When you look at the above picture — a group portrait of the Congressional freshman class of 2013 — what’s the first thing that pops into your head? Maybe something along the lines of “there sure are a lot of white dudes in that picture!”
Not if you’re “Emmanuel Goldstein” over at Roosh V’s Return of Kings blog. No, he looked at that same picture and thought: American women sure are a bunch of worthless attention whores!
Why? Because some of the women in the picture have the temerity to wear … bright colors!
[N]ot one man appears in bright red, blue, pink or yellow. For the men, it gets about as radical as a light grey suit … The women, on the other hand, have never met a gauche shade of neon they wouldn’t wear. Why are American women so hell bent on attention whoring, precisely in the places where they say they want to be taken seriously? Why do women ‘fight for equality’ by swapping outfits with Bozo the Clown? Why are old white women so desperate to show us their wrinkly cleavage?
I’m not exactly sure how you’re defining “cleavage” here, EG, but I’m not really seeing a lot of it in this picture. Well, none, really. None cleavage. I see one outfit, possibly two, that might under some circumstances reveal a small amount of cleavage.
Not that it really matters, as EG’s outrage is purely for show.
He quotes the late paleo-con Lawrence Auster, who also professed to be similarly outraged by women and their terrible breast-baring clothes.
The way many women dress today, with half their breasts exposed, is an expression of total disrespect for men. Men are left with three possible responses. To grab the woman, which is illegal; to ogle the woman, which is socially unacceptable; or to affect not to notice the woman at all, which is emasculating. A culture that normalizes such female behavior—i.e. not only not noticing or objecting to it, but prohibiting any objection to it—is extremely sick.
Really? Men suffer because sometimes they see cleavage and they’re not allowed to grope or drool? Oh, you poor, poor fellows! Should I prepare the fainting couch?
EG then turns to Laura Woods, the self-proclaimed Thinking Housewife, who once declared
revealing dress in professional settings [to be] a last-ditch effort by women to salvage their femininity. They are living daily lives of masculine aggression and drive. They are pressured to destroy their inherent selflessness and desire to serve. They make their breasts appear overblown, near-to-bursting balloons as a way of diverting attention from what they have become.
Near-to-bursting balloons? Apparently Woods has been watching too much office-themed porn.
Naturally, EG agrees wholeheartedly with Woods:
Hers may be the most potent explanation yet. I have surmised as much about the ubiquity of the color hot pink, as a microcosm of this drive, and it’s popularity as a marketing tool to women. It is an impossibly ugly, tacky hue, yet women love it. These women are not feminine in any meaningful way, yet they think that having a vagina is something to be proud of. Wearing hot pink is akin to liking an anti-Kony group on Facebook to feel like you’re doing your part to fight genocide.
Wait, what?
Wearing hot pink is akin to liking an anti-Kony group on Facebook to feel like you’re doing your part to fight genocide.
I’m tempted to stop here, because there’s no way he can get any dumber than this.
But then I remember that I forgot to mention the one man who EG sees as the “male analog to the women I describe.” That is, the male analog to those whorish congresswomen and their oh-so-revealing pantsuits. His name, EG tells us, is
Buzz Bissinger, a GQ contributor who later checked into rehab for a shopping addiction. … Oh, it turns out he’s had some homosexual encounters as well. I’d love to see a straight man test the bounds of ‘equality,’ and dress like these buffoons, and still keep his job.
Damn those bisexual men and their bisexual style privilege! Straight men truly are the mostest oppressed of the most oppressed!
Anyway, here are a couple of pictures of Mr. Bissinger, the male analog, evidently taken while he was on the job:
As you may have noticed, he’s not exactly the “male analog” to the pantsuited congresswomen above, given that in the middle picture there he seems to be wearing NOTHING BUT HIS UNDERPANTS AND SOME WRISTBANDS.
You don’t see that a lot in the Congressional Women’s Caucus.
