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.
Wait, I missed the bit (prolly ‘cos of eye-glazing) in Tommy’s tl:dr where he equated cat ownership* with boredom/dullness/whatever.
Hmm … so being a writer and artist and generally creative person who’s rarely if ever bored, with friends around the world (online and off), who’s in exactly the relationship** zie’s always wanted … is negated by being a cat person?
PffffffffffffffffffLOL!
*with apologies to kitties. I know it’s not ownership, but the Knob from Space doesn’t seem to.
**with a lovable, loving man WHO HAS GORGEOUS LONG CURLY HAIR.
Hey Tom? You’re half right. The part about mice is correct. You read your link though? Because *drum roll*
CORRELATION IS NOT CAUSATION
Also, completely wrong on the results, assuming it is the causal factor and not the reverse. It’s entirely possible that the mental illnesses in question make exposure more likely, and none of them involve “making the human behave in a similarly drunk slovenly manner, to be disorganised and vulnerable enough where they feel like they need a cat for company, thus, the cat gaining access to the human’s food.”
Tommy’s prolly pissed that no cat wants to get close enough to him to give him cat scratch fever, or anything else.
If I were a cat, I’d stay clear of him…if for no other reason than his lack of a genuine sense of humor.
Hell, if I were bedrock I’d make the effort to steer clear of him.
Break ranks with whom? What in the hell are you talking about? Not a rhetorical question. Huh?
Considering how you so thoroughly misunderstood the very study you go on and on about all over the internet, it’s unlikely that anyone is going to take your little jabs about toxoplasmosis seriously. And when I hear someone making weak, dull jokes and comments about that illness in particular with regard to their ideological opponents I just hear the nasty homophobes of the 80s sneering at AIDS patients. There’s a history there. Look it up. (And then have someone else explain it to you, because your reading comprehension is so poor that you took a small self-reported poll of fully orgasmic women and turned it into a seminal (ZOOOING!) study of women hooked to “brain scans” faking every vocalization and basically having no fun at all in bed.)
We’re all still waiting on your responses to those various points re: the Frigid Faking Bitches brainscan fuckstudy that changed the world.
I asked once if you have any inkling of what your obsession with the particular things you’re obsessed with makes you look like to the outside world, and I’m dead serious in asking that again. You know that you don’t come off as an activist getting at the truth no matter the cost to himself, right? That you simply look like someone who has weird, sad hang-ups?
Apparently hangups about baldness cause misogyny, rage, sense of humor loss, and frivolous lawsuits. Damn, we better get working on a better cure for baldness before Tom tries to invade Poland.
Obviously sense of humor loss. Keeps him from appreciating Cheech and Chong.
Imagine being deeply sensitive about the unfairness of judgment and jokes about male pattern baldness, a merely physical thing that can’t be helped, but not seeing for a split second how that sort of thing is the poisoned air girls and women are forced to breathe from birth.
Ooh, Tom’s back! I wonder if he’ll ever get around to addressing my questions about his “study…” Probably not. Ah well.
😛 Is Tom trying to recruit people again? How cute.
@HM:
It is weird how suddenly his attitude changes when it becomes about him. Apparently joking around (or not) about people being whores, gold diggers, crazy cat ladies brought on by cat piss, and so on are all fail game.
Mention a lack of hair and it’s on like Donky Kong.
That, or misogyny, rage, sense of humour deficit and bringing frivolous lawsuits cause premature baldness.
Don’t be silly, kittehs. Obviously whores and Page 3 girls who refuse to model for free cause baldness.
Since we’re all whores (even those of us who aren’t penguins), does that mean I’ve helped make Tommy go bald?
Cool.
I made him go bald(er) by commenting on his baldness the first time. I’m rather proud of having discovered such an easy way to make him throw a tantrum, actually.
::high fives Cassandra::
Smooches!
(For the kitties, and for everyone who isn’t Tom.)
Smooches back!
(I’d say the kitties send smooches too, but that’d be stretching the truth.)
HM,
I can’t find the study I read about about previously – of brain scans revealing all of women’s vocalizations during sex are fake, only the study asking women, where most of them admit making fake noises during sex.
Either way, considering women’s exceptionally poor concordance with what they say their vaginas like compared to what vaginal plethysmographs show their vaginas actually like – around 26%, compared to men’s 66%…
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2811244/
… and the social pressure and economic gains for women to vocalize during sex, then the chances are that a lot more women are making entirely fake noises during intercourse than care to admit it.
Is it all women? All of the time?
I’ve had two or three smaller women make some strange electrically shocked type noises along with orgasm which seem genuine (definitely not following a script) shortly before or after point of entry – but as for the moaning, or yessing – all fake (in my opinion).
I will be investigating for this documwntary, if women who orgasm more – by whatever means – tell better jokes.
If you’re too poor a communicator to be able to tell a joke, then maybe you’re too poor a sexual communicator to be able to accurately vocalize what you want a man to do to make you orgasm during sex, or vice versa.
Telling a joke, involves telling the truth on some level – so it’s a good start.
What’s this?? Tom Martin is trying to control women’s bodies again? I am shocked. SHOCKED.
Don’t flatter yourself, Tom.
You might be in the running for ‘most annoying person who refuses to go away and keeps posting here.’ But, yanno, you’re a buzzing noise in our ears, the background noise of sexism, always trying to cut women down. You’re a symptom of a problem.
We aren’t raging at you, Tom. We’re holding you up as an example, showing other clueless sexists what they could look like if they let that hate fester.
And it’s working.
What arguments? You don’t make any.
Here’s how it goes.
TM: Women are gold-diggers, I can prove it!
MB: How?
TM: With SCIENCE!
MB: What kind of science? How will you control the variables? What are your operational definitions? How will you get subjects to consent in advance? What is your control group to establish the baselines? Etc..
TM: I don’t need that, because women are gold-diggers, and I will prove it.
TM: Women have very limited rights in Saudi Arabia? Because they like it that way, and force men to deny them rights.
TM: All women are whores because in the past men did things.
MB: Women were prevented from doing them, and lots of the things women did are ignored.
TM: That’s because women are whores.
And so on. Those are what you call arguments. We call it nonsense.
So did the courts. I wonder if your lack of Scalply Piliosity (go on, be an autodidact for us) might not be the self-inflicted stress and trauma.
Tom really wants an award, huh? OK. Worst Salesman of the Year!
How’s that debt repayment coming along?
Blowup doll technology has really improved.
I wonder if being in the same room as Tom voids the warranty.