Categories
a voice for men are these guys 12 years old? boner rage douchebaggery drama drama kings evil sexy ladies excusing abuse I'm totally being sarcastic imaginary backwards land kitties lying liars men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny MRA precious bodily fluids

The “Tell Her Her Soul Is Dog Sh*t” dude declares that I’m a “misogyny pimp.”

If Jason Gregory were this adorable, it would be hard to stay mad at him
If Jason Gregory were this adorable kitty, it would be hard to stay mad at him

Hey, everybody!

So you remember that post a couple of days ago, that one in which I quoted Jason Gregory’s most peculiar dating advice for angry men? You know, the one in which he suggested that men rebuff women who are interested in them with a long and rather nasty assortment of misogynistic insults? You know, like these:

Tell her that she isn’t interesting, that her soul is dog-shit and that she has nothing to offer other than boobs and booty, that she is a piece of shit and a total failure as a human being, that you don’t find her attractive and that she isn’t even good enough to be a cum-bucket.

And he went on like that for several more sentences. You can read the whole quote in my original piece, or in his original post on A Voice for Men.

Well, it turns out I totally misinterpreted Jason Gregory’s post, according to an unbiased and neutral outside observer named Jason Gregory, no relation to the original Jason Gregory, who’s written a post about it on his blog.

Hold on, I’m being told that this second Jason Gregory is in fact also the first Jason Gregory.

Anyway, according to Jason Gregory, even though Jason Gregory did explicitly tell men to “tell her … that her soul is dog-shit” he didn’t really mean to tell men to “tell her … that her soul is dog-shit.”

No, he only hypothetically meant this. He was just trying to suggest was how mean the ladies are when they turn down men.

What he was really trying to express, he now says, was that

men need to learn self-respect and to value their selves in totality—including the importance of valuing their sexuality.

Pretty weird how that came out in the original post as

Tell her that she isn’t interesting, that her soul is dog-shit and that she has nothing to offer other than boobs and booty, that she is a piece of shit and a total failure as a human being, that you don’t find her attractive and that she isn’t even good enough to be a cum-bucket.

But, he insists, his aim was really quite noble. As he explains now, he wasn’t just trying to stand up for the dignity of men — he was trying to protect women from having their inboxes filled with dick-pics.

I wrote that men should stop giving away cock like it’s worthless. Perhaps if men valued their sexuality, they’d be less inclined to inundate women with emails, messages, and pick-up lines. Perhaps if men actually valued their sexuality, the ladies at Jezebel wouldn’t be so inclined to complain about all the free-cock oppression. Perhaps if men actually valued their sexuality, men wouldn’t degrade themselves by harassing, begging, and inundating women with dick pics and pleas for their attention and affection.

Indeed, he went on to argue, it was not he who was the real misogynist, but me. J’Accuse!

This might seem a hard case to make, what with the whole “tell her … her soul is dog-shit” bit and numerous other remarks in his original post, like, for example, his description of women who actually enjoy sex:

You may be able to find a few coked-up girls who really get into it—the kind of girls who end up with sweaty hair, mascara, and cum dripping down their cheeks, but those girls usually have emotional disorders and are simply trying to bury their emotional problems in various sorts of drug induced escapes.

And who can forget his suggestion that men make their dates “pay for a juicy sirloin to replace all the jizzed-out protein” they cause to be jizzed out?

But apparently I am the true misogynist because I ran my post making fun of him during my pledge drive. Which makes me a “misogyny pimp.”

This is where the mocking of misogyny becomes misogyny. He doesn’t care about the women who bother to read his blog. Though he may have a few days in which he invites women and other commenters to share and cry about their troubles, any good pimp knows the importance of faking like he cares. Any good pimp knows how to manipulate the emotions of “his bitches.” …

[H]e doesn’t care about why men are sending dick pics and bombarding women with emails and messages through online dating services. He’s not looking for solutions to these problems. He’s not saying that men who do such things may lack self-respect because the value of male sexuality is often viewed as less-than-worthless in our culture.

Wait, what? I don’t care enough about men who harass women so I’m a misogynist?

