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.
@katz Because I MEANT TO KEEP IT LIKE THAT. Like cloudiah said, why in God’s name would anyone sock if they haven’t done anything wrong?! Who would be so fucking dense to try that? Apparently the general consensus here agreed it’s me!
@Shiraz You don’t think I don’t know that Maury screws with the tests and encourages the audience’s goading of the guests? He’s still sending a damning, disgusting message out there.
@Kittehs I’m sorry. It’s fucking humiliating to admit to that, even to a bunch of strangers on the internet. But hey. I’m a dunce, an absolute dunce. Mission accomplished.
@cloudiah Seriously? How were they not credible sources? You do realize waving me off by saying I cited Youtube is not a plausible explanation.
He was, once, a half a step up from Springer (think people screaming, and that being the sole point because you could never catch anything about wtf they’re saying as every other words is bleeped). Maury’s more like one word a “sentence” is bleeped. Mostly still people screaming about who’s cheating and who’s having who’s kid and a metric fuckton of “he’s cheating on me with a man?!?”
Totally a credible source!
Day time talk shows, they suck.
“@Kittehs I’m sorry. It’s fucking humiliating to admit to that, even to a bunch of strangers on the internet. But hey. I’m a dunce, an absolute dunce. Mission accomplished.”
Really? Lots of us regulars, me included, have changed names and had WordPress flick back and forth, or it just puts up our names from other sites, and sometimes we get asked “Hey, is that you, XYZ?” – especially if the gravatar’s recognisable. What’s so humiliating about saying “Argh, Raven’s my other handle, sorry!”
See? It just recorded me under my previous name ‘cos I forgot to change it here.
Wow, Raven/Laight sure is dramatic.
*looks over Laight/Raven’s work* No. If this is your best, I would hate to see your worst. D+
D+? That’s generous.
Why? You’re really going to deny academic papers, studies, and direct side-by-side comparisons that show, clear as day, this unequal treatment between men and women?
And @Kittehs you’re really not getting it? When all of you switch handles it doesn’t matter because you all know each other anyway. But I had meant to set a dichotomy between this handle and Raven.
You know what? I don’t know why it’s that embarrassing to admit it. It just is.
Argenti, again, big thanks for hauling into that study and breaking it down for the rest of us.
Because I’ve suspected for a long time that the study (which every MRA hauls out) consists of bullshit. And I think we knew that it was largely about reciprocal violence.
But when you break out every single peice that’s wrong with it, it begins to look like it was cherry-picked solely to come up with that oft-repeated conclusion… women are just as bad as men.
RavenLaight: OK, just gonna put this here one more time. Whether you like it or not, this trope exists.
And… Who said it didn’t?
What we dispute (and you handwave away) is the merit of your claim that this is the dominant trope
And no, TVTropes isn’t a citation. It’s a bunch of people (various stripes) giving their personal opinions about things. It’s not anything close to valid research (same for Cosmo, CNN, etc.).
Maury Povich? You are trying to cite his audience as representative.
Come on.
Pecunium asked me to show my work, I did my best. That is all.
This is your best? That’s sad; because even Ruby did better.
Once again, real easy to snark at questionable media sources. What about the news articles and papers that prove men serve longer sentences than women for the same crimes?
Well, you did sock for no reason, so you’re admitting to either being incredibly dense or having done something wrong.
Anyway, as soon as you began socking, you were indeed doing something wrong–pretending to be someone else–doubly so when people asked if you were Raven and you didn’t admit it. Turns out you’re not actually allowed to pretend to be someone else just because you’re losing an argument.
And you’re indeed incredibly dense because you then responded to comments directed at your original handle.
Because I MEANT TO KEEP IT LIKE THAT. Like cloudiah said, why in God’s name would anyone sock if they haven’t done anything wrong?! Who would be so fucking dense to try that? Apparently the general consensus here agreed it’s me!
Keep it like what? You were laight, then you were Raven, now you are Laight again. All you needed to do, to avoid socking, was, say, “I changed my handle”.
You didn’t. When called on it, you said nothing. It wasn’t until the evidence was tallied that you ‘fessed.
