Oh, joy! A Voice for Men has now published what is possibly the most ridiculous thing ever written by a human being. Here, from an article titled MGTOW re-understood, is what some dude named Russ Lindquist calls his “ode of MGTOW.”
When in the course of widespread misandrist tyranny, it becomes necessary for men to dissolve the social solder, and reverse the spiritual mutilation which has stuck and imperiled them, so inequitably, to the whines and whims of women. These men must, perhaps, reinvent the wheel of free-association.
Oh MRA dudes, don’t even try to write fancy. Clearly, you can’t handle fancy.
Let it be clear that a man has a right to go his on way. Therefore, let modern men acknowledge and accept – as tearfully as they might – that far too many women, for far too long, have far too well assumed the role of nothing but shined, shaven social-succubi who reflect all of mens vices yet none of mens virtue. Further, these succubi (desirous of everything and deserving of nothing) can offer men nothing but the role of a masochistic self-indentured-servant: he is to work a job he hates; he is to earn money that she spends; he is to live far less comfortably; he is to die far sooner.
A big shout-out to all the “shined, shaven social-succubi” reading this now!
Let each man reject this poisonously pink proposition; let each man end, in whatever way he sees fit, the misandrist fem-anesthetization that is, now, generations old; let each man choose, instead, to live a life of self-direction, self-control, self-reliance and personal responsibility–even if such self-respect means that he must wholly abandon such soul-striping social roles as, for example, womyn’s unpaid bodyguard, womyn’s unpaid moving-company, womyn’s unpaid therapist, womyn’s unpaid accountant, womyn’s financial-lust-object.
I’m sorry, I only made it about a third of the way through this paragraph. I’m sort of stuck on “misandrist fem-anesthetization.”
Men deserve better than these “womyn” are offering. Men have a right to go their own way.
Please, please, please just GO already. Don’t tantalize us like this, you Men Going Their Own Way! JUST GO.
I can only imagine how much more painful this process must be in romance language-speaking parts of the world. At least we have a language without grammatical genders to deal with.
And kind of off topic, but Rush Limbaugh has now joined the ranks of right-wing shitheads calling women’s suffrage a mistake.
Shade — but feminist is a word, and would’ve made sense in context (oh no, not context!) Also, do you mind being called Shade, or should I write it out?
PsychoDan — idk about the romance languages, but the parent of them, Latin, has neuter nouns (and neuter means genderless here). They mostly refer to concepts, not things, btu they exist.
Nah, “Shade” is fine, that’s usually what I go by in normal conversation. My screen name just has that extra bit because it works better than just a random everyday word (that in the roleplaying context it originated from isn’t exactly a rare name choice either).
And I was thinking more of like.. feminist, but as a verb, as in the act of “making” someone into a feminist. Which would fit with their concept of feminism; people “corrupting” women to feminism and “ruining” them.
I dunno, maybe i’m just talking rubbish. 😛 It just looks like a sentence that someone thought up, but instead of reordering to make verb use unnecessary or using “feminist”, they just ran with the nearest sounding verb they could think of. “Feminist” would certainly make sense in context, but even for an MRA you would think that word choice would be obvious, so there must be a reason for not using it.
I should totally stop overthinking anything an MRA says. 😛
You’d rather be seen as a huge male vagina twit by supplicating to your bitch wife than to grow a spine and be a healthy man who dominates women. I can only imagine how big of a self-loathing piece of shit you’ve got to be to choose to be a bitch’s slave.
Sincerely,
Your missing balls at MANHOOD101.COM
‘If only we would behave like semi-sentient blow-up dolls…they’d be happy.’
It must be embarrassing for women to know they can’t even compete with blow-up dolls for men’s attention—LOL. But it’s men with the attitude problems, right?
I think it would be a very good idea to invite him onto Have I Got News For You. Might cause him to rethink his ideas a little lot.
… ‘little’ was supposed to be strikethrough.
Argenti:
There’s a difference between being ‘feminine’ (womanly) and feminist (gender supremacy). Women outside the Anglosphere understand the difference—which is why men choose to marry them instead.
I’m from Portugal and Portuguese is very gendered, but I don’t think it’s so much the nouns as it is the articles. For instance, “o” and “a” are both like the English “the”, but “o” is masculine, while “a” is feminine.
Of course there are also gendered nouns, and those can be quite annoying to de-gender, but I think the articles are the biggest problem.
