Regular readers of this blog, for better or worse, know one thing that makes “Men’s Human Rights Activist” Paul Elam’s penis happy: The prospect of harassing feminists. He is, after all, the man who wrote of one feminist that “that the idea of fucking your shit up gives me an erection.”
Now Mr. Elam has given us a rather more complete account of what it is that pleases his penis. I’m not sure there was any great demand for this information, but he has chosen to release it, and so here we are.
In a post with the tasteful title “on tits, ass and fucktards,” Elam informs the world that he is in fact a fan of the first two items in this list – that is, tits and ass. He is also, he goes on to explain, a lover of
Sorry, I have to stop for a moment to remind you that you are about to read about things that give Paul Elam — yes THAT Paul Elam — a boner.
I will not think any less of you if you stop reading right here.
If you are ready and willing to continue, here we go:
I like well-formed thighs that lead up to the promise land, and smooth knees above shapely calves. Of course, all that combined with a woman’s pretty face is a crowning glory; full lips that promise supple kisses and great blow jobs, clear eyes and unblemished skin. All this combines to make a woman utterly fuckable, and visually that is what I like most of all. I like to look at women that are little fuckmuffins.
Yes, he actually wrote all that, attached his name to it, and posted it for other people to see.
But as much as Elam likes to look at “little fuckmuffins” he does not actually seem to like most of them very much.
After roughly 150 words devoted mostly to cataloguing his favorite female body parts, Elam evidently runs out of nice things to say about women, and so he returns again to his favorite pastime, devoting the bulk of the post to a rant explaining how much he hates “feminist fucktards,” traditionalist women, and women with Facebook accounts.
While happy enough with “fuckmuffins [who] are sexually liberated and adventurous” and who “like to please and be pleased,” Elam informs the world that he feels no such love for all those awful “fuckmuffins” who “liv[e] life with prudish sticks up their asses made from the same wood that forms the chips on their shoulders.”
He’s also mighty pissed at all those who aren’t interested in hearing him expound at length on what his penis likes.
Of the now almost endless list of things that have grown annoyingly stupid and sanctimonious about feminism is the Victorianesque shaming of my sexual programming as a man. Even with the so called “sex positive” feminists, the most hypocritical assholes of them all, the only positive sexuality they embrace is that of women. To them, male sexuality, in all its glory, is something to be buried, controlled and allowed to surface only when it serves the sexual needs of some narcissistic, horny, self-absorbed little “sex positive” princess.
Unfortunately, more traditional-minded women aren’t much interested in hearing about his penis either. And for some reason they, like feminists, think that there might be some sort of connection between men and rape.
Who are those traditionalists? You will know them by their obsequious silence while feminists shame men for committing the scurrilous act of looking at women sexually. Or better yet, as they join in with their “men can stop rape” bedfellows to twist and distort the natural inclinations of young men with Puritan sexual guilt that marches in lockstep with the feminist hatred of male sexuality.
Elam stops for a moment to reassure his readers that despite all that stuff about “well-formed thighs” and blow-job lips he prefers Good Women to mere “fuckmuffins.”
Now, all that being said, is woman-as-fuckmuffin all I care about? Hardly. As a matter of fact, I would throw fuckmuffin to the curb faster than you can say “patriarchy” to spend time with a woman of good character and intelligence. I have learned in life that my dick has a healthy agenda for humanity, but not necessarily for me. So as my values have matured, so has my taste in women.
Heck, it turns out he actually sort of hates “fuckmuffin.” After all, he tells us,
fuckmuffin … is prone to act indignant when she feels sexualized (by the wrong guy). She can become so angry at being “objectified” that you can see her tits shake right through that tight sweater with the neckline that plunges to the vicinity of her toes.
And then he compares her to a bug:
Time and experience will lead [men] to understand that fuckmuffin should be regarded with same respect as you would afford a stinging insect.
Basically, he explains, the only problem with lustful young men who ogle women is that they haven’t learned to hate women enough quite yet. And so women shouldn’t complain when young guys stare at them. Or when they don’t. As far as I can figure it, he thinks women shouldn’t ever complain about anything.
Leave [young men] the fuck alone. There is nothing wrong with them. Nothing needs to be fixed. If you want to help a young man like that, just start encouraging him to connect the dots between fuckmuffin’s propensity to take her own picture and post it to Facebook four times a day and her ultimate tendency to make him miserable. Eventually he will get the connection. And if he doesn’t, maybe that makes him happy. Either way, it is none of your fucking business.
