Back in the day – way, way back in the day – dudes opposed to women’s suffrage loved to depict suffragettes as ugly spinsters (that is, when they weren’t depicting them as sexy young women using their feminine wiles to manipulate men into supporting suffrage). We looked at some examples of this yesterday and noted that, when it comes to dismissing feminists as uggos, some things never change.
But why, oh why, are feminists so (allegedly) ugly? Or, to turn the question around, why are so many (allegedly) ugly women (allegedly) drawn to feminism?
Well, we’re in luck, because some manosphere dickwads have stepped forward to provide us with possible explanations.
Over on Freedom Twenty-Five, the “red pill” Casanova who calls himself Frost offers this theory:
Feminism is the set of ideologies whose aim is to redistribute the natural allocation of access to desirable men. It is Marxism in the Sexual, rather than Economic Marketplace.
Frost is so proud of this sentence of his that he puts it in bold, as I have. He continues:
The ultimate goal of the Feminist is to create a world in which all women are as hideous and awful and dead inside as they are, so that everyone can have an equal timeshare in the alpha harems, and everyone’s fatherless offspring can be raised by the same uninspired bureaucrats in the same grey-walled, concrete and plate-glass buildings.
I can confirm that this is indeed the ultimate goal of feminism; we talk about it at all the secret meetings. The penultimate goal? To get Sleater-Kinney back together again.
Frost breaks it down:
– Feminists tend to be some combination of fat, old, ugly, abrasive, and slutty.
– Feminists want to convince men that we should be attracted to fat, old, ugly, abrasive sluts.
– Feminists want to convince women that it is OK for them to be fat, old, ugly, abrasive sluts. They want desirable women to become fat, old, ugly, abrasive sluts, so that the feminists no longer look so bad in comparison.
– Related to (1) and (2), Feminists want to convince men and women that it is immoral for men to not be attracted to fat, old, ugly, abrasive sluts.
This is why Feminism is working so passionately to ruin American women. [Who benefits] from the widespread adoption of feminist beliefs that destroy our once-slim, once-feminine, once-nurturing women? The answer, first and foremost, is the women who were already destroyed to begin with.
Feminists know that, in a monogamous world where everyone pairs up with an equally desirable mate, they could only ever earn the favour of weak, bottom-feeding men. Feminist ideology, i.e. the hysteric and childish whining about Patriarchy, Shaming Language, and Socially Constructed Gender Roles, is no more than the set of rationalizations with which they seek to drag the rest of womankind down to their level.
Over on the blog of a fellow named Anatoly Karlin, meanwhile, a commenter calling himself fcomp has a similar theory to explain why so many feminists are (allegedly) fat fatties.
If you think about it, there is a strong rationale [sic] self interest between feminism and the increase of female obesity. If feminism is to be defined as increasing the societal power of women, then it would serve them well for their to be more obese women.
Go on.
The desirability of a women to a man is far more objective then subjective. If women were to be, across the board, more attractive, if all women became, at minimum, 6s, men who ended up marrying 6s, the men who would be the lowest in male desirability in such a society, wouldn’t nearly be as unhappy as men who end up marrying 1s in our society.
I’m not quite sure that fcomp really understands how averages work. Lake Wobegon aside, you can’t actually have a world in which all women are above average in “objective” desirability.
The logical result of that, is that in such a beautiful society, ironically, the value of female beauty would become far less valuable, and beauty would be far less desired. If there isn’t a chance that one might end up with a landwhale, I suspect that most men would hardly bother with stuff like game and the like. I would imagine that such a society would experience little sexual discrimination, but at the same time, be very anti-female, in the sense that women who are competitive with men in economically productive fields would be quite successful, but at the same time, “feminine virtues”, a females capacity attracting men, the only area in which women surpass men, would be far less valued.
If all women are beautiful, then no women are beautiful?
There is a upper cap on female attractiveness, which are the feminine ideals hardwired into us by evolution, but there is no downward cap. … [F]eminism is intrinsically a downward trend because the only thing a beautiful women can do to that makes herself more desired in a society, is to reduce the amount of beauty in that society.
