Life is tough for dudes in our evil misandryarchy. Even dudes who just want to help littler dudes find themselves blocked by evil women.
Take, for example, the sad tale of a public-spirited MGTOWer who calls himself TheDisgruntledGentleman, and his thwarted attempt to join the Big Brother/Big Sister program. No, not the TV show, or the creepy dystopian leader/voyeur from 1984 — the mentoring program that pairs adults with at-risk kids. Let’s let him explain:
So, instead of just hand wringing about how males are targeted and denigrated within all aspects of life, I decided one way of trying to help would be to join the Big Brother Big Sister program. The first meeting I went to explained that there are twice as many boys looking for a match than there are girls. They said it was partly because more females than males volunteer. They didn’t mention how most boys have a mother in there life but no father because of the misandric divorce courts but I digress…
Oh, dear. We’re not off to a good start here.
Anyways, as part of the process, I had a one on one interview with a female member of the organisation to assess if I was suitable to be a Big, and if so, they wanted to know about me so they could match me with a little. I mentioned that I carry a firearm everywhere I legally can, I also wanted to know what protections were in place to protect me from unfounded accusations, and I expressed how I couldn’t be with a Little if his father had been forcibly removed from his life because of the vindictive actions of the mother. I think the final one sealed my fate however.
Yeah, why on earth would the program reject a gun-toting, woman-hating, self-described “disgruntled gentleman” whose only question for the organization, apparently, was about what would happen if he was accused of child molestation or abuse?
I’m not particularly upset at being rejected because after looking into it more, the activities deemed appropriate to do with your Little seem somewhat feminine, but it just further hammers home that even when you try to help because there are boys out there screaming for some positive male role models in there lives, you’re only allowed to show them masculine things that females deem are appropriate. It just makes me sick.
Hate to break it to you, dude, but you’re not actually a positive role model for anyone.
In the comments at MGTOWforums.com, where TheDisgruntledGentleman posted his tale of woe, others stepped forward to offer their own, er, critiques of the Big Brother program. “I’m really not surprised by the outcome of this at all,” wrote Mpav8r.
Basically, for our purposes, without intending any disrespect to the pious, we can compare the Big Brother service to a kind of prostitution agency, specializing in providing uber-manginas to attend to the fatherly duties of the harlot’s absconded alpha daddy, or the cuckolded beta wallet in exile; furthermore these manginas are free-range certified not to be paedophiles, or likely to have any real parental influence in lieu of the mother’s. Big Brothers is basically a volunteer organization that makes the logical connection between single moms and pathetic beta chumps trying to score brownie points, and attempts to exploit it for the perceived benefit of the children.
Most pathetic is the fact that these volunteers know for a fact that they will not be getting any tail as part of the deal. Unless you have a bleeding heart for abandoned bastards, you’d have to be a fool to waste your time on such a fool’s enterprise.
Based on what you said in your post, I would wager that the women in charge likely factored you as an armed misogynist pedophile with a chip on his shoulder. I would have gone wearing an old navy outfit and talked about flower arranging and self-esteem.
Relic, meanwhile, suggested that the best way to help out young boys today is for MGTOWers to keep being the woman-hating assholes they already are. Well, that’s a rough paraphrase. He phrased his advice slightly differently:
For me personally, I have zero interest in helping single mothers raise their kids. If she wanted a positive influence from a male, maybe she and her kind would not fuck us over at every turn so dad stays in the home. It’s only when society passes the breaking point things will get better for men. Stalling this only prolongs the suffering. Until then, I’m in the shadows.
I’m willing to bet that many men have been falsely accused of crimes trying to give back to these programs. No fucking way I would expose myself to that nightmare to help a single mother. Allow the whole thing to come crashing down while putting good information out there for truth seekers to get educated. It’s the absolute best thing we can do for boys.
I do agree that the best thing MGTOWers can do for boys is to stay as far away from them as possible.
Awwww… somebody’s angry their stereotypes don’t work…
Aw, someone’s sad that their trolling is a big pile of fail.
I am so impressed with the power and logic of your political argument. You’ve convinced me. I clearly must be wrong.
Pro-stupidity: How about you keep your weapons paranoia out of the question and concentrate on the fact that the man is clearly insane, dangerous, and hates women?
Speaking as someone who likes guns, and has been using them for more than 40 years, and spent more time sleeping with one in arms reach than a lot of people have spent sleeping with their partners (At a guess, I’ve spent between ten and fifteen years sleeping with a gun in arms reach. I’ve spent several months with an M-16 (not an AR-anything, an honest to goodness M-16A1, or A2) in my arms) … stick a bore-brush up your ass.