And so ends what’s probably the strangest work of erotica I think I’ve ever read.
The problem is you think re-linking to the same TV tropes page constitutes an argument. There are lots of tropes out there. If I linked to White is Evil* trope or whatever, would that prove everyone who wears white is evil, or that that color is even used to symbolize evil in most media?
*Trope name may be slightly off due to my bad memory
Yes, but you don’t seem to understand how the humor here (if we can call it humor, which is a dubious proposition) works.
Wife rapes husband? This is funny because it’s backwards, hahaha! Ha. Ha. Fucking. Ha.
Wife brutalizes husband? This is funny because it’s backwards! Ha! Ha. So. Goddamned. Not. Funny. At. All.
This is not a trope. This is the inversion of a trope.
TVTropes is a wiki-style user-created site, and in my experience they’re full of Nice Guy half-way to MRA whiners.
So naturally there’s a ‘what about the menz’ page.
But if you surf it too hard you realize that most of the humor is because this is ‘backwards.’ BECAUSE IT’S SUPPOSED TO BE THE OTHER WAY AROUND, YOU GUIZE!!!!!
Do you see how that actually builds a foundation of misogyny, not misandry?
So, you are pointing me to one tv tropes link, telling me it’s all there(I looked at it, btw.) and that proves…what exactly? The site has…how many tropes? It describes one stereotypical way women and men interact in movies and TV. One.
I’d like to read it again and give other examples, but the site is not loading for some reason.
So, what about women who are expected to endure any mistreatment and to ‘fix’ the man, which is usually what this means in the end.
Women have to be better than men.
Women are weaker than men. (which is why on TV a man hitting a woman is worse than a woman hitting a man. Women hitting women, on the other hand, is considered sexy, and a joke. Men hitting each other is heroic (sometimes funny)).
Can’t help it, because he’s a man.
It’s the woman’s job to basically pick up where the mothers are done.
And yes, the role of a man is often to do moronic things, but it is the woman’s job to forgive.
Also the article clearly states that tropes on cheating are to be found elsewhere.
I’m not entirely sure what you want you want to prove anymore.
The thing is,the different human cultures of Earth have always had different ideas on when childhood ends and adulthood begins. Adoloscence and “teenagers”, mind you, is mostly the invention of WASP Americans at the turn of the 20th century, originally for purely economic reasons i.e. labor unions. As a 2002 article in the Philippine Star (google it if you want) goes, “There were no teenagers in Rizal’s time”. Which is why I am honestly shocked that there is always such a big hullabaloo by affluent Westerners, particularly suburban Americans, over the “loss/end of innocence” and all that sky-is-falling paranoia over “kids growing up much too fast” when all that’s really happening is merely a reversion to type as just recently as only a few centuries ago our collective ancestors were already coming of age at around the same ages. Im fact is even to be expected, what with all the chemicals and hormones in the food and beverages, the information in the media, and the radiation/radioactivity everywhere in the environment/ecosystem. Hopefully, this paradigm will finally die off at last in the US (and thus by extension in all of those countries aping the US) when all of the ABaby Boomers lose control of the American establishment and take their 1950’s Pleasantville delusions of reality with them.
Just to add on my previous point to anyone who might be bugged by it:
That his teenage depression is not serious compared to others is a part of the plot, it should of course be taken seriously.
Also, Raven, if something is a bad example it can’t very well be used to prove a point.
Thank you so much for mentioning all of those people in the tech industry. I’ll definitely show those pictures to my father.
The most reliable hadith collections – Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim – confirm that she was 6 at the time of marriage and 9 at the time of the consummation of her marriage (i.e. when she lost her virginity to Muhammad).
But if you surf it too hard you realize that most of the humor is because this is ‘backwards.’ BECAUSE IT’S SUPPOSED TO BE THE OTHER WAY AROUND, YOU GUIZE!!!!!
Do you see how that actually builds a foundation of misogyny, not misandry?
To build on this point, the use of humorous female-on-male violence normalizes the non-humorous use of male-on-female violence. The use of violence at all is shown as solving problems, particularly problems between intimates, and the fact that it’s often fictionally female-on-male is a wink to the reality that it’s usually male-on-female.
If you tell a joke with a misogynistic subtext (ie. that men beat women a lot, lol) you are participating in misogyny, even if the text of the joke is thinly veiled with violence against men. It’s like telling a joke where the punchline is that a black person didn’t steal something; by joking about the opposite case, it implies that theft is the “norm” or the typical case, which is clearly racist.* The punchline is meant to be surprising or shocking; nothing is surprising about men beating women, so humorists use women beating men to amuse the audience with the wacky gender reversal.