The blogger on whose blog this muddled comment was posted, Anatoly Karlin, is so impressed with fcomp’s theory that he highlights it in a post of his own, adding
This is why your typical Third Wave feminist or rape activist is fat, has a manjaw, or is otherwise unattractive.
If you are ugly, devaluing beauty is not bad evolutionary strategy.
On a blog called Misanthropy Today, meanwhile, Dan Y. is not only convinced that (most) feminists are ugly; he also seems bitter that anyone would dare criticize him for calling women ugly.
[M]ost women who try to guilt us out of using looks as a criterion for judgment tend to not be very attractive. It makes sense that someone lacking in a certain perceived quality would want to dissuade others from assigning value to that quality, and would want those who possessed that quality to be humble and not flaunt it. It also seems extremely self-centered and petty to try to convince others to think and feel a certain way just so we can marginalize our lesser qualities. …
Feminists’ cries of outrage at man’s obsession with physical beauty are not altruistic. They are … upset that other women are benefitting from a quality that they don’t and probably never will possess. Their own perceived value relative to better-looking women will inevitably increase if looks are dismissed as unimportant.
Apparently, suggesting there’s more to a person than conventional attractiveness = shallow and petty. But basing your judgment of a particular women largely on whether or not she gives you a boner is the height of sophistication.
As these guys show again and again, real ugliness is more than skin deep.
Says the man who obviously didn’t come in here to be civil, constructive, or legitimate. Pot, meet Kettle.
Oh, and not all of us are, or were, women at the time this article was posted four years ago. Commenters come and go, you see.
How dare we make comments that aren’t completely and totally civil, or not constructive, about a comment that some rando made saying we’re all hideous fat-monsters who no man would ever want to fuck because we’re (gasp) feminists! We should be ashamed of ourselves for daring to be so awful! [/sarcasm]
Of course, you can’t be bothered to actually explain what that logic is.
We obviously just have to take your word for it.
“You’re all just too stupid to follow this logical argument and don’t understand it, and that’s obviously why you don’t agree with the original comment.”
How very uncivil of you.
What an “ad hominem attack” actually is: “You’re [insult], therefore you’re wrong.”
What an “ad hominem attack” is NOT: “You’re wrong because X, Y, Z. And you’re [insult].”
You have fundamentally misunderstood what ad hominem actually is, you pickle-headed ninny-muggin.
Well, I feel I should defer to someone with your level of experience with the subject of “people who wish to be perceived to be intelligent”, considering your brilliant demonstration of one.
Says the poster who just said that an MRA who said that feminists are all out to make women ugly and unfuckable has a point, and we’re too stupid to understand their logic.
You know what they say about “assuming”, right? I mean, you’re sitting here assuming that you know more about us and our minds than we do right now, so surely you must know.
Unless you’re capable of reading our brain plasticity simply from posts we’ve written on a blog dedicated to making fun of misogynists.
Apparently not.
Yes, but those “types” don’t exist in a vacuum, broseph. Your “type” is influenced by things like the media, the way you were raised, your religion or lack thereof, etc.
“Types” aren’t something people just “have”. They’re informed.
Oh, and the “I get to reject you! Not the other way around!” thing is cute. Whatever helps you sleep at night, pookie.
First of all, I don’t consider someone a “decent” person if they feel the need to snub their nose at someone for making fun of someone for being a raging misogynist, instead of choosing to always engage with said raging misogynist as though their “arguments” are “valuable”, and thus worth a serious discussion.
Second of all, I also don’t consider someone a “decent” person if they feel like all people who have to put up with bigoted garbage every single day of their lives have to take it all in stride, or else they should be chastised for not being “civil” to people who obviously have no interest in being civil to them.
Third of all, I don’t consider someone a “decent” person if they want to side with said raging misogynist because “logic”, because there isn’t any “logic” known to me that would side with such nonsensical bigotry.
Fourth of all, no one here besides you cares about your penis.