Because this dude, with his, “I carry a gun everywhere I legally can”, isn’t doing responsible gun ownership any favors.
We don’t need any “help” by you scaring off possible allies.
If this is scaring them off, we don’t fucking need them.
If tone-trolling people saying that irresponsible gun owners are a menace is your idea of being an ally, we don’t need you either.
So, again, stick a bore-brush up your ass.
People pop up several days late with the weirdest bigoted non sequitors. Is this “SOMEONE IS WRONG ON THE INTERNET” or just stupid?
Well so much for accepting dissident opinions in the hope of strengthening the anti-sexist movement.
Don’t worry. I’ll still defend you even if you won’t defend me.
You see, for some of us fighting the sexists is a principle, not a group cohesion thing or a convenience.
sorry you don’t agree.
6 East Movement
On this blog, it’s a necro meme all its own. Argenti has a gif of that, pity zie isn’t still up to use it!
Um… there were no dissenting opinions. There was ableism and tone trolling. Neither of those are actually opinions, they’re noise.
Feel free to offer up a critique besides “your small blog is magically scaring people away from… SOMETHING!!!! because you sound SCARY omg MENTALLY ILL PEOPLE ICK ICK ICK SCARY” and we might actually address it instead of laughing at you, but so far all you’ve done is fart at the end of a very long comment thread.
I’m so glad you dropped by to tell us this, Pro-Gun Fail. What part of “misogyny, I mock it” tripped you up?
It’s cute how this troll blithely assumes that some of us didn’t grow up around guns, hunt, soldier, etc. What an asshole.
—I do agree that the best thing MGTOWers can do for boys is to stay as far away from them as possible.—
Davey, the best thing you can do for boys is to stay far away from them too. You’d drill misandry into teir heads from Day 1.
OMG you guys are destroying feminism by failing to cater to the large and very influential anti-sexist and also armed to the teeth at all times and determined to tell everyone about it during volunteer interviews demographic. Shame on you.
Uh ok … considering the replies here, can you explain to me why that assumption of mine is wrong?
I have no problem with mocking misogyny. That’s why your title attracted me in first place.
I just wasn’t aware that other political assumptions were built in and required.
It’s funny how it’s us, and not the guy who compulsively needs to jump in and wank about how we shouldn’t be allowed to have a problem with guns, who are refusing to accept dissenting opinions and not putting feminism first.
Oh, cool, more tone trolling. That always leads to the troller being taken seriously.
About 110% sure “gun-toting” is in fact what attracted you in the first place.
Pro-stupidity: Well so much for accepting dissident opinions in the hope of strengthening the anti-sexist movement.
Don’t worry. I’ll still defend you even if you won’t defend me.
You see, for some of us fighting the sexists is a principle, not a group cohesion thing or a convenience.
sorry you don’t agree.
Such a nice glass of whine with your self-valorisation.
Where was the dissidence? What I saw was you accusing people of paranoia because this idiot said things which were stupid about weapons (and other things… but you, in your monomania about how Guns is Good, failed to notice that most of the thread was about those other things), and you think noticing people being stupid about weapons is folly.
You are giving gun-owners a bad name. With allies like you (and Wayne Pierre) we don’t need enemies.
How do you think waltzing in and insulting people is, strengthening the anti-sexist movement,? What I see is someone being stupid enough to alienate, rather than convince, followed up by an immediate dismissal of the actual discussion about sexists as being conducted by stupid people who don’t have your slavish love of guns; which has (as seen by your hyper-focus on the subject; again, one not shared by those you labled as paranoid) blinded you to any other merits in the comments made here.
After all, we are, as a group, here because of the misogyny, not the weaponry.
Uh ok … considering the replies here, can you explain to me why that assumption of mine is wrong?
That knee-jerk anti-gun paranoia is what the comments on this thread were about.
I just wasn’t aware that other political assumptions were built in and required.
Oh, the irony. This from someone who just told people to shut up about guns because that might scare people like you away from fighting sexism; even though its not just a convenience to you.
So which is it… sexism is the big target, or not ignoring firearms stupidity by someone applying to work with at risk youth is the critical topic in the world?
Because you seem to be the one with the litmus test.
BTW… is there some reason you ignored my comments? It’s not like I don’t know weapons, and its not like I don’t think this idiot, with his, “what protections do you provide me from accusations of doing something bad to the kids”, in the same breath he’s going on about how he’s always armed, isn’t something of a problematic poster child for concealed carry.
