So when I was poking around on Roosh’s Return of Kings blog the other day I ran across a guest post from someone calling himself Samseau accusing feminists of using racism to exploit men – that is, of expertly manipulating men of different races to fight one another instead of standing firm against the evil feminists and their evil agenda.
The post, while purporting to be somehow “above” the issue of race, is a muddled mess full of “white men have it worst” nonsense like this:
[R]acial infighting between American men wouldn’t be so bad if it weren’t for the political consequences.
Women, if you haven’t noticed, do not fight with each other over racial conflicts. They might get angry over the past, but they are able to resolve all issues by agreeing on a scapegoat: the white man. Colored women will gladly forgive their white sisters, since, after all, it was the white man who oppressed women and minorities.
White men are the big, bad, evil masters, and as such, all females of different colors can agree to put aside their differences in order to bring the white man down.
Yes, he did indeed use the term “colored women.” Oh, but there’s more.
The election results show that decades of brainwashing young American boys has been an unqualified success. Rather than have boys be loyal to their gender, boys have instead been trained to be loyal to their race.
Little non-white boys at the tender age of 9 years are fed lies about how white male oppressors created their poor living conditions, while white boys are taught that they need to correct the injustices of their forefathers lest they be guilty with the indelible sin of white privilege. Female teachers use the appropriate shaming tactics on these young minds to imprint the intended desire for conflict.
All according to plan.
And more:
Men are pawns in the race game. Thus while American women feed themselves government largesse, jobs, university degrees, their husband’s money, and child support money, American men fight each other over table scraps.
But my favorite thing about this article is the little graph that Mr. Samseau made up to illustrate the REAL issues men face today.
Yep. Race is the least important issue, while “getting laid” is number one.
It’s a pretty revealing little chart, huh?
The comment section for the article – wade into this swamp at your own peril – is (predictably enough) filled with angry racists trying to explain why race really does matter. Others, meanwhile, seem upset that all this racism is getting in the way of the regular woman-bashing. Still others suggest that men of all races needed to understand the “root cause” of all our “multicultural problems.” That being … teh Jews.
My favorite comment of the bunch, though, has to be this, from Caliente, combining an astounding ignorance of history with some half-digested evo psych:
Btw the reason why there are practically no racist women is simple.
Males of mammals are territorial.
They naturally base they identity from bottom up: family,tribe,nation,race.And naturally react negative to males of different “tribe”.
Females at the same time are receptive to have sex with any males as long as they are alpha enough.
In 19 century whites fucked all the black women because they were alpha and they had recourses,just look at Brasil.Nowadays a feminist will be cheating on her white beta herbling with some black fitness coach because that is how her brain assumes alphaness.
Wow.
Glad we got that all settled!
*would also put him into the lying category.
Oh, and I made a pie chart: http://cheezburger.com/7001504000
I second that he is most likely a terrible person.
1. Dagrabbit is awesome.
2. My money for Demarcq’s identity is MRAL. I would do a stylometric analysis myself (with software, of course; I don’t know how to do that shit!) but I suspect that might involve actual work.
3. brd
Does anybody ever point out how feminism threatens or oppresses white dudes, or is it just assumed to be obvious?
WANT to flash your cash in a uniquely feminine way? Don’t want to rock the diamond-encrusted chains the boys do? Need your ICE to bring out your EYES? Try HERBLING!
HERBLING: it’s bling – for HER!
LOLWUT? I am not trying to liberate myself at anyone’s expense. However, it is pretty clear that other groups are doing precisely that by repeatedly mocking autistic men(without using the “autism” tag of course) for being socially inept and “creeeeepy”.
Intersectionalism is a great idea. If only people would actually go along with it instead of one group trying to get ahead at the expense of another. FYI, autistic people are the new blacks.
Lowquacks: Well done. Now we just need a poster of it.
Thanks for clearing up just how much of a shitweasle you are.
Demarcq, it’s called “intersectionality” and it’s you who is assuming we mean “autistic folks” when we talk about “creepy entitled fucks” or what have you. Autism does not cause you to be a misogynistic knob. There are both neurotypical and neuroatypical misogynistic knobs.
Imagine you’re very socially adept, for whatever reason, and you freak someone out by overstepping boundaries. When you learn about this, you could do a few things. One would be to accept the validity of the other person’s feelings, apologise if necessary, and endeavour not to do that again. Another is to complain that somehow people are discriminating against you for telling you when you’re being creepy and take to the internet to argue about it.
Iowquacks: If a guy is initiating an interaction with a woman or such an interaction is already underway and he oversteps the boundaries, then yes he *is* creepy.
That doesn’t change the fact that there really are women who label guys “creepy” simply because he is in her presence and his abnormal mannerisms make her uncomfortable.