Exploiting women is a form of misogyny … In this way, Boobz has more in common with an abusive pimp than he has with any heroic slayer of misogyny. Boobz is the misogyny that he mocks. Boobz is a misogyny-pimp.

QED, I guess. Apparently quoting misogynists, mocking misogynists, discussing misogyny, taking notice of misogyny in any way … makes one a misogynist. At least according to a guy who apparently thinks that the only women who really “get into” sex are “coked-up girls” with “emotional disorders” and “cum dripping down their cheeks.”

You’ll notice that last line in Jason’s quote links to a video; that link is from him. It’s a clip from the film Bad Santa. As Jason makes a point of mentioning several times, that’s where he got the “your soul is dog shit” line.

But if you watch the clip you’ll notice one thing about that line, in its original context in the film — it’s not surrounded by a paragraph full of vile misogynistic abuse. Nope, that stuff is all Jason Gregory.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

315 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
HeatherN
7 years ago

Anyone else think buttboy sounds like Vicky Pollard from Little Britain: “Yeah but no but yeah but no but…”

Bina
Bina
7 years ago

How can you compare rejection with sexual harassment that sometimes escalates into sexual assault is beyond me.

They seem to think that harassment/assault is fair play if you’ve been rejected. A comparable example would be if I sent cat poop to all the publishers who’ve ever rejected my writing. At that rate, I could only reasonably expect one thing: to go on getting rejected forever, maybe even blackballed if the grapevine gets wind of me. These guys, on the other hand, seem to think that deliberately setting themselves up for defeat will end up snatching victory from its jaws. They forget that women talk, and that if a guy (or group of guys) starts acting obnoxiously, someone is going to do some googling and blow their little game before the second round gets underway.

Poor widdle Jason is just mad that David happened to get onto him before the women of OKC did.

Bina
Bina
7 years ago

So if you send out a bunch of impersonal messages and get a response, great, but you’re not emotionally invested in it, so it’s not a big deal if you don’t.

If you only send out a scattershot load of impersonal messages, you shouldn’t be surprised if you get rejected; in fact, you have only increased your odds of being rejected. A guy who’s only looking to get laid by as many hot chicks as possible is boring and, unless she’s equally horny and unchoosy, she will simply find him not worth bothering with.

And personally, if all I wanted was to get some relief from the hornies, I’d take care of it myself, and not bother trying to pick up random dudes. Because the health and safety risks of casual sex are so not worth it, especially since we’re not guaranteed an orgasm like men are.

LBT
LBT
7 years ago

Masculinity: the toughest shit in existence… until you reject it. Then it breaks like glass.

WHY are macho guys supposed to be the tough ones again?

pecunium
7 years ago

buttboy69: You gonna show us the page, and give us access to the inbox?

(I will now pretend, again, you are willing to engage in good faith).

No, all I’m saying is that most men will get consistently rejected no matter what, and it hurts less if it following a spammy and/or crude and/or copy-pasted come-on, because it doesn’t feel like a personal rejection.

This isn’t true.

I’ve been sexually active for about 30 years. I don’t think I’m some sort of Adonis, or Cassanova, but I know I’ve “had more than my share” (based on the number of partners I’ve had, completely apart from the number of my relationships* being higher than the US average for sexual partners of men of my age: let’s hear it for being poly, since a few of them overlap).

Have I been rejected? Sure. Have I had women I was interested in whom I didn’t seem to get any reciprocation from? Sure.

Have I been, “consistently rejected”? No. I’d say my “failure” rate when I got around to expressing an interest is probably around 70 percent.

I’d wager most people, who aren’t being douchecanoes, have a similar set of experiences. By the time they get to the point of making a play for sex, they have some idea of it’s likely reception (see above re the women I didn’t make any overtures to, because I wasn’t able to get an indication of interest.

In my life I’ve also rejected people (and about an even mix of men and women). I’m going to go out on a limb here and argue there have been a number of people whom I didn’t have to reject, because they noticed there weren’t any reciprocal signals, and didn’t approach me.

Is this going to be different in an online venue? Maybe. I met a few lovers through some old-school BBS environments. We talked, etc., and met in social settings of a neutral nature, and one thing led to another: I can only think of a couple of occasions where desires for sex were communicated prior to a face to face meeting; and never by me, but I digress.