Fifth of all, the fact that you think that we’d ever want to “pursue intimate connections” with someone who can’t even be bothered to read when a post was made before necroing it to waft their Unearned Superiority in our faces is laughable. You value yourself far too highly.
I believe I just demonstrated that concepts like “decency” and “physical attractiveness” is relative, but let’s continue, shall we?
I mean, fifty years ago, it was considered “indecent” for black people to use the same facilities as white people. Nowadays, it’s indecent for someone to think that way (out loud or in front of black people). We’re also bombarded with media that tells us that black people are unattractive, because we see things like natural black hairstyles deemed “unhygienic”, but when we see cornrows (or god forbid, dreadlocks) on a white model, suddenly it’s the next hottest thing that everyone’s doing.
Back in the early 1900’s, it was considered “indecent” for women to vote, and nowadays the “women” vote is something politicians scramble for, and it’s considered indecent to insult women as a group (out loud or in front of them). Back in the suffragette days, suffragettes were portrayed as being ugly old spinsters by propaganda posters, thus making them “unattractive” to men, despite what a majority of them looked like. Today, we see things like fat women, bisexual/pansexual women, women of color and such being portrayed in media as being “unattractive” to men.
And today, I consider it “indecent”, and highly unattractive, for a man to tell me he has no interest in me, despite the fact he’s scarcely worth the pixels on the blog he posted on to me, though he believes that I should be distraught that his opinion, the opinion of a man I’ve never met before, and likely never will (thank Aphrodite), is that I’m not worth his time.
I also consider it laughable that this man thinks that I should be oh-so-upset that he thinks I’m “indecent” for daring to not take an angry, petty, shallow, sexist man seriously enough to be “civil” to him.
Oh, sweetie, it’s cute you think this irrelevant little screed is worth a mic drop. Or that the fact that you don’t want to use your penis on us is an insult that should strike me to my very core.
And men like you have threatened to not “pursue intimate relationships” with women like me before, either women who are fat, women who are feminists, women who practice witchcraft, women who are genderflux, and women who are open and very much confident about these facts.
Sir, I encourage this line of thinking among men like you.
Please, continue to find me “indecent” and not worth your time. Don’t waste your time and my time with your nonsense. Shoo. Begone with you. I release you.
However, I’ve found that so many of you can’t seem to follow through with your “threats”, and apparently you are simply one more example. Here you are, saying you don’t think we’re worth your time for not being kind to a very unkind person who thinks we’re all fat uggos who aren’t worth his penis, and are therefore worthless, and yet, you felt it was worth your time to tell us what awful people we’re being, and how your time would also be wasted on us.
So, if we are so very truly not worth your time, then shoo.
Ladies why you not understand simple logic. Look it’s easy:
1. Penis
2. Decency
THEREFORE
Penis
Sorry if that was too hard to follow. Maybe take a logic class or logically understand male brain as it pertains to bonerific matters. Have you ever thought maybe you can be civil hello listen to me don’t walk away. You have to know penis requires attention or it become sad when ladies don’t hear me talk all the time every day. Look it’s easy to SAY about random caps that they don’t enhance male superpower but when you have SEEN boner truth you will somewhat now if assumed lady brain can not malfunction. I am truth. Superior knowledge and glorious penile understanding will for us all usher in times of ladies finally regret indecent behaviors and realize respects is earn truthfully should be frome male to lady whenever male says it can for what. See who’s laughing THEN. Haha check mate penis win again bye now ladies don’t cry for missed opportunity when penis male go to future robot to love okay bye.
FIN
http://i306.photobucket.com/albums/nn259/pitshade/FINs.jpg
FIN(s)
@ IP
*slow clap*
FIN
Future Robot! 😀
Thanks for the “civil” responses. I agree wholeheartedly none of you should care what I PERSONALLY think of you, since we don’t actually know one another. There was a bit of vitriol involved, though, wasn’t there? More rational folks will read the before & after and see the truth of the matter. It illustrates the point far more lucidly than a line by line attempt at repudiation could ever do.