Samples of credible sources, apparently:
CNN
Daily Mail
Cosmo
YouTube
TV Tropes
That’s right, Cosmo!
And sure, a few things from .edu sources, but without any argument about HOW they support your contentions. Citations are not a substitute for making an argument. Credible citations can support an argument, but they don’t make it for you.
But at this point, your credibility around here is shot, for reasons other people have already explained.
I’m sorry; is there an issue w/ accessing those PDFs and simply reading what they had to say? And sites like YT and TVTropes – although TVT acts as a wiki-like page, they still list all the abundant examples where that trope has been notably used. They’re not filled with wishy-washy references that could be interpreted loosely (each page already has a Your Mileage May Vary page for that, anyway). And the YT video simply illustrates the horribleness that is that app, nothing more or less.
Finally, the news articles on crime – those are the manifestations of my point. They clearly show how much women serve compared to men, for the same deed done. This prejudice is undeniable.
So, LaightTempest was Raven? I couldn’t tell exactly.
oops, nvm xie was. Still leaving that citation needed thing to see if I got the link thingy to work 😉
Citation greatly needed.
oh, xie wasn’t banned for socking. In that case, raven/laighttempest, just stare at that citation needed gif until you actually site something. And for a claim like the one I just quoted, you’re going to need something a hell a lot more credible than cosmo.
Marie, the Cosmo articles didn’t have anything to do with men and women serving unequal sentences. Speaking of which, there is still undeniable proof that female criminals are treated more leniently than male criminals. Or can you for some reason not access the PDF files for these studies and the news articles?
RavenLaight: Why? You’re really going to deny academic papers, studies, and direct side-by-side comparisons that show, clear as day, this unequal treatment between men and women?
Again, the issue isn’t, “are men and women treated unequally”, but why. And your assertions as to what the studies say isn’t all that well supported (see Argenti on how you either mistook 35 percent for 70 percent, or just took an MRM reference as true without double checking it), to say nothing of your explanation of “what it means” being completely unsupported.
Forgive us, but we’ve done this dance before, and so far you aren’t showing us any new steps.
“Once again, real easy to snark at questionable media sources. What about the news articles and papers that prove men serve longer sentences than women for the same crimes?”
Because it has fuck all to do with how cheating men versus women are viewed? And no one appears to be in the mood to amuse your goal post shifting?
Also, last time this came up, iirc, consensus was that there is a sentencing disparity but the difference is far more pronounced when you look at race. And no body was denying that, just ignoring your dancing goal post.
Okay, take what I have to say with a grain of salt because I can’t remember the source for this.
But I do remember something about gender disparity in sentences for men and women… and how male judges often gave female offenders less time than female judges did.
So… assuming Laight is right about this one tiny detail (I don’t think zie’s right about the cheating thing), it still wouldn’t be about misandry! It would be about the supposedly “benevolent” sexism that views women as less of a threat than men.
Fade, I don’t have a source handy either, but I’m pretty sure you’re right about this — it’s male judges who are more likely to be lenient towards women.
I think there may have been some discussion of all this on Alas, a blog?
I don’t think anyone is claiming there isn’t a sentencing disparity for many crimes, but it comes from a combination of outdated chivalry/viewing women as weak-minded children in adult’s bodies, and is not helped by the fact that men commit the majority of most crimes so male crime is viewed as a bigger problem needing harsher punishments (particularly, of course, for men of color). Being viewed as weak-minded children is not something that advantages women over men as a whole, even if it may occasionally help some women who commit crimes.
In other words, your facts do not really support your argument — to the extent you’ve even made an argument.
Kind of ninja’d by Fade there, should have refreshed the page.
And sorry for triple posting, but the thing that really burns me up about MRAs is that they look at sentencing disparities and think “How can we make women serve more time in prison?” Most of us here, I suspect, would look at the same thing and think about how to reduce crime by offering people meaningful opportunities, fighting poverty and racism, etc.; and by figuring out better ways to rehabilitate prisoners, rather than merely punishing them.
Over on r/mr, on a thread about equal pay, they were arguing in favor of making sure more women died in workplace fatalities. I kid you fucking not.