What I (nor they) did, was make a pass, before some social interaction had taken place. By not doing that, by getting a feel for the other person, the odds of rejection, qua rejection, went down a lot.

Newsflash, most people aren’t interested in having sex with most people. Of the more than 3 billion women on the planet who might be interested having sex with men, I doubt more than a couple of hundred thousand are likely to find me attractive.

So it’s stupid as all hell to open up with “hey, take a look at my dick!, don’t ya wanna jump on that!?!” Because that makes you look like an insensitive asshole (ok, looks isn’t right, it is the action of an insensitive asshole). It’s possible one can attenuate the rejection by saying, “well, she doesn’t have a sense of humor, and I can let it pass if she thinks I was being a jerk”, but make that work one has to either admit to being a jerk, or pretend that it’s not really a jerk move.

Either one is self-defeating (and it doesn’t lead to finding the sort of person one is interested in, unless what one wants is someone who likes being hit on by jerks).

So that argument fails my experience, and looks to be self-defeating; on all the levels it’s being made.

*I’m defining relationship as a romantic involvement which lasted longer than 6 months, and was seen as more than a sexual exchange between the two of us.

pecunium
7 years ago

Molly Moon: Although I’ll probably flunk out once I start upper division because I don’t understand how anyone takes the categorical imperative seriously.

Could you expand on that? Because a lot of how I shape my personal philosophy is based on The Categorical Imperatives (though I confess when first exposed to the First Formulation, in high school, the phrasing made it seem alien). I can’t say I got there through Kant, but when I took some more formal Ethics, and we got to Kant, it was really familiar.

Nietzsche is harder, mostly because he’s building on lots of other things, and assumes you know those things. Not having an understanding of what he was saying makes it really hard.

If I had to try to sum Nietzsche up, it’s, “live the Categorical Imperatives.”

Diana Adams
Diana Adams
7 years ago

They seem to think that harassment/assault is fair play if you’ve been rejected.

And they are also convinced that women have it easier and are priviledged. Priviledged to deal with abuse and threats.

This reminds me of Margaret Atwood’s
“Men are afraid women will laugh at them. Women are afraid men will kill them.”

shayla
shayla
7 years ago

How can you compare rejection with sexual harassment that sometimes escalates into sexual assault is beyond me.

Good point… and also, the point needs to be made over and over that the person who decides to initiate the contact makes a CHOICE to, this isn’t two people who just happened to be thrown together magically. I’ve been on both sides and the truth is: it’s better being the initiator, the initiator gets to decide they were ready to have that conversation and got the chance to prepare themselves for acceptance or rejection — whereas the recipient has it sprung on them and doesn’t have any control over whether the contact starts, they’re tossed into a situation that they have to navigate without hurting feelings, without giving false hope, and without arousing anger.

That doesn’t mean never talk to anyone for anything, it just means accept the reality that a) contact without any indication of interest from the other person first puts that person in an awkward position 95% of the time, and b) most people in the world just won’t be available or interested in any one person male or female no matter how hot, so accept rejection without resentment as part of the biz. If you’re doing cold sales with yourself as the product, don’t be surprised that a lot of people don’t actually like cold sales. If it’s hard to imagine the awkward position of someone being asked, remember the last time someone asked you for a sum of money you couldn’t easily part with. Or, imagine the last telemarketing company that bugged you writing you a letter about how much your rejection of their generous offer hurt their feelings.

SredniVashtar
SredniVashtar
7 years ago

Hi buttboy69, also (like pecunium) going to assume you’re not a troll and are just trying to engage in some good-faith thinking (although seriously dude, if you are honestly not a troll you might want to consider picking a different nym!) (A similar thing happened to me a couple of weeks back where an ambiguity in my phrasing meant some people thought I too was an eeeeevil MRA).

If I understand what you’re saying correctly, you think that some insecure men might send out spammy and impersonal messages because it would lessen the sting of rejection, even though also making that rejection less likely? I think you might be right – that whole ‘it will hurt to fail, but it will hurt even more keenly in proportion to how hard i try, so i’m barely going to try’ is a sadly familiar psychological bear-trap to fall into.