I did not revive or “necro” this thread to waste my time.
I am a modern stand-in for Cassandra. I AM THE CANARY IN THE COAL MINE.
First comes my own restraint towards the formerly fairer sex. MRA is like a campfire left smouldering in a dry forest. The blaze is coming.
= NOT PENIS
I can’t engrish up the words for how I feel about this sentence.
Aw man! I missed this guy.
I’m curious. I’m a man, and I find that feminism addresses my needs very nicely. Specifically it provides me with the philosophical tools needed to confront damaging patriarchal expectations, and the mental tools to address my own harmful behaviour.
What does MRA have to offer me as a counterpoint? Right now all I’m seeing is someone whining and being mocked on the internet, and I have to be honest… it’s not a terribly convincing sales pitch.
FIN.
NNFASG:
More rational people have read this, and have found your post wanting.
*Giggles*
I’m positively quaking in my boots.
*Giggles*
Gosh, I missed this one! It’s certainly been a busy long weekend here.
Hello, @No Need for a Shallow Grave! (I hope you don’t mind if I shorten that, howabout “NoNeed”?)
You’ve made a fairly classical mistake here. You’ve come to a metaphorical bad-movie club, where people gather and watch terrible movies, and make fun of them. You know, like Mystery Science Theatre 3000. We see terrible things and then joke, throw popcorn, and generally have a good time about it.
This is normal human behaviour. You’ve come in, seen us mocking the movie, and decided to take it personally (perhaps you’re playing a bit part in the movie? The metaphor is stretching a bit thin!). You think we’re all just awful people because we just can’t take what we’re seeing seriously.
Does this mean we are indecent or terrible? Not at all. It means that we’re being indecent towards this subject matter, in this context, though, yes. Other subject and other contexts? You get different reactions.
It’s ridiculous to think that any expression of anger or mockery is inappropriate in any context. We’re well-rounded human beings.
As for your boner report; do you really want to be in a relationship with a woman who possesses no sense of outrage, or no sense of sarcasm or irony? Who’s always decent, all the time? If so, sir, I suggest that you don’t want a relationship with a human being, you want a status symbol. Women are humans, and humans do express outrage, hurt, and the most vivacious, indecent, ribald joy. Comes with the package.
(And yes, I’m fully aware that you’d be far less upset about women mocking, say, feminism, or something you disagree with. You’re only upset because we’re mocking something you personally hold to be true. If you’d like a discussion on why you’re wrong, I’m sure we can enter that discussion whenever you like! But I won’t drag that into the conversation at the moment. There’s enough to be said as it is!)
Welcome again. Sorry if you’ve had a rough welcome, but, well. You did sort of come looking for it.
I find that hard to believe.
Note for Newcomers
Comparing yourself to mythological characters is not a convincing argument or sympathetic statement! It is unlikely to make you look like the mythological character which you are comparing yourself too!
Unless it’s Narcissus, I guess. You can compare yourself to Narcissus all you like, and it would work!
You leave sweet little Cassandra out of it, she has had enough troubles on her own!
A double necro! That’s a bold move you don’t see every day!
I AM THE TURKEY IN THE SALT MINE.
IM THE CAT IN UR MINE
Aww, the previous necro seemed fun…
@Gravedigger. Ya know, the monster truck
So a massive disaster that kills many, injures many more, costs untold sums in property damage, and that everyone sees as a dangerous nuisance? So a raging sea of destruction exacerbated by humanity’s general irresponsibility? So the problem we address with a coordinated and cooperative effort from both the proper authorities and ordinary citizens? OK, I guess…
Oh, also:
The fuck does that mean? I musta missed some shit, cos that makes no sense
I AM THE POTOO IN THE DERP MINE
http://i.imgur.com/2Wf3vRi.jpg
Who wants to place bets that he comes back in November to triple-necro the thread?
I would, however, point out that making assessments of a person based solely on their comments on an internet blog is, itself, a sign of significant lack of cognitive abilities. Personally, I find making moral judgements about ANYONE to be somewhat repugnant. As a physician, I can say that a given behavior may not be healthy for you, but I have no right to say that a given behavior makes you a bad person. Or even an indecent person.