If someone was attracted to a blog for the misogyny-mocking you’d think they’d do some misogyny-mocking.
katz: Oh yeah. Pro-gun didn’t read the comments, s/he read the headline and assumed it was a buncha-gun haters bashing on the poor dude who is just in favor of carrying a gun everywhere; because… well he doesn’t seem to have a reason; but he does seem to have some serious problems with women; and some paranoia about being accused of doing bad things to kids.
So yeah, I’m sure he’s completely safe to have around some kid, while armed.
Simple fact, I don’t want some dude I can’t really vett hanging out with my kids, or my friends kids. So if I’m letting my kids have a “Big Brother”, I want them to vett that person for me. Having that person (with no other proof of qualification than some rudimentary background check [all the FLA requires to issue a permit good in 14 other states]) packing heat… not something I’m in favor of.
Uhhh… I wanted to. That’s why I clicked on the “mocking” link.
Unfortunately, the first thing I saw after that was stupid remarks about guns.
Don’t you also love the built-in assumption that everyone commenting here is USian and therefore if they’re not devoted to guns there’s something wrong with them?
Guess what, Pro Gun Dipshit, the USA =/= the world, or the internet, or even the commentariat on this blog, and yeah, there are a whole lot of countries where gun ownership is not the norm, and the USian situation does get the side-eye. So pull your head in with sneering at anyone who isn’t in love with the things.
Here’s the thing… If you spent some time here, and were respectful, and fucking introduced yourself, you could probably start talking about being “pro gun” without the angry responses. And you know, maybe you could consider actually addressing the OP. Do you think the Big Brother program is right to be suspicious of this dude? Weigh in!
I’m not saying there wouldn’t be pushback, there would, but if we knew you and trusted you as being an anti-misogyny co-traveller it wouldn’t be as hostile.
Instead, you come in as an unknown on a dead thread and are like “It’s me, listen to me, do as I say” and we say, understandably, “Fuck you.”
So apologize, or fuck off, is my advice. Actually, given your behavior I want to emphasize the FUCK OFF part of my message.
So,w hat political assumptions were those again?
Replies mostly to me? I smell some old socks here.
@ pecunium
There’s also the fact that has a grudge against women who’re divorced or separated from the father of their children + armed + has your child in their possession = potentially very bad situation in all kinds of ways. I’d rather not have my (hypothetical) kids held hostage, or have to deal with a heavily armed person who thinks I’m Satan’s minion who’s handing them back to me.
Unfortunately, the first thing I saw after that was stupid remarks about guns.
So, you think someone wearing a gun, who emphasizes he will wear it always and wants to be protected by liability by Big Brothers as well as not paired with any kid who had an evil mom who drove the father of the Little Brother away should have been welcomed with open arms by Big Brothers?
Poor Pro-guns. S/he came here to give us the good news, and we rejected it. Even those of us who are pro-gun rejected it.
Why? Because the base premise s/he made; that this post was all about the evils of guns, is wrong.
So all that anger, wasted. All that effort to rail at those who were too stupid to know better… all the vitriol ginned up to deal with the “knee-jerk anti-gun” responses wasted.
Because we didn’t respond to that. We responded to the tone-trolling, and the logical contradictions of hir actual arguments. All those matches, and not a good strawman to be seen.
hallelujah! The first reasonable reply!
Even if it does use childish name calling!
Thank you.
Also, all those opportunities to talk to another person who likes guns and is anti-sexism, wasted!
Cassandra: There’s also the fact that has a grudge against women who’re divorced or separated from the father of their children + armed + has your child in their possession = potentially very bad situation in all kinds of ways. I’d rather not have my (hypothetical) kids held hostage, or have to deal with a heavily armed person who thinks I’m Satan’s minion who’s handing them back to me.
Oh yeah. The serious level of problem with having that pile of obvious issues in BB is bad enough, but the guns? I’d refuse his ass. I might tell the cops that I had doubts, based on his comments, about his suitability for possession of a carry permit. Not because I’m against guns, but because he is exhibiting signs of paranoia, and paranoia and guns don’t mix well.
Cassandra – yeah, I’m getting a whiff of unwashed footwear here too, though I hadn’t spotted the part that zie was mostly replying to you. That, or you have the unfortunate condition called Troll Magnetitis!
So, Trolly McTrollsock, what were these “stupid remarks about guns” you’re whining about, and why do they matter more than the idea of a potentially violent, possibly sexually predatory, markedly misogynistic man trying to work with children, hmm?
The first thing you saw was a post a week old.