Now, I think your next point is that if some of these insecure men are also misogynistic assbags, they might make those messages sexually harassing/threatening so that, although it decreases their chance of acceptance even further (perhaps even more than they themselves realsie) they can sort of console themselves with the thought that ‘OH WELL I WAS ONLY TROLLING THE BITCH ANYWAY’, and that they can pathetically hope the woman, too, can’t be sure they weren’t trolling and at least they haven’t ‘wasted’ any respect on someone who was going to reject them. I can actually kind of see that psychology as plausibly obtaining in some cases.

So actually I think you make a fair point – I think what many of the other commenters got annoyed about was that it sort of sounded like you thought that’s just because that’s the way these insecure men DO think means it’s an EXCUSE for harassing the ladies. If you didn’t mean to imply that, then just clear up your ‘is’es from your ‘oughts’ and all will be cool! (And someone will give you a welcome-package with kittens in it!)

Bina
Bina
7 years ago

And they are also convinced that women have it easier and are priviledged. Priviledged to deal with abuse and threats.

This reminds me of Margaret Atwood’s
“Men are afraid women will laugh at them. Women are afraid men will kill them.”

Privileged to be in fear of death at the hands of your date. Yup, what a glorious thing it is to be a woman…

Sam-I-Was?
Sam-I-Was?
7 years ago

Ah buttboy, as always your logic is interesting. As a rule of thumb if you don’t want to get rejected out of the gate, don’t do something that will make people automatically reject you. Does rejection hurt, of course. And despite how you think the world runs everyone gets rejected. However setting yourself up for failure is never a good way to succeed.

But of course I’m just a mere woman, hold on while I send off the line of men at my door.

LBT
LBT
7 years ago

Hey, Feminist Borg peeps and katz in particular! Thanks for the support! You can read Esprit de Corps, AKA the adventure of the cute little BorgCritters here.

(Sorry to be spamming here, I just know katz isn’t on LJ and want to make sure she finds the story she paid for!)

bbeaty
bbeaty
7 years ago

I kind of hate to come to buttboy’s defense, but I can see his point to a certain degree. I can “entertain the thought without accepting it” as someone famous (who I could look up it I wasn’t feeling lazy) said.

David, you said “I suppose sending shitty messages out to women becuase you expect to get rejected could be considered a male “deffense mechanism” but it’s also1) a shitty thing to do and 2) totally self-sabotaging. It’s the sort of thing petulant teenagers do, but most petulant teenagers grow out of it pretty quickly”

I would add that many defense mechanism can be self-defeating, especially when we are not aware of them and don’t engage in much self-examination. And they can appear like shitty things to do to, especially to the folks we think we are defending ourselves against. As for being the actions of petulant teenagers, most definitely. Do we all out grown all our teen petulance? Good for anyone who has. Goodness knows at 50 I can still be pretty petulant and childish at times. I try to aware of it at self-correct

I am in no way condoning the the totally shitty behavior suggested by the OP. I personally do not feel entitled and privileged when I get a dick pix or am called a horrible name for saying no to the guy who propositioned me from across the street while I was shoveling my walk. These are all shitty, petulant, offensive, childish things and are illogical to do. AND they are probably defense mechanisms. Twisted defense mechanisms.

LBT
LBT
7 years ago

Honestly, auggz, I’d advise not answering dude’s calls at all. He seems to be the sort who ANY attention makes worse.

LBT
LBT
7 years ago

RE: bbeaty

Enh, what a useless defense mechanism. Seriously, I used to have major ED behavior, and THAT had more practical use to it than anonymous dick pics. And I’m really not okay with this, “And they can appear like shitty things to do,” thing you said here. They ARE shitty things to do. Sending pictures of my genitals to strangers who don’t want them is a shitty thing to do, regardless of my mental traumas or defenses, because it is hurting other people and dragging them into my shit.

Lots of people do shitty things as defense mechanisms. That doesn’t make them any less shitty.

Molly Moon
Molly Moon
7 years ago

Pecunium:

Could you expand on that? Because a lot of how I shape my personal philosophy is based on The Categorical Imperatives (though I confess when first exposed to the First Formulation, in high school, the phrasing made it seem alien). I can’t say I got there through Kant, but when I took some more formal Ethics, and we got to Kant, it was really familiar.