@Katz
Thanks. That’s my old-timey radio advert madlib/formula.
The template is:
[rhetorical question with vaguely creepy wording emphasised] [another rhetorical question that outlines the niche of the product] [rhetorical question with a bad but self-satisfied pun] Try [PRODUCT NAME, where the first half of the name describes the market and the second the product]!
[PRODUCT NAME]: It’s [PRODUCT] for [MARKET]!
My kitty cats probably hear it the most, when I feed them in the mornings:
Are you an individual of the feline persuasion? D you love to eat, but the chow on the human table ain’t up to scratch? Do you want food for PAWS and TAILS, not FORKS and TABLES? Try CAT FOOD!
CAT FOOD: It’s food – for CATS!
I think you’re looking for an objective standard of “creepy” that doesn’t exist, dude.
“FYI, autistic people are the new blacks.”
To you sir, I offer a hearty dose of Fuck You — one of my cousins has two preteen boys, the older one is autistic, the latest example of being socially inept? He lectured his mother for a good twenty minutes about how lying to him about Santa is lying and thus wrong…and then realized that meant she’d bought his presents and told her she was very generous.
Note the vast difference between the hard and fast “lying is always wrong” and “I can overstep boundaries because I don’t know better”.
Also, seriously, go reread some of the comments people of color have made on this very thread — review the stories ranging from trouble finding foundation that matches, to systemic slave rape, to lynching. Get back to us when the killing of ASD people is seen as something to make a picnic and postcards out of.
Actually, don’t get back to us, just go.
For the rest of you @Anony_mmis has spent the night trying (and to some degree succeeding) to get #OpThunderbird trending — epically short version: indigenous and native women are raped and murdered at rates far surpassing rates for whites (not news to y’all, I’m sure) and anon is fed up. I’m sure Demarcq will find a way to spin this, but I really don’t care.
FFS I am 100% positive the diagnostic criteria for any autism type disorder (including autism) isn’t “Have you made any woman, at any time, feel creeped out”.
There are loads of people with autism who aren’t creepy at all. There are loads of guys without [insert whatever autism-linked mannerism here] who creep women out. Because being creepy isn’t fucking determined by whether the guy has autism or not.
I am only referring to cis-men for posting history reasons here.
The constant theme in the MRM seems to be that these men are owed sex. And that makes me want to scream.
I still think this is Om Nom, since the idea that women call men creepy because of prejudice against autistic people rather than because of anything the guys are actually doing was his hobbyhorse.
That’s a bit too coincidental, isn’t it? I haven’t seen that one trotted out here before, though I think Slavey was fond of the “you’re calling an innocent man sitting on the bus creepy for existing” line on occasion. I haven’t read many of the threads where Om Nom gets going, he was boring and pretentious without having the frothing tinfoil-hat wingnuttery of Slavey’s efforts.
Yeah, that’s really the only characteristic of his that I remember other than a love of big butts which he wouldn’t shut up about. He was basically what would happen if Diogenes tried to be funny after being raised in an isolation tank as part of of some sort of cruel experiment.
NWO’s obsession with creepy was more that it’s shaming language against men (similar to Steele) — he insisted that if you ask a random person to fill in the blank, they’d all say “man”. Said fill in the blank —
“There was this creepy [blank] at the bar” or something like that
I got answers like non-Euclidean geometry, because I have weird friends.
Afaik, NWO never took up the banner of ASD people are called creepy. It was very gendered to him.
In other things, is om nom short for something? Or a repeat sock I might recognize by another nym? I haven’t a clue who y’all are talking about!
Monsieur Sans Nom.
@melody:it reminds me of years ago when I was a peon in the insurance industry. One of the claims adjusters got very annoyed at someone complaining about the replacement value of their lost item vs. the original cost and the cost of their premiums. Quoth the adjuster: “This isn’t a bank, you know!”
I would suggest that the same theme is going around the head of MRAs, but I Do Not Want To Know anything about the deposits they think are contributing to their sex claim.
Argenti—Om Nom is short for the troll known as Monsieur Sans Nom.
Yes, I didn’t clarify that about Slavey – he didn’t bring non-neurotypical into it much, it was all Horrible Women Making Poor Men Die of Shame stuff.
“… if Diogenes tried to be funny after being raised in an isolation tank as part of of some sort of cruel experiment.”
… you mean he wasn’t?
Oh, Mister No Name, yep, om nom is funnier!
Compared to Om Nom Diogenes really has his finger on the pulse of pop culture. (Don’t get too excited, kid – consider how boring the person you’re being compared to is.)
Just wait, he’ll incorporate this into his next rant about eeevil feminists being out to get autistic men.