Anyone else imagining the process by which a person such as our dear tone troll might come across this post? Like, do you just Google “guns” and click every link, or do you Google “guns + misogyny-mocking”?
Protip: you want reasonable replies, don’t come in making stupid attacks on people.
I got a notification that PGAPWR was replying to me.
There was no name calling in my post.
FUCK OFF. Thanks, asshole. (That’s name calling, for future reference.)
@ pecunium
Yep. As you know I’m not a fan of guns (which is rather common among Brits), but there are many people who can carry guns without that fact making me feel alarmed. Someone who stinks of paranoia and conspiracy theories, though? That’s a bit worrying.
Well you were still the first reasonable reply. Regardless of which type of jerkdom you also indulged in.
Are you accusing me of childish name calling?
Not quite.
Lets review the evidence, shall we.
1: Rude entrance, with language pretty much guaranteed to offend.
2: Implicit premise in the argument which is not supported by the facts.
2a: Implication that thread not read, and response was formula
3 Accusation of sunshine feminism because of assumed facts in 2
4: Assertion this is all reasonable behavior, despite 2, and 2a.
So yes, I called you stupid. It wasn’t childish. It was actually reasoned. That you didn’t see the reasoning, well see facts 1-4. You came in looking for a fight. You got derision, excision and more detailed response than the merit of your words really earned.
You’ve still not actually responded to a single argument made to you, yet you are championing yourself as speaking “truth to power”, or some-such. So you think what you are doing is of merit, i.e. you support it.
So you are, objectively, pro-stupidity.
And Pro-stupidity has still not actually responded to anything of substance said to hir.
Do you think you hurt my feelings?
For those following along at home, if one were actually interested in having this conversation for real, you would say something like this:
YOU: Hi guys, great post and that guy should definitely not be around kids! I can’t believe he brought up being protected from false accusations; of course that’s a major red flag! But I think you might be too hard on the gun part. I often carry a concealed firearm and I am very careful about gun safety. Being a gun owner doesn’t make you automatically dangerous.
And then we could reply with something like this:
US: Sure, but if you mention that you carry a gun and you mention a hatred of divorced women and paranoia of false accusations, doesn’t that sound like a threat? You’re basically just announcing that you’re prepared to commit a crime.
And then you could say:
YOU: He would sound like he was prepared to commit a crime even if he didn’t mention the gun part, though. That isn’t what makes him dangerous.
And then we could reply to that and go back and forth in, you know, a conversation.
Yeah, pecunium, zie’s definitely replying to me. I’m getting WordPress notifications.
katz: ::applause::
I know Pierre’s taking a rest, but I get the feeling this one could be building up to a script.
I’m amused by the “NO ONE HAS A REASONABLE REPLY LOL U SUK I WANTED TO TALK BUT I CANT”
“Reasonable reply.”
“SOMEONE MADE A REASONABLE REPLY LOL”
“Anything to say other that “trolling” and “lol”?”
“NO LOL REASONABLE LOL INSULTING LOL”
@katz, A conversation???!!!??!?! What’s that? WHY???
Now now, Deoridhe, you have to remember that only Sir Trollsalot is allowed to be impolite.
*digs toe into the dirt* Awwww, but what if I ask really, really nicely?
::Deoridhe asks really, really nicely to be impolite::
::Kittehs’ head explodes::
😀
GREAT VOID OF THE UNIVERSE!
I can’t believe I actually saw a reasonable comment criticizing me on a political post on the Internet! And even said pretty much what I agree with!
Excuse me. I have to sit down.
The shock, you know?
I have a bit of experience having beliefs (indeed, beliefs that I consider a core part of my identity) be wildly unpopular in feminist circles, so I know how it goes. Basic principles:
1. Don’t come in with your unpopular belief. Focus on the common ground so you don’t just sound like a wanker.
2. Be prepared to politely, eloquently explain it in a non-confrontational way. Don’t just expect everyone to agree with you or complain if they don’t.
3. Understand that there are going to be people who will always disagree with you, sometimes vehemently, and who may be jerks about it. It’s OK. You don’t have to be their friend.
cloudiah: How does wordpress know it’s to you, as opposed to just a new comment? I don’t doubt you, I’d just don’t know how to set that up.
Pro-Gun, are you going to have this precious gun debate (even though that’s not what the OP is about) or are you just going to carry on with this pearl-necklace-clutching nonsense? It got old within about two comments, and you’re coming across as another in a long line of bog-standard trolls or sockpuppets. Say something substantive or piss off. Oh, and you might like to think about why you don’t get much interaction on the net. If you act like this on every blog you go to, it’s hardly surprising, now is it?