The gentlemen bloggers of the Manosphere — particularly those obsessed with pickup artistry, a.k.a. “game” — like to pretend that they’re part of some sort of reactionary intellectual renaissance. Indeed, some have even convinced themselves that they’re part of a new “dark enlightenment.”
These intellectual pretensions are undercut rather thoroughly by the often puerile content of their blogs, in particular the bloggers’ obsession with cheap insults of the “yeah, well, you’re a fattie who can’t get laid” variety. Indeed, sometimes this seems to be their only real response to their many critics.
Some of these “dark enlightenment” intellectuals have discovered that crude, cheap, offensive insults garner more attention from the wider world than their sad attempts at serious philosophy. Witness some of Matt Forney’s dumb, attention-seeking provocations aimed at “fat girls” and female self-esteem.
Now “game” guru Roosh Valizadeh has decided to gin up some pageviews by launching a week-long assault on fatties, which began on Monday. In a post on his Return of Kings blog announcing the start of “Fat Shaming Week,” Roosh argues, with the utmost insincerity, that this is a public-minded intervention designed to make the world a better place:
We at ROK fully understand that the reason women are so against fat shaming is because it works. Mocking someone for lazy and slothful behavior is one of the best ways to motivate them to change and appear more pleasing before our presence. If a fat woman goes to the bar with attitude, thinking she’s a great catch, but several men check her for that arrogance by calling her a grenade launcher, do you think she’ll feel comfortable the next day for her scheduled cupcake and ice cream binge?
Even setting aside the fact of Roosh’s extreme assholery, this is simply not true. Fat shaming doesn’t work. In fact, as a recent study by Angelina Sutin at the Florida State University College of Medicine in Tallahassee found, it can actually lead to weight gain. Looking at data from more than 6000 participants in the nationally representative longitudinal Health and Retirement Study, Sutin found that
Participants who experienced weight discrimination were approximately 2.5 times more likely to become obese by follow-up … and participants who were obese at baseline were three times more likely to remain obese at follow up … than those who had not experienced such discrimination. These effects held when controlling for demographic factors (age, sex, ethnicity, education) … .
She concludes:
The present research demonstrates that, in addition to poorer mental health outcomes, weight discrimination has implications for obesity. Rather than motivating individuals to lose weight, weight discrimination increases risk for obesity.
In other words, fat shaming makes people feel like shit, and it causes them to gain weight, not lose it. This is obvious to anyone who thinks about the subject for more than a few seconds: after all, we live in a society in which fat shaming is ubiquitous, and rates of obesity continue to rise.
But of course Roosh isn’t really interested in making anyone’s life better except his own. Indeed, it’s fairly clear that what’s really motivating his little campaign is a desire for revenge on the women who have turned him down over the years. He more or less comes out and says it:
Hurting people’s feelings is the quickest way to get them to change, as any man who has been rejected by women can tell you (we can get laid today only because we’ve adapted to being shamed and punished for our appearance and beta male behavior over the course of many years).
Huh. Does Roosh really want to create a world full of bitter, angry women who are essentially female equivalents of him, using and manipulating men for their own pleasure without remorse?
Well, no. I’m sure he didn’t think it through that far. He just wanted an excuse to post a bunch of crap making fun of fat women.
So what sort of public spirited content did Roosh offer his readers during Fat Shaming Week?
A post urging men to take unflattering pictures of fat women without their permission — and post them on Twitter in order to shame them.
A post, evidently inspired by Matt Forney’s “Why Fat Girls Don’t Deserve to Be Loved,” titled “5 Reasons Fat Girls Don’t Deserve Love.” In it, semiliterate dating coach Christian McQueen explains, among other things, that “fat girls” smell (because “[i]t’s impossible to be that fucking fat and be able to wash your ass properly”), are bad at sex (because he cannot find their vaginas “unless I roll you around in flower [sic] and look for the wet spot”), and eat too much. He concludes:
Your fatness is the human version of a dead hippo, a beached whale, or to put it more bluntly, a human size cupcake: spongy on the outside, round and full of crap.
Really? Where exactly are you buying your cupcakes, dude, because normally cupcakes are delicious.
