seems to be that he can only relate respectfully to women over the age of 164. Presumably there are a lot of vampires where he lives.
Hey, since I was fourteen, I’ve been trying to reproduce with that scene in The Vampire Lovers where Ingrid Pitt is taking a bath. It might be difficult being mixed parents – one a man, the other a very worn stretch of VHS tape – but we can make it work, damn it!
@Cassandra
Mary Wollstonecraft published A Vindication of the Rights of Woman in 1792, so any woman untainted by feminism would be over 200 years old.
@ creativewritingstudent
“Also, I would like proof that men wear sexy clothes.”
Here you go.
http://postimage.org/image/7ako7lyot/
NWO, you still haven’t explained how oral fits in to your whole theory.
NWO: yes, dipshit, agenda. Your sites were more of the right-wing batshittery that you love so much. I was wondering if you had stats from anywhere that didn’t feed into your delusions, if there is such a thing.
Tell me again, why do you come here? Aside from us being the only place that hasn’t banned you and gives you some human interaction, that is.
Damn is this the wrong thread?
“Oh, if you need a drink be sure to not have sex with anyone you deem worthy if either of you are drunk or high. That’ll be added to the CDC rape stat of 1 in 5. And whatever you do stay away from well lit college classrooms surrounded by people at desks. That seems to be a hotbed of rape activity, a veritable culture.”
First, I know I said this already, it isn’t the classrooms, it’s the parties, the dorm culture, all that booze. Second, statutes time!
Sec. 53a-70. Sexual assault in the first degree: Class B or A felony. (a) A person is guilty of sexual assault in the first degree when such person … (4) engages in sexual intercourse with another person and such other person is mentally incapacitated to the extent that such other person is unable to consent to such sexual intercourse.
Sec. 53a-65. Definitions. As used in this part, except section 53a-70b, the following terms have the following meanings:
(5) “Mentally incapacitated” means that a person is rendered temporarily incapable of appraising or controlling such person’s conduct owing to the influence of a drug or intoxicating substance administered to such person without such person’s consent, or owing to any other act committed upon such person without such person’s consent.
I am unsure whether intentionally staying substantially less impaired than your partner would count, but it’s quite unethical to water down your drink will serving full strength drinks, without having agreed on that beforehand. As for “or passed out” —
Sec. 53a-71. Sexual assault in the second degree: Class C or B felony. (a) A person is guilty of sexual assault in the second degree when such person engages in sexual intercourse with another person and: … (3) such other person is physically helpless;
Sec. 53a-65. Definitions. As used in this part, except section 53a-70b, the following terms have the following meanings:
(6) “Physically helpless” means that a person is unconscious or for any other reason is physically unable to communicate unwillingness to an act.
In layman’s terms — it ain’t rape solely because you had a beer.
“@Argenti Aertheri
‘I’m pretty sure most people are math whizzes compared to someone who things 70% and 50% are the same thing.'”
You’re quoting Cassandra there, I think, it wasn’t me though. In any case, yes, if you’re going to take 70% and then apply it in such a manner that it looks like you mean 50%, you should at least clarify your made up math.
Molly Moon — oral was on the last page, the rate NWO topic-shifts I can understand your confusion, but yep, this is that thread.
Fact: If sex were only for reproduction, humans would be like cats. Every time the male cat’s penis enters the female cat’s vagina, the barbs on his penis causes her to ovulate and get pregnant. EVERY. FUCKING. TIME (well, unless either of them is spayed/neutered).
Even female bonobos and most other female primates (our closest living relatives) have HUGE ASS SWELLINGS and go into “estrus” when they are ovulating.
Humans are not like this at all.
Hence, humans obviously are not made to have sex be for reproduction ONLY, otherwise we would have a set “heat” schedule and our bodies would get pregnant the second we had sex.
Also, there would be no homosexuality, bisexuality or sexual behaviors that involve non-genital-sex because there would be no reason for it. Masturbation would literally not exist.
And yet……
Sexual pleasure is for bonding, stress relief, boredom relief, and it can be with the aim of reproduction (although those of us who are barely fertile or infertile can attest that we still like sexual pleasure even though pregnancy is probably not going to be on the radar).
And hell, I like having sex WHILE pregnant, and you can’t make pregnant people MORE pregnant.
Therefore, sex is for all sorts of things, not reproduction-only. The end.