And:
IM THE LIGHTBULB IN URANUS!
(Posting this under older handle so that it will go through moderation and only see the light of day if David lets it through)
Reminded of this:
The previous necromancer was a bit more amusing than mister shallow grave here.
I mean.
IM THE SHARLET IN THE ICMI
There is a mistaken connection between my “shaming language” comment, and my interest in “decent people”. Take a good long look at my earlier post. I didn’t rail against anyone here specifically, but I find shaming language less useful and more off putting than dealing rationally and logically with any subject matter, especially one that rankles.
I am bemused at the idea, as a male that prefers the positive character traits of a person to be the pivotal reason to associate with them, as opposed to their physical attractiveness, that this preference would elicit controversy of any kind.
The mistake several posters made was reading that as:
:: IF you are a person using shaming language THEN you are not worthy of recognition as a human being at all.
Instead:
:: IF you are a person using shaming language, THEN consider voicing rational points X, Y, Z, THEN – STOP.
— & completely unrelated —
:: IF a person has a consistent set of core values that leads to their own success & happiness and ALSO the happiness & success of others as often as feasible, THEN I might want to hang out with them, romantically or otherwise.
Note the separate paragraphs. Not all men judge a prospective friend or lover or wife by looks alone, and this group includes me. And yet, several respondents blatantly lost control of themselves making that fallacious connection.
“= NOT PENIS” – I am a human being first, and a male second. For evolved people, their sexuality is managed as a part of themselves, not their primary mission or only topic of conversation.
I see numerous people everywhere, in jest or not, talk about “Misogyny” and in their very next sentence reduce the male perspective, regardless of merit, to…
“Boner”
You can’t see the rank hypocrisy in that? Welcome to Misandry!
The Cassandra angle is that according to the myth, here was a person who could state the obvious, and would not be believed regardless, because of her curse.
I can’t support everything that goes on in the Manosphere. But I see some of their points as valid, and the reception my comments have received ARE the evidence. I do believe some blatantly unattractive women are working tirelessly to needlessly damage relations between women and men. This does not mean I am in any way against UNIVERSAL HUMAN RIGHTS for everyone. I also see PUA and other hysteria from some MRA participants to be crass and damaging to what I see as their initial core cause; actual fairness and justice for everyone, including fathers in family courts.
More than just playing a bit part in a shadowplay, I gently prodded the bee’s nest and sadly found what I expected (outright Misandry). Curiously, I was never a fan of MS3000, because I was left with the impression that as corny as the subject movies could be, the “stars” making fart jokes and other inane commentary could do little better.
I am at once disappointed at most of the responses, and I also think it is fantastic. Thanks! Maybe in a few weeks, those “rational” folks I was talking about will review the tone of the comments and consider some changes.
The idea that it is somehow bad form to voice an opinion on an open thread when a person reads it and not only a few days after it is posted should perhaps be reconsidered. See you in November! 😀
@Axecalibur,
Thank you for the Johnny Cash song!
When the “male perspective” in question consists solely of unasked for opinions on the dateability, fuckability or marriageability of a woman, the there’s not much else to say besides “nobody cares about your stupid boner.”
I’m not looking to date, marry or fuck you. I doubt anyone else here is either. So why should we care about your perspective?
@weirwoodtreehugger
Why do you feel rejected by me personally? Trust me, I am not posting here looking for dates. Does the internet give you license to behave in a rude way?
I can assure you that all of my statements I have made here I would calmly and politely say in person.
Do you speak to others the way you post to me? In your family? At your job? To random strangers at a social gathering? I am always seeking to improve the way I communicate with people I care about, which basically includes everyone alive. Sometimes I stumble and fail.
THIS is what my purpose is in posting here and other places. MRA proponents often sound strident, and so do you. It isn’t improving the situation as I see it. I think you can do way better!
http://67.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m9hg4cnzU11qj4zs1o1_400.gif