Well tbh I didn’t form much of an opinion until months after I took the class, so I probably only think it’s silly because I have an incomplete/incorrect understanding of exactly what the categorical imperative is. Maybe before I start criticizing it I should ask you why I’m wrong lol. My memory tells me that, basically, it’s “don’t do things that would screw everything up if everyone did them all the time.” Is that anything close to accurate?

sparky
sparky
7 years ago

Couple different things here:

1. buttboy appears to be conflating “generic impersonal messages” with “harassment and dick-pics.” There’s a world of difference between “Hello, my name is _______, we both seem to enjoy _____. Would you like to talk about _______?” and “I know you’re going to reject me, you snobby [expletive deleted], so here’s a picture of my genitals.” One is sort of boring and unimaginative; the other is uncalled for. Sending a generic message to lots of people on a dating site, in hopes of getting a few replies? Ok, whatever. Sending pictures of genital and messages full of slurs is just wrong. A dick-pic is not a generic message.

2. Jason Gregory was not talking about online dating, he was using that as a springboard. The whole “dogshit” tirade was about rejecting a woman who wanted to have sex with a man. The woman is already interested. Gregory is telling men to reject women in the cruelest manner possible.

sparky
sparky
7 years ago

auggzillary: Ugh. I’m sorry you and your roommate are dealing with that. Don’t have much more to add, except what LBT said about just not answering the calls and what Argenti said about alerting campus security if either of you thinks he might try something. If gets to bad, maybe roommate can change her phone number?

Stay safe.

Kiwi girl
Kiwi girl
7 years ago

Now, I think your next point is that if some of these insecure men are also misogynistic assbags, they might make those messages sexually harassing/threatening so that, although it decreases their chance of acceptance even further (perhaps even more than they themselves realsie) they can sort of console themselves with the thought that ‘OH WELL I WAS ONLY TROLLING THE BITCH ANYWAY’, and that they can pathetically hope the woman, too, can’t be sure they weren’t trolling and at least they haven’t ‘wasted’ any respect on someone who was going to reject them. I can actually kind of see that psychology as plausibly obtaining in some cases.

I don’t see how this can be considered anything other than trolling. There is nothing attractive or positive in posting dick pics, so it’s an almost 100% guaranteed method of rejection.

Self-defeating would be more along the lines of thinking “this female won’t be interested in me, so I won’t even bother trying to contact her”. Sending dick pics is an escalation of behaviour way beyond this, demonstrating a complete lack of respect for the recipient, and a desire to upset/offend an unknown person. That’s not self-defeating dating behaviour – that’s fucking harassment.

SredniVashtar
SredniVashtar
7 years ago

I think in some cases it’s both. It’s a self-defeating behaviour, AND it’s fucking harassment. The fact that it’s the former doesn’t excuse the fact that it’s the latter in any way.

I imagine a lot of these guys do actually entertain some ludicrous secret hope that one of the women they proposition for sex will actually take them up on it. And if not, if they’re disgusted or upset or insulted, then hey – nothing lost except the finger-strain of typing out a few obscene messages right? Because i’ts not like womanthings have feelings that matter, or anything.

kittehserf
7 years ago

“Retired gigolo”? Oh, BROTHER. >snort< How fucking desperate were his "clients"?

Methinks he’s only “retired” because he never had any clients.

pecunium
7 years ago

bbeaty: Even if they are defense mechanisms… it’s not that “sending dick pics” (or other harassing behavior) appears to be a shitty thing to do it is a shitty thing to do

And I am perfectly willing to go past not condoning it, straight to condemning it. The same way I condemn ablist speech here, or creepy behavior at Arisia or thing’s like this creepy app for rating men because I’m not willing to be maligned with the idea that, “Men are like that”, and “boys will be boys”.

There is no other swathe of human behavior wes so massively, passively, condone by not condemning it. When it comes to racism, we have driven it to a more fringe position.

But this shit, we chalk it up to, “awkwardness”, or “Defense Mechanism”, and wrign our hands about the consequences to reporting it.

