So I had to re-ban a couple of long-banned trolls today, who had returned with new names and slightly different IP addresses but who gave themselves away with their behavior. And that got me thinking about the people — well, the MRAs and PUAs and other such charming folks — who regularly denounce me as an evil censor of FREE SPEECH.
In fact, when I ban people, I do so for good reasons: one of the two trolls I banned today was a longtime MRAish commenter here who eventually creeped everyone out by boasting about having sex with underage prostitutes; the other was a man of many sockpuppets known for angry, abusive meltdowns full of slurs.
Anyway, so I thought I’d give you all a glimpse into my “trash” folder. Here’s a sampling of comments from would-be first time commenters at Man Boobz that I felt would not add anything to the discourse here. But in the interests of FREE SPEECH I thought I’d give these “ideas” an airing today.
TRIGGER WARNING for violent and offensive language. (Sorry about the quality of the last two; you can click on them to see larger versions.)
Not all of the comments I trash are quite this awful. Some are only mildly violent or abusive. I tend to be a bit picky with people’s first comments, assuming that if someone posts a shitty first comment it’s not likely to get any better after that. There are a few banned commenters who stop by and try to post anyway, including one fellow who leaves endless comments trying to prove, as far as I can tell, that teenage girls are objectively hotter than women in their twenties and older.
And, of course, there are comments targeting individual women, whether these are giant cut-and-pasted rants about Anita Sarkeesian, vaguely threatening remarks aimed at other well-known internet feminists, or bizarre sexual comments about female MRAs from fans of theirs.
Once in a while I will get a comment from a feminist that resorts to violent language; I don’t let those comments through either.
And then there are the pictures people try to post in the comments. Below, one of the ones I actually let through, depicting me in a dress with some extremely tall dude. A quick Google image search reveals that it was originally posted online by regular A Voice for Men contributor Janet Bloomfield, in a blog post of hers from last year on Disney princesses. Stay classy, Men’s “Human Rights” Movement!
Anyway, the pictures I don’t let through are worse.
That image is total BS.
Everyone knows David donates his bridesmaid dresses to Goodwill.
Beauty-David’s hand scares me. I know hands are hard to draw, but yikes.
bwarghahahahahaha thank goodness I wasn’t drinking then
Does this mean we get to do the wardrobe version of Making Up Shit About David?
Today we will learn true facts about the Manboob.
@Stoic Sophist
Lol! I read it in zefranks voice.
PS. Don’t watch True Facts about the ducks unless you are interested in corkscrew genitals.
Oh gods yes, zefrank should totally do a True Facts About The Manboob – using the mighty Making Up Shit thread as a script, of course.
I still crack up reading that.
I will have to use the power of the Googz to find that thread tomorrow, it sounds fun. I am no zefrank, but I will give recording it in homage a shot.
We’ve had a really cold winter in Wisconsin. This morning is -12F, actual temperature. And it’s been like that since the first week of January — we almost never break 20F during the day and routinely stay in the single digits. Our water companies are telling us to run our water continuously because they’ve had a record number of water main breaks. I know it’s even worse in Canada, but I seriously can’t wait for summer.
Someone was apparently inspired by my post to leave a creepy pedo-ish comment and a link to this highly scientific diagram, which (a little google image search reveals) has been making the rounds on 99chan, 7chan, bodybuilding.com and other assorted sites:
http://img.ie/images/onzlz.png
That image is the creepiest thing I’ve seen in a long time, and I made the mistake the other day of wandering into the comment section of an article about Dylan Farrow.
That image led me — and now I can’t even remember how — to an even creepier one on the same theme. It was posted on hookingupsmart, but didn’t originate there. I’m not a fan of Susan Walsh, but I’m happy to report that she was mocking this kind of “jailbait is best” bullshit:
http://i0.wp.com/www.hookingupsmart.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/proofjbisbest.png?resize=789%2C459
@josorio
Creative insult, calling him fat. Truly you are so original and edgy. Clearly, this new troll will not feel like a carbon copy of the past dozen or so.
/sarcasm.
Also, ranting is equivalent to mocking misogyny? Cuz the site’s about misogynists, not pointing out ‘oh look at this person ranting on the internet’. I mean, I rant all the time, but seriously doubt I’ve been put here, since, you know, I’m not a raging misogynist. but w/e.
@AL3H
Hi and welcome! :3
@wewereemergencies
And hi and welcome to you, too! :3
@kittehs
It was only a matter of time.
@chie
Ouch. Our water companies told us to run our water earlier, but it was only for about 2 days or so. I definitely do not envy your weather.
@david
that image.. I’m going to be scrubbing my brain for a while.
I’m the creator of both of those images. Actually the RV graph was taken from this book on zoology and I add the notes.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Animal-Behaviour-Mechanism-Development-Evolution/dp/0130899364
So yes, they are scientific and explain the popularity of adolescent girls in the sex market. I’m happy to answer any questions you may have about them.
I’m in a northern country and all we have is SLUSH. Gross, disgusting slush. It’s supposed to be below freezing so I can enjoy a proper winter and go ice skating.
Regarding the second chart… the most disgusting thing there isn’t even the ‘ideal’ age (which is repulsive in and of itself)… it’s the fact that an infant has about twice the ‘reproductive value’ of a 30-year old woman. Considering what an arbitrary curve it is, that means the creator actually intentionally put that. Now I’m going to go look for youtube videos of baby animals to bleach my brain.
@atomic wheelchair
Yes, can you please go fuck off and never bother humans again, you creepy asshole?
RV is a mathematical concept of essentially