Another “humorous” post compares “fatties” with wild animals and suggests ways to kill them if you’re the victim of a “fatty attack.” Douglas writes:
Fatties tend to have poor hygiene habits so physical contact can be unsanitary. Their physiology provides many unique difficulties to overcome. Their thick skull is an effective counter to blows to the head. Their bulk is a good defense against projectile weapons. While big game cartridges such as .300 Winchester magnum and .338 Lapua can put a fatty down, a man would have a difficult time explaining to a grand jury why he was packing such a weapon outside of Africa.
“Emmanuel Goldstein” contributes “5 Ways To Bully Fat Sluts On A Date,” full of hilarious suggestions like “Go Bike-Riding Together” (because fatties can’t ride bikes!), “Go For A Hike Together,” (because fatties hate to walk!) and “Go Ice Skating Together” (because she’ll fall through the ice!).
There are several more “fat shaming week” posts up; they’re equally puerile.
Roosh and his pals have also taken their campaign to Twitter, posting such gems as these, using the hashtag #fatshamingweek.:
#FatShamingWeek selfish cunts. Children from fat mothers probability wise, are dumber, fatter, more prone to depression. Wipe de sperm off.
— Francis Begbie (@BegbieBegbie) October 8, 2013
https://twitter.com/Beppo_Venerdi/status/387635431283515392
https://twitter.com/JacquesJournal/status/387844928052543488
https://twitter.com/RealCMcQueen/status/388494710580326400
https://twitter.com/Feisty_Woman/status/388458961705250816
https://twitter.com/EsotericTrad/status/388331081344487425
Even Tom Leykis, the semi-popular radio misogynist, has gotten into the act:
#FatShamingWeek what a great idea! If your girl looks like a human Cinnabon or a Butterball, make her feel like shit! http://t.co/cjbLvvNKeB
— Tom Leykis (@tomleykis) October 11, 2013
Happily, the hashtag has been pretty much taken over by feminists and fat acceptance activists and other people countering the douchebaggery of Roosh et al.
And the only real media coverage the campaign has gotten — from Buzzfeed and The Daily Dot — has focused on the sheer douchebaggery of the fat shamers.
So it seems that the main effect of Fat Shaming Week has actually been to advance the cause of Fat Acceptance, not to undermine it.
Brilliant, dudes. Just brilliant.
CassandraSays – wait, someone was sharing cock shots here? WTF?
I still remember when people complimented my mother on losing weight when she was undergoing chemotherapy (which they were aware of). Hey, you’re dying, but at least you’re getting really skinny? That was a high point on the “WTF, society?” scale.
I do think this is a thing, in the sense that how women look with makeup is how women are supposed to look. Frinstance, lots of teenagers of both genders have acne. If you walk around a high school, you’ll see lots of boys with obvious visible acne. But you won’t see many, if any, girls, because they mostly cover it up with makeup. So it gives the impression that acne is abnormal and extra gross for girls.
I think I have an eye-closeup I could share… but it’s on my less mobile computer, so it won’t be until tomorrow.
Almost all of the other pictures of me are ones that were taken in a club in very harsh lighting, after I’d been dancing for an hour or so… so sweaty, pasty, and with godawful hair. Still, when not drunk, tired, and overheating, I looked pretty good. 😛
The eye closeup could go with the selfeyes we did a few weeks back. 🙂
Action pics of self are way too likely to look dire. Hell, I look bad photographed in daylight after a twenty minute stroll!
Thing is, what’s “how women look with makeup”? Do we mean that skin blemishes are covered? Or do we mean a full face of makeup with mascara, eyeliner, and so on?
The only comment anyone has ever made when I’ve been out and about or at work without makeup is “you look tired” when I had really dark circles under my eyes.
Well, we could get into a stupid game of what counts and what doesn’t, but obviously there are overall trends to how most women in the West most often apply makeup, and obviously those trends alter people’s everyday perceptions of how women in general look. I gave one example; you’ve just given another.
Especially in mass media, where images of women are so unrealistic to begin with…
Sure. That’s not the same thing as saying that women aren’t perceived as woman when we’re not wearing makeup, though. A more accurate description might be that we’re perceived as looking bad when you can see any visible skin imperfections in a way that men aren’t.
(Note – looking bad, as opposed to not looking like a woman at all.)
Oh yeah, I definitely didn’t mean the “aren’t perceived as women” aspect. Sorry if I came across as defending that.
