This won’t be news to a lot of you — I’m a little late getting to it — but our old pal Tom Martin, the repulsive British MRA celebrity, is actually going ahead with the somewhat baffling video “women and comedy” project he was babbling about in the comments here many months ago, when he was still allowed to comment here. Well, “actually going ahead with it” this August if he can get anyone else to agree to work for him for free minimum wage.
The documentary project is called “Laughing with Women” and, Martin explains, it will “investigat[e] if gold-digging impairs women’s joke-making ability, and if, when women reject gold-digging in all its forms, they can become instantly funnier.”
In case that didn’t make sense to you — don’t worry, that’s a completely natural reaction — Tom explains his, er, “logic” a bit further in a jobs listing he’s posted in hopes of finding a crew, which has already gotten a good deal of ridicule over at PZ Myers’ and on at least one comedy website.
Why are women, on average, slightly less funny than men? Does gold-digging in particular impede women’s joke-making ability? When women publicly reject gold-digging, do they become as funny, or even funnier than men?
In his numerous visits to Man Boobz, Martin expounded at length on the topic of gold-digging women, generally referring to them by his preferred term, the shorter and blunter “whores.” Martin has previously estimated that roughly 97% of women fit this description, and has suggested that female penguins are also whores. Frankly, once he gets going on the topic, it’s hard to shut him up, which is partly why he’s no longer welcome in the comments here.
In any case, this odd hypothesis will be tested, Martin says, with a “radical, and revealing street-based social experiment.”
Still puzzled? Mike Booth, the British video comedian behind SomeGreyBloke and Dan Cardamon, has managed to tease out a few more details from Martin (posting here as sexismBusters):
Martin is confident that his proposed video will blow the lid off this whole “women and gold-digging and comedy, no really, they’re connected” thing:
If the radical, and revealing street-based social experiment at the centre of our documentary proves gold-digging does make women less funny (as pre-production research suggests) then our findings will make headlines around the world, our film’s two minute teaser trailer attached to all those news and blog articles (Update: this advert alone has already been blogged and tweeted about by outraged PC types).
The full documentary will be shot to a broadcast-quality standard and format, giving mainstream television companies worldwide the opportunity to purchase broadcasting rights (if they’re feeling brave enough) whilst we maintain a virtually guaranteed revenue stream from our already established hardcore of supporters and fans within the non PC gender equality field around the world, who, along with everyone else, will be able to enjoy Laughing with Women on newly launched pay-per-view channel, Vimeo on Demand (VoD) – where VoD itself takes a very modest 10% cut. The documentary has the potential to be translated into several languages – gold-digging a familiar if hidden story in every country, until now.
In other words, it sounds like some sort of video gold mine.
So I’d recommend that all gold-digging women out there try to get in on the ground floor of this Tom Martin dude.
Oh, and speaking of Dan Cardamon, here’s the faux MRA’s take on the project:
CORRECTION: This post originally stated that Martin wouldnt’ be paying his crew, but he says he will be paying them minimum wage, so I’ve corrected the relevant passage above.
EDITED TO ADD: Tom has shown up in the comments, and I’m letting his comments through (for now at least), so if you have any questions for him, feel free to head to the comments to address him directly.
for those who were not big fans who eventually became massively disappointed, he famously said women were incapable of humor. Any humor, any woman, full stop
Did he say this? I don’t think he did. For future reference, it’s generally best to know what you’re talking about before you talk about it.
@Aaliyah: hey, i’ve dropped a few comments on your blog but they’re under Anonymous. You’ve got a nice MRA specimen over there BTW.
No, his actual statement was that funny women are mostly “hefty or dykey or Jewish” (as illustrated here. Which clearly makes it all better.
I’m assuming you didn’t show up here with the intention of acting like a pretentious asshole, but your comment really, really sounded that way.
…And here is my poor lost parenthesis: )
Congratulations hellkell! Hope it works and you feel good. I want a hysterectomy SO BAD and I know short of coming into a lot of money and travelling for it it’s not going to happen… tubal is also unlikely but more likely so I don’t know if I should try for that instead?
Anyway, I hope you’re OK with the lack of babies, I certainly sigh wistfully at the idea.
@katz
It is kind that you always return your parentheses when you lose them. 😛
Also, if funny women are ‘hefty or dykey or jewish’ why can’t I be more funny! ;( I’m a lesbian, but I feel the only humor I contribute is adding onto other people’s not thinking of my own.