*insert usual caveat that race != gender, etc.
I don’t want my eyes anymore.
Bagelsan, excellent unpacking.
Thank you, Howard, lovely pithy way of putting it yourself. 🙂
Howard and Bagelsan, thanks for giving me an excellent example of ‘how to get at what’s bugging me about this’.
@ Argenti
No worries.
@ Bagelsan
Thanks for doing that so I don’t have to.
@ Raven
I’m not sure if you’re disingenuous or just kind of dumb, but either way, your argument is really dumb.
It’s so tempting to use, but TVTropes makes a bad source.
@Faze
I think Light Is Not Good is what you’re thinking of. Of course white = evil wouldn’t be an absolute everywhere, but since a considerable amount of creators use it over the much more obvious black = evil, it’s now become a recognizable concept all on its own.
Same w/ the Double Standard tropes inflicted on men. It used to be an edgy “Take that!” tactic to highlight why doing these thing to women were wrong. But now it’s so prevalent it’s no longer a parody of the original statement, it’s a statement all on its own. Another example – the Bumbling Dad used to be a counterreaction to the “Leave It to Beaver” father archetype; the head of the family, always rational and knowledgeable. Nowadays the latter is so out of use, it’s antiquated.
@Howard B
The inversion IS what’s key here, but like I said, it is sexist on both sides: no woman is supposedly strong enough to harm a man, so any man weak enough to be harmed by a woman isn’t a real man.
So because TVTropers acknowledge that sexism affects BOTH men and women, they’re “MRA whiners”? Check out the Gender Dynamics index, and the Always Male/Always Female indexes. They extensively cover and discuss positive and negative portrayals of these tropes, and why it hurts both sexes in many cases.
@Bagelsan
One flaw in your argument there; in reality female-on-male domestic violence happens just as often as male-on-female. HUGE LINK DUMP AHEAD
Women commit half of all partner violence and are just as controlling as men. http://www.unh.edu/news/cj_nr/2006/may/em_060519male.cfm?type=n, http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/ID41E2.pdf
Almost one out of four relationships are violent, half of which is reciprocal, with women as the perpetrators in 70% of nonreciprocal violence. http://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/abs/10.2105/AJPH.2005.079020
The same research which is used to say that a woman is severely assaulted by her husband/boyfriend every 15 second in this country, also indicated that a man is severely assaulted by his wife/girlfriend every 14.6 seconds.
http://feministsaresexist.tumblr.com/post/30950141583/abusedmen-org-what-domestic-violence-presenters-wont
The same research which is used to say that a woman is severely assaulted by her husband/boyfriend every 15 second in this country, also indicated that a man is severely assaulted by his wife/girlfriend every 14.6 seconds. http://news.ufl.edu/2006/07/13/women-attackers/, http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/06/070625111433.htm
While men are less likely to report violence (http://thedailycougar.com/2010/04/21/study-examines-domestic-violence/), which distorts crime data, virtually all randomized sociological surveys show women initiate domestic violence as often as men and use weapons more than men, that men suffer one-third of injuries, and that self-defense explains only a small portion of domestic violence by either sex. http://www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm, http://www.breakingthescience.org/RichardGelles_MissingPersonsOfDV.php
And despite all of this, we still have people believing that men are more violent than women. We still ignore the discussion of female-on-male violence (http://www.law.fsu.edu/Journals/lawreview/downloads/304/kelly.pdf, http://siryouarebeingmocked.tumblr.com/post/41650997794/cdc-national-intimate-partner-and-sexual, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gF6xNzMxUYY), cheer for abusive women or laugh at abused men (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LlFAd4YdQks). And while feminism doesn’t advocate outright erasure of male DV victims, you still openly deny the sheer amount of battered husbands out there. That, and your insistence that the “woman are innocent, men are strong and violent” stereotype ONLY hurts women is just as bad.
Do we need a “No Public Dumping” sign?
Yes.
Please stop with this bullshit.
Oh yeah, and your super funny “what about the menz?!?!?” Gaslighting.
http://permutationofninjas.tumblr.com/post/21542661943/on-gaslighting-and-why-what-about-teh-menz-is-a
Have fun in moderation with that link dump.
Dave, could you just not let it through?
Oh, look, it’s learned some terms. Fuck off, Raven. All you’re doing is one big what about the men.
I love how MRAs randomly capitalize words for emphasis. Maybe we should teach them how to do italics?
Cassandra, they’re education-proof, why bother?