It was the “not women” part that made me go “WTF?”. The fact that there’s pressure for women to try to look as flawless as possible (without seeming to have made any effort to do so) is something that I’d assume everyone here is aware of.
Wasn’t there a study or poll fairly recently that showed men don’t even realise a woman wearing makeup is wearing it, unless it’s very obvious? Goes to the whole presentation of women as “just looking like that” with no visible blemishes and suchlike, that Cassandra mentioned.
It also goes back to the lackwit SittieKItty quoted in the first place. Not a lot of point in claiming women are/should be putting makeup on for men’s sake when men don’t even know if we’re wearing it or not. 😛
Also, if you think about the pressure to conceal things like evidence of menstruation, the overall picture becomes less “must wear makeup” and more “must conceal any messy signs of imperfection, in case evidence of your humanity makes horny guys feel bummed out”.
“(I did not click on his name, so thanks for whoever warned the rest of us.)”
That wasn’t STRENGTH, it was whitepride over on the FAQ. And you’re welcome, I figured warning was the least I could do to remedy suddenly having a screen full of cock (I mean, nothing against said bit of anatomy, but I only want to see it when I want to see it, ya know?)
And more selfeyes plz! Lol, I can post one of me all made up for my Wayward Victorian Girl shoot if we do that again. My makeup only took about two hours! (Meanwhile, I can do both black in under 15 min)
Oh and speaking of STRENGTH, if you’re lurking, you do the win7 install in parallels and go retrieve the MBR from its package contents, and then you can just overwrite the existing boot table from terminal via the OS X startup “disk” (USB, since my SuperDrive is busted and that’s the whole problem here). rEFIt, or whatever the new fork is called, is certainly making the less aggravating (a certain someone got it all up and running only to realize it was the x86 version, not the x64 version I need to use the damned mac drivers and actually have properly working hardware >.< )
CassandraSays – I feel like the pressure is overall saying “women need to show that they are not human, in order to attract dude boners” (which is where we get the “women don’t fart”, “women don’t poop”, “women don’t burp”, and the like from).
Which is utterly stupid. Why does being ladylike mean “denying my humanity”?
Was it here we talked about a bizarre article/ campaign that seemed to take on the “must hide all signs of menstruation” thing by saying women should be perfectly happy to walk around with bloodstained clothes?
The only time I’ve ever been misgendered while not wearing makeup, I was about 15, so I’ll cut the person who did that a little slack. It was summer, I had a tan, no makeup, inch long lair, and I didn’t get my tits until senior year.
Now when I don’t wear makeup, I get carded.
The idea of attracting a bloke who wants to have sex with someone/something not human makes my skin crawl. Okay, YKINMK but being put into the category of “not the same species as him” makes me wonder what he thinks he’s fucking … an animal? In which case, crawl back under your rock, creepy bestiality dude.
That part of why the wording of the comment earlier seemed so off to me, because the pressure isn’t designed to make women appear more womanly, it’s designed to make us appear doll-like, ie without any visible signs of human imperfection. If you naturally have blemish-free skin there’s no pressure to put on makeup just because, the purpose of the makeup is to hide “flaws”, at least in the makeup-as-boner-pleasing way of framing things.
(Apparently we’re going to ignore some of the more garish styles of makeup that a lot of men vocally dislike.)
Also add all the other things seen as “flaws” that should be corrected with makeup.
And I would say the use of makeup to cover imperfections is probably a rather recent thing in makeup history, as it’s been used for millenia and by both sexes for different reasons.
I feel like there’s a point to be made here about how the discourse the dude in the link is reinforcing tends to frame attempts to use makeup to hide flaws as good, and attempts to use makeup to express your subcultural affiliations or just for fun as bad/stupid/vain/wrong/pointless because don’t you realize that doesn’t give men boners?
kittehs – People who think like that should probably be banging RealDolls, TBH. Stuff some microwavable hand warmers or something and you’re good to go.
Aieee, did you see this terrifying pic David posted in January?
http://manboobz.com/2013/01/17/mens-rights-redditors-weigh-in-on-sexbots-railroad-monopolies-and-why-women-are-terrible/
@ cassandra says
Yes my beef is that most people I meet find fit/ muscular and intelligent/geeky to be mututally exclusive. I dont expect nor want everyone to be attracted to me and in no way is that why I do it. Hope that I got my point across finally lol.