Basta.

pecunium
7 years ago

Molly Moon: Maybe before I start criticizing it I should ask you why I’m wrong lol. My memory tells me that, basically, it’s “don’t do things that would screw everything up if everyone did them all the time.” Is that anything close to accurate?

Close to accurate.

The two formulations work in concert:

1: “Act only on that maxim through which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law.”

2:”Act in such a way that you always treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of any other, never simply as a means, but always at the same time as an end.”

The first means (and it’s a difficult phrase) if you want to do something, extrapolate it out to see what happens if everyone is allowed to do it. If that fucks things up, then it’s not moral.

The second means you can’t treat people as things. You can’t use them as means to your end.

The short version of the two, which are meant to be seen in concert is, “you aren’t special”.

Where it gets complicated (and where Kant gets some well-deserved grief) is that pure Kantian Ethics are reductionist, and deterministic, and remove most of our humanity from the equation.

kittehserf
7 years ago

And if you do what buttboy is talking about, and send dick pics instead of queries you will get no assignments and will instead be reported to the authorities. (I assume; I never tried that approach.) The guys who send out dick pics are lucky that more women don’t report them.

I suspect if you tried that method and got an assignment, it’d be like Groucho Marx’s “I refuse to join any club that would have me as a member.” 😉

With men sending women dick pics – that reads to me as a rape threat, and I’d want to see him in court for it.

I don’t give a flying fuck if this is some alleged defence mechanism. It still comes down to men treating women like fucktoys to be abused. If they’re that immature and have such a poor opinion of women anyway, they aren’t fit to be dating at all, ever.

SredniVashtar – oh, buttboil’s a troll, all right. His troll lack-of-cred is well established.

buttboy69
buttboy69
7 years ago

@SredniVashtar- Yes, that’s exactly what I’m saying. Idk if I wasn’t making myself clear, but then again, my posts here aren’t exactly read charitably.

And I wasn’t just talking about dick pics- the more common manifestation of this sort of insecurity is the generic copy-pasted “what’s up” or “you’re hot”. Dick pics are sometimes the extreme manifestation of this insecurity, usually combined with a level of accumulated bitterness and anger.

(Not that I think that’s the motivation behind every dick pic. Just some of them.)

Am I excusing that behavior? Well no, obviously not, but I don’t feel the need to write a disclaimer to that effect. I’m just pointing out what I see as a certain dynamic at play. How you respond to the existence of that dynamic is your business.

Kiwi girl
Kiwi girl
7 years ago

Dick pics are sometimes the extreme manifestation of this insecurity, usually combined with a level of accumulated bitterness and anger.

Citation required.

kittehserf
7 years ago

I really don’t want contact from some man with so much “accumulated bitterness and anger” that he sends me, a total stranger, a photograph of his penis, purely because I’m a woman who hasn’t said “ooh yes please come here and fuck me”.

katz
7 years ago

Am I excusing that behavior? Well no, obviously not

Obviously.

LBT
LBT
7 years ago

RE: buttboy69

my posts here aren’t exactly read charitably.

I can’t IMAGINE why.

the more common manifestation of this sort of insecurity is the generic copy-pasted “what’s up” or “you’re hot”.

That’s funny, because that’s not what we or James Gregory was talking about. We were talking about anon dick pics. Maybe we aren’t reading you charitably because you’re not communicating well. Step up.

Dick pics are sometimes the extreme manifestation of this insecurity, usually combined with a level of accumulated bitterness and anger.

*plays the world’s tiniest violin for the Mr. Dick Pics of the world*

pecunium
7 years ago

And, as expected, buttboy isn’t honestly engaging

Am I excusing that behavior?

Yep.

You are making excuses for why they do it, as a means to make it “understandable” and so make them seem less objectionable (after, they are just, “trying to cope with the fear of rejection.”

Married to your fairy-tale about how “the harassment isn’t really that bad” your entire schtick is, “those poor menz, being abused for their inesecurities”.

Straight up apologism, married to a disingenuous lack of respect for your previous statements. Pull the other one, it’s got bells on it.

pecunium
7 years ago

buttboy: my posts here aren’t exactly read charitably.