Quick Tom Martin, who am I gold digging for this!!!!!!!!!!!eleven!!!!1
No, his actual statement was that funny women are mostly “hefty or dykey or Jewish” (as illustrated here. Which clearly makes it all better.
Not necessarily, but that’s completely different from what Howard Bannister said. Also, in a later video response he granted that some “pretty women” are funny, and his real point was that funny women employ traditionally male humor. You can agree or disagree as you will, but it’s a far cry from saying “no women are ever funny, full stop”. That’s a falsehood.
Heh. Apparently there was a post here on manboobz. But that was before I found my way here.
Apparently the manosphere liked that quote of his. Go figure.
PS: I used to be a big fan of Hitchens. I used to read all his stuff.
Learning that he was actually pretty much not what I wanted to be when I grew up, that was harsh.
Gee, did I misquote a misogynist? I will cry salt tears tonight, my friends.
Does it bother you that I misquoted a misogynist?
…
Fuck that fucking guy. Fuck him sideways.
Hitchens’ statement was also a falsehood, but somehow you’re totally willing to extend him a “you can agree or disagree”. Howard didn’t get the exact phrasing right, but for the love of God, the title of the article was “Why Women Aren’t Funny.”
@Howard Bannister
Wow. Eww on that guy you quoted. O_o. is that the poor misquoted misogynist in question? I kinda am distracted today
Marie, that is indeed the late Christopher Hitchens from his article “Why Women Aren’t Funny.”
That quote isn’t the worst part.
Chris Hitchens, MRA.
The most recent ones, right? Yup, just saw them.
Oh, and that’s tomek. He’s a troll who was banned from Feministe. And he’s probably the most annoying regular commentator I HAVE.
Re: HM — I think the TL;DR version sums to “men who complain about women faking orgasms need to take ‘be a better lover 101′” Also, if you want to end male circumcision you’d damn we’ll better be adamant about FGM as it removes more of the sensitive bits.
In short, that LONG anti-woman bit is a quote. Apparently one by Mr. Tom “97% of women are gold-diggers” Martin.
…That should be “have,” not “HAVE.” The anti-feminist Arbitrary Capitalization is getting to me. X_X
On the one hand, I want to be a little cautious here because I wouldn’t want anyone to get unfairly labeled a misogynist because of being misquoted. But what you said was close enough to hit the gist of it, and dissecting what exactly he meant by “women aren’t funny” is splitting hairs and there’s no possible interpretation where he isn’t a hideous misogynist.
And congrats hellkell! Glad it went well and hope your ballon deflates uneventfully.
Er, you’re right, katz, I think I phrased that poorly.
That second paragraph was meant to imply that what he said was worse than how I summed up, with the quotes to prove it. Instead it sounds like I am advocating misquoting.
Hasty words, I will always regret them!
Don’t misquote!
But Hitchen was totally dropping misogynistic turds all over the place!
EWWW I don’t think a silly, paranoid, insecure man challenging my views is sexy. And those aren’t actually my “views,” they’re basic reality on earth.
And yes, that long, long cut and paste of bizarre, left-field, paranoiac, terrified-of-female-sexuality claptrap (available at the link) is a series of quotes from this dopey guy. My point was not to address said well-covered phenomena (doesn’t everybody but…this guy already know this?) but to share more of his amazingly goofy views. Guess I got caught up in responding to them because they’re just so stupid I couldn’t help myself. Anyway, the TL;DR is that in addition to all the other hilarities, this guy haunts YouTube comments wailing about how women faking orgasms during penetrative sex drive men to drink and drugs and to hate themselves and woe, woe are men, because this is yet another way women oppress them.
And that he seems weirdly and hilariously obsessed with male sexual inadequacy and insecurities.
Not to worry, you’re all good.
Hitchens is actually rather misandric as well because he claims men are better comics because they are dumber (after saying that wit is an extension of intelligence. Logic – how does it work?). From the article Howard linked:
No one hates on men more than misogynists.
Gee, did I misquote a misogynist? I will cry salt tears tonight, my friends. Does it bother you that I misquoted a misogynist?
Well, since your hysterically labeling him a “misogynist” is predicated on the misquote, yes, it does bother me.
I also love how that flippant six-page essay has become Hitchens’ magnus opus in the minds of idiots. You do realize that magazines often assign topics, right? In fact, Hitchens essentially says as much in his memoir, Hitch-22.
But…but…Those sentences are right next to each other!
Hitchens is actually rather misandric as well because he claims men are better comics because they are dumber
Yes, this is because it was meant as a light-hearted speculative piece. Unfortunately, tone is lost on certain people, especially when something plays into their pet ideologies.