Eric:
If you’re into dolls, why should we care? One of my good friends is an infantilist, nbd….AND he’s also kind, considerate, smart, funny, great company, and has good taste in TV shows. (Also a devout Christian.) I love this dude. Because kink is fine. Being a giant freaking tool isn’t.
Anyway, one of my cats is striped. Is his soul striped too? How do I find out?
Ignoring your unsurprisingly wrong definition of feminist, I’m well aware feminist and feminine mean different things, that was the entire point of questioning your use of “feminise” (it means “to make feminine” not “to make feminist”).
Also, today in MRA land, we have FOREIGN BRIDES! (Haven’t had a FOREIGN BRIDE MRA in a few weeks now…)
creativewritingstudent —
<del>strike-out</del>Jacobb, is the extra b for extra bullshit?
Eric, I thought you were busy GYOW. If you want to play with dolls, that’s cool. We’ve got a regular troll around here who’s into that.
It must be embarrassing to do all this foot stomping about going only to find no one cares.
Ooh, not one but two trolls at once!
(Rubs hands in glee, pops a pan of spanikopita in the oven)
(I know people usually talk about making popcorn, but we’ve got spanikopita!)
Hellkat:
No, I asked a pertinent question. You grrrlz think MGTOWs are male pigs. You want us to go away. So we did. Why do all feel the need to attack us constantly and beg for our attention?
What gives you the idea everyone on this blog is a “grrlz”? Also, who came here again? No one is begging for your attention. Don’t you have somewhere else to be? Some kind of going your own way type of thing?
I don’t really think much about MGTOWers, except to wonder idly why they don’t … go away.
I started to answer this one way, but I realized this is, like, several layers of fail packed in a short space. I almost want to admire it.
“It must be embarrassing for women to know that X” presupposes that:
a) X is true
b) X is bad
c) X is women’s fault (all women! everywhere! all the time!)
For all of which, please show your work.
“…can’t even compete with blow-up dolls for men’s attention”:
a) Some women couldn’t care less about men’s (sexual or romantic) attention, because they are asexual, or lesbian, or bisexual and monogamous and currently partnered with a woman, etc.
b) Others don’t care about other men because they are in relationships already, with men who have made their preferences clear.
c) Gaining the attention of *a* man is a very different thing from gaining the attention of *all men*. The existence of men who would rather have a doll does not mean that women can’t find other men who disagree.
d) Gaining the attention of any man is not necessarily best framed as a competition. “Ooooh, Sally, too bad! You were so close, but you only got a 9.7 in the swimsuit competition and Ginger’s 9.9 is enough to put her over the top.” That doesn’t really match any sexual or romantic thing I’ve heard about.
e) Also, it’s interesting that men aren’t supposed to (don’t have to?) compete for women’s attention, in this world view. That’s not how MRAs usually argue.
f) “can’t *even* compete” I dunno, is there anything that women are supposed to compete with for men’s attention? “You think you can compete with the NFL playoffs? Hell, you can’t even compete with blow-up dolls!” Something about the word “even” just doesn’t seem right, but I can’t put my finger on it.
“But it’s men with the attitude problems, right?”:
a) implies that if some men are criticized about their attitude, that the existence of “bad” women makes that criticism wrong
b) implies that the people here think *all men* have attitude problems
Eric: first, it’s hellkell. Second, you came here. Why is that?
No one is begging attention from your or any other man going his own way. In fact, it would awesome if you’d go.
No one here thinks MGTOW are pigs. That would be devoting too much thought to them.
Cloudiah, I love spanikopita!
hellkell, I will fax you some when it’s done. Would anyone else like a square of spanikopita? It’ll be done in about 20 minutes.
Why should I be embarassed that a stranger prefers dolls over me? I suppose that should be some sort of slight on me like “hur hur, I prefer plastic over your grotesque form!” But I don’t really see that. Because I’m not enough of a self centered tool to think a stranger’s sexuality has anything to do with me.
Yum! I would love one.
Thanks, Cloudiah! I miss Greek food, Texas is not exactly a hotbed of it.
Snowy, any minute now…
@eric:
“It must be embarrassing for women to know they can’t even compete with blow-up dolls for men’s attention—LOL. But it’s men with the attitude problems, right?”
Well, if the men in question aren’t interested in actual human company and all that entails they are welcome to have a blow up doll even though I think it’s safe to say that most well adjusted individuals don’t prefer inanimate objects to actual companionship with real flesh and blood human beings. Personally, I can’t think of a better example of a crippling emotional intimacy issue than that.