Sadly, they are. What they aren’t is being read the way you want them to be read. Instead they are being taken as written, which means you look like a jerk.

sparky
sparky
7 years ago

kitteh, I’m with you on this one:

I don’t give a flying fuck if this is some alleged defence mechanism. It still comes down to men treating women like fucktoys to be abused. If they’re that immature and have such a poor opinion of women anyway, they aren’t fit to be dating at all, ever.

It seems like what’s at the bottom of this is the idea that men are entitled to love and sex from lots of beautiful women; and when women reject them, they lash out in anger.

kittehserf
7 years ago

buttboil’s whole schtick is defending misogyny and abusive behaviour by men to women, and he then whines he’s not being read “charitably”.

kittehserf
7 years ago

sparky, exactly.

Notice, too, how buttboil has got it totally arse about face (apt) from Jason Goobery’s original piece? He was all about men abusively rejecting women who are interested in them. Nothing to do with Oh noes poor menz are always rejected except when they aren’t like fartwad here is saying.

Bina
Bina
7 years ago

Methinks he’s only “retired” because he never had any clients.

Now THAT I can believe.

Dick pics are sometimes the extreme manifestation of this insecurity, usually combined with a level of accumulated bitterness and anger.

Wrong again. It’s more like photocopying your naked ass at the office party while drunk…juvenile, stupid, and not something one does in polite company. And certainly not something you do if (a) you want to keep your job, or (b) you’re hoping for a good reference in future.

bbeaty
bbeaty
7 years ago

I completely agree sending unsolicited dick pix is completely unacceptable and completely shitty. I just don’t think that happy, well-adjusted people wake up in the morning and say “I’m bored. I think I’ll do something shitty.” Just like I don’t think happy people wake up and say “I think I will be a raging racist or maybe post hostile things on the internet.”

I completely think this behavior needs to be called out as shitty and abusive.

I am simply acknowledging that maybe the people who engage in this behavior see it (and therefore try to justify it) differently than I do.

Maybe it’s just a quirk of mine, but I always want to look for a more complicated reason for bad behavior than “they’re a dirt bag.” Even if the ARE a dirty bag.

Robert
Robert
7 years ago

Sparky, I think ‘entitled’ is the correct description. The behavior indicates a worldview of ‘I deserve to get what I want, unconditionally’. It is revealing that this part of life is most likely the only one for which they believe this to be true. Otherwise there would be no libertarian MRAs.

kittehserf
7 years ago

Kiwi girl, that pic is SO COOL.

bbeatty – see, the difference for me is, I don’t care if these abusers are unhappy or self-hating or whatever. They’re sexually harassing women, and may go on to do worse for all I know.

Argenti Aertheri
7 years ago

Levels of messages, in increasing order by odds of getting a reply:

Dick pics
“You’re hot // similar
“Sup?” // “hey” // similar
“Do you like [thing messages sender likes]?”
“I saw [things] on your profile, do you like // have you seen/read/heard [similar thing]?”

Etc

Note that exactly zero of those involve greater risk of rejection than “no, [thing] is for losers”…except the dick pic, that may get you in real trouble since it’s fucking harassment. Displaying that you actually read their damned profile does not require some soul baring complex message.

Not that this has anything at all to do with rejecting women by insulting them rather than a simple “I’m not interested [sorry]”

Kiwi girl
Kiwi girl
7 years ago

Being insecure and/or anxious is not a bloody “get out of jail free” card for being an arsehole. It’s not a defence in court, and it’s not a defence for being an obnoxious jerk. It also insults the vast majority of people who are insecure and anxious (both people who have these emotions from time to time and people who have stronger tendencies here), as they don’t bloody send unwanted dick pics to people. Being insecure and/or anxious is therefore *not* a cause of this behaviour, and *assuming those conditions are more commonly manifest in people who send out unwanted dick pics* (and that is a *huge* assumption), that would still be a correlational rather than causal factor.

Psychiatry and clinical psychology continue to have their failings, but one positive is that there is no DSM condition called “sends unwanted dick pics”. There is also no condition where one of the symptoms (required or optional) is “sends unwanted dick pics”.