Umm, I guess he’s never seen a picture of Bozo the Clown. (Don’t click that if you don’t want to see a clown)
I’m not a huge fan of Hillary Clinton, but I am surprised they didn’t mention her since MRAs generally have such a hate crush on her. I mean, those pantsuits!
uh huh…and if the women WERE dressed in black and grey it would have been….women aren’t feminine!!!!!eleventy!!!!! Why are they trying to be like men!!!!!???? Be more fluffy damnit and stop trying to steal our jobs!
Also talk about catty….I thought only women were supposed to be like that? Sorry if catty is problematic…it just really amuses and disgusts me what hypocrates these people are
Yep, in the 80’s, misogynists would make fun of shoulder pads in women’s suits, because that meant the women were too masculine and phony. How dare they pretend to have large, square shaped shoulders!
Don’t let women watch Dynasty or they might decide to wear shoulder pads, and women that wear shoulder pads are man haters!
You’re right, though, that it’s just as bad for women to wear feminine coded clothing, too, at least in business offices or in Congress. That means they are making a big deal about being women and trying to get attention. The only correct way to win at this game is for women to just not be in Congress or board rooms at all. That’s what EG is really complaining about, women having positions of authority, but he’s too chicken to come out and say it.
All of this also ties in with his EG’s ageism.
He thinks old women shouldn’t be in positions of power, because they’re not HAWT. But if a younger, sexier woman had the job, that means she just used her looks to get power and she’s too inexperienced for it. There is no correct age for a woman to have power.
@Thebionicmommy Of course the logic doesn’t go the other way! Men aren’t objects to be acted upon, only women are. [/bitter sarcasm]
Ugh.
(Hi! De-lurking for a moment.)
That’s a really good point. If a woman criticizes another woman’s looks, then she’s being catty. If a man says the same thing, though, he’s just “telling it like it is” and that’s not catty.
Bionicmommy—UHG!! That reminds me of my MIL boyfriend who was ranting about the woman who was moderating the presidential debates last year…..he was like she’s ugly and old! I so wanted to tell him to go hug a cactus….
“Every bit of clothing ought to make you pretty /
You can cut the clothing, grey is such a pity. . .”
It’s a little disturbing how fast he moves from “congresswomen” to “people I want to bang.”
Not that there’s anything wrong with wanting to bang your congresscritter, I guess.
I feel for you in that situation. Why does the debate moderator have to be young and sexy? Wait, why does a woman moderating the debates have to be young and sexy? Of course it’s okay for a man to be old, because he is distinguished and his looks are irrelevant to the job.
It reminds me of people that said they didn’t want to vote for Claire McCaskill because her face has wrinkles. Umm, yeah, that kind of comes with the territory of aging and having decades of experience as a lawyer. If she were to get a face lift, though, she would be criticized even more. The nerve of some women, being older and yet refusing to be invisible!
Y’all need to stop posting counter examples in every thread! It’s ruining their reputation for not fact-checking if you can find such things with a preliminary google search or in the manboobz comment sections.
And lmao, Don Cherry, he’s pretty much the quintessential example here. No one beats Don Cherry for his fashion sensations.
Totally off topic, but I noticed this political commentary on r/mr and had to share:
So insightful.
And fascism is about faces!!!
It’s rocket science!
Socialism is about PARTIEZ!!!
Arranged by height, maybe?
Bionicmommy-He thought the weather girl on channel 5 should have been doing the debates*eyeroll* Oh and women are the shallow ones!
Hypnotism is about living in a society run by hypnotists.
To prevent the spread of cooties?
@David
What is hypnotism about, now that you mention it?
Hypnotism is the worship of sleep, obviously. Mmmm, sleep.
And fascism is about having a face.
…Totally ninja’d.
Your eyelids are becoming very heavy.
Come to think of it, my eyelids are becoming very heavy.
Hmm… -isms. I can think of several that fit this obvious definition of obvious.
Sexism – is about sexual intercourse, colloquially known as sex.
Externalism – is about external things, like trees (external to a house), or clothing (external to a body), or rain (external to a cloud).
No wait, my words don’t follow that naming convention…
Definition clean-up!
crotalism
loxoscleism
aphorism
latrodectism
priaprism
…
…
Prism