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 Kitteh’s Unpaid Help: Yeah, I figured that. He probably shows up on film discussion sites and goes “Why are you all talking about films, I demand you talk about goats!” or something of the sort.
Thanks, Marie!
::sporfle:: and I don’t even want to think about why he’d want to talk about goats.
OT: I love goats.
http://i.imgur.com/nvysK5b.gif
I met a goat once at the Collingwood Children’s Farm. She’d been born with three legs. Her name, unsurprisingly, was Tripod.
Tripod.
<3
That is all.
There’s a meeting of the minds of Meanypants Mountain? I know I’m late, but I’m in. I can bring cold pizza and everything!
Well, it’s morning and I’m off to work soon. Your wonderful home (that somehow fits on my monitor) makes insomnia fun!
Have a good night/evening/whatever time it is where you*re at.
Have a good day, TomBcat! 🙂 Go forth with the power of the FGETC.
RavenSongXia: @hellkell I didn’t wave it away.
Yes you did. You did it in this post where your repsonse to refutational evidence was to say, “That doesn’t count”.
That is nothing more than waving it away, just as this is: And aside from TomBCat’s list, I don’t see any solid proof that female cheaters are predominately portrayed more sympathetically than male cheaters.
I’m certainly not saying there aren’t examples of men who are pardoned unfairly over women, either.
No, you are saying it doesn’t matter that there is contradictory evidence, becuase MEN!
You don’t see it because you don’t want to see it.
Confirmation bias, you can haz.
You are also being fundamentally dishonest. You don’t take Seth MacFarlane seriously, but you use him to support your claim, and so expect us to take him seriously.
Imagine that… a MRA talking about his wang. I think all those MRA’s that sent me pictures of there peckers may have been a herald to this great article… and no I don’t want to show you them either but they are nothing to write home about.
katz: I highly approve of that Harold Lloyd short.
Kitteh’s: Hello!
Raven: At the age of 30, my brothers will have to put their lives on hold b/c of this
Whuh? I don’t know of any country which has a mandatory draft which kicks in at 30. So either you are confused (to be charitable) or they are all somehow privileged enough to get a 12 year deferment, which isn’t an effective exemption.
And (with a lot of experience; with a lot of armies), people who are more than about 22 are lousy draftees, which is why deferments of more than about 4 years tend to equal exemptions, or being sent to OCS.
I call shenannigans (esp. because the rest of that post; and some others, are suddenly full of, “gotchas”).
Raven: Feministsaresexist doesn’t do this. She identifies as egalitarian, not MRA.
What’s in a name? She’s an MRA. I can’t imagine why she doesn’t want to call herself one.
There isn’t much statistical data he distorts here. It’s about media representation. He’s compiling clips from film, TV, etc. of examples that are harmful towards men, while saying that constantly reiterating the message “men are primarily abusers” creates a dissonance. Seriously. It’s as simple as that.
And selection of material can never be used to distort the facts (e.g. your studies on DV, which claim half is inititated/perpetrated by women).
We accept that women can be misogynistic towards other women.
Unless they call themselves “egalitarian”, because the right packaging changes the message, right?
And although I’m a critic of feminism, it doesn’t mean I don’t believe that misogynists are worthy of ridicule.
Because there is value and merit to hating women, right?
So because this person dares to explore the kinks behind this situation
The fuck? Rape is not a kink. Finding someone who is passed out drunk and fucking them isn’t a “kink” it’s a crime.
You sound like the lawyer in Canada who argued his client hadn’t committed rape because he didn’t know she was drunk; he thought she was dead, and so it wasn’t rape, merely necrophilia. (the Judge said, no, and he was convicted of rape).
@kirbywarp, that post was much more nuanced than that, if you’d even bother to read it.
Please explain what you see as the nuanced arguments he uses.
You guys repeatedly attempt to silence my arguments with that and “mansplaining” w/o even trying to see me eye-to-eye. That’s gaslighting.
No. What we didn’t do is say, “DUDE! I never thought of that; you are SO right!”. It’s not that we didn’t take you at face value. It’s that we did. You just don’t like the facts, and pretend that by repeating the statement (I can’t call it an argument), “you are wrong; look I have people who agree with me”, you are somehow validated. It ain’t so. There are people who think the earth is flat, or that Thatcher made Britain Great Again, or that Reagan never raised taxes, or that Islam Wants to Destroy US! I am not required to, “try to see [them] eye-to-eye,” because they are (wait for it)… WRONG.
I’m so sorry to hear that. =[ I hope you’re doing well. That’s incredibly messed up.
@pecunium The “I didn’t wave it away” was toward hellkell’s assertion that the cougar trope was only offensive towards women’s sexuality. http://manboobz.com/2013/04/08/an-unsolicited-update-from-paul-elams-pnis/comment-page-3/#comment-283060 Her opinion doesn’t count as “refutational evidence.”
And I conceded that there was contradictory evidence, but they were the exceptions to the general rule. It doesn’t change the trend that women are less likely to be punished harshly over wrongdoing than men. This isn’t merely cultural, either. Men serve longer sentences than women over the same crimes. Female abusers that are reported on the news are more likely to be protrayed sympathetically than male abusers.
@Argenti Aertheri
The study in question has to do with non-reciprocal DV. I think that’s right on the point for you.
LaightTempest, are you the same person as Ravens whatsit?
LaightTempest, why do you think women are punished less harshly for the same crimes than men? Provide citations please, and back up your arguments. (If you did that earlier, a link to your earlier comment will suffice.) In particular, do you have any citations in support of this:
Oh gods, I don’t even have to check to reply about the study (perks of having written abstracts I guess)
According to the 70~ words of the abstract devoted to the results section, 50%~ of DV is reciprocal, of the rest, women perpetrate 70% of it.
70% of 50% = .7 * .5 = .35 = 35%
But yes, the pronouns here suggest that you’re also Raven, and socking like that is not exactly approved of.
Cloudiah was it you that offered to find the study if I wanted it? Because now I’m curious how they managed this (I have suspicions of the sample being college undergrads at one university and the usual generalization errors resulting from those sorts of studies)
Argenti, yeah, just email me the cites of the studies you want and I’ll see what I can do.
p.s. The Straus one at least was based on college undergrads, but over many countries as I recall.
Lol, never mind, it’s free access. Give me a min to read it in full.
Thanks though!
Note one, they’re using another group’s data, from a survey on adolescents. (But hey, the data they used form it is the 18-28 age group and “most” DV is in that range, so maybe not a problem)
Note two, “and then specific types of relationships (primarily important ones) were selected and more detailed questions were developed to gather more information” We have a problem. You selected certain types of relationships to focus on…heterosexual ones with reported violence. Well okay, violence is the point here, but why exclude non-heterosexual relationships? (Also, OH HAI your cis centric approach, big surprise there)
Note not relevant, I’ll be doing this one chunk at a time cuz iPad, sorry for the incoming wall of comments.