Finally, sending out these unwanted pictures has negative consequences for some people who receive them. Therefore it is morally right to call out this behaviour, and to attempt to prevent it occurring. Having idiots like BB try to make excuses for this behaviour is therefore morally repugnant, as making excuses supports the negative behaviour.

Congratulations BB, you’re an enabler of unethical behaviour. You must be so proud of yourself.

kittehserf
7 years ago

buttboil also demonstrated for the umpteenth time that he can’t read for quids. Jason Gregory wasn’t talking about this at all. He was full of misogynist shit, but it was more weird than this bog-standard variety.

Shaenon
7 years ago

all I’m saying is that most men will get consistently rejected no matter what, and it hurts less if it following a spammy and/or crude and/or copy-pasted come-on, because it doesn’t feel like a personal rejection.

Yes, the argument from “women won’t have sex with me even if I treat them almost decently, so I might as well be totally shitty to them instead.” I’ve heard it many times from MRAs. It’s just a weak excuse for being an asshole.

I’ve encountered assholes before, thanks. I don’t care about their special secret asshole pain. There are plenty of non-assholes with real problems for me to worry about instead.

Bina
Bina
7 years ago

Being insecure and/or anxious is not a bloody “get out of jail free” card for being an arsehole. It’s not a defence in court, and it’s not a defence for being an obnoxious jerk. It also insults the vast majority of people who are insecure and anxious (both people who have these emotions from time to time and people who have stronger tendencies here), as they don’t bloody send unwanted dick pics to people. Being insecure and/or anxious is therefore *not* a cause of this behaviour, and *assuming those conditions are more commonly manifest in people who send out unwanted dick pics* (and that is a *huge* assumption), that would still be a correlational rather than causal factor.

Bingo. I’m often anxious and insecure. Do I send unsolicited shots of MY genitals to random strangers? Nope. If it’s not right for women to do it, men shouldn’t get a free pass either.

LBT
LBT
7 years ago

RE: bbeaty

I am simply acknowledging that maybe the people who engage in this behavior see it (and therefore try to justify it) differently than I do.

Look, I’m a moral relativist too who runs on a different reality manual from a lot of folks, but just because they see it differently doesn’t make it any less shitty. I thought starving to myself was a totally justifiable thing, but I would be REALLY CONCERNED if folks were like, “Well, I’m sure he sees it differently than I do, so I just think we should acknowledge that maybe in his mind, starving to death is totally okay.” I don’t give a shit about how bad I was feeling, that’s not an appropriate way to cope!

Maybe it’s just a quirk of mine, but I always want to look for a more complicated reason for bad behavior than “they’re a dirt bag.” Even if the ARE a dirty bag.

But looking for a more complicated reason just makes it sound like you’re trying to justify the behavior. Seriously, I’m not giving out asspats or, “Aw, you’re just dealing with suppressed mental trauma” to assholes sending me pictures of their dicks. As someone who DOES have mental issues, who HAS performed bad behavior out of them, I don’t want people accepting or trying to reason away or justify my behavior. I want to be CALLED OUT, so I learn and STOP ACTING LIKE A DICK TO PEOPLE.

Come on. I expect higher standards of my behavior.

kittehserf
7 years ago

How far does this “aww he’s anxious and insecure” excuse run? It’s already being used to explain and, yes, condone, sexual harassment. Are we supposed to feel sorry for the men who escalate to stalking, or rape, as well?

Oh, my bad. We’re always being asked to do that.

Argenti Aertheri
7 years ago

Well, I’m pretty sure rapist #2 would’ve tried it, but I took a hard line no contact policy.

Kiwi girl
Kiwi girl
7 years ago

@kitteh, I *know*, it’s like we’re asking for those guys to take responsibility for their own behaviour, which they know is inappropriate. Misogyny!

LBT
LBT
7 years ago

Honestly, as a mentally ill man, I’m kinda offended how LOW people’s expectations are of my behavior. I mean, Jesus Christ. I’ve met DOGS who behave better, and yet somehow I’m apparently so tortured I feel compelled to send anon dick pics to people or some shit.

I don’t want people to “understand” my oh-so-tortured bad boy act. I want people to smack me with a clue-by-four! I’m a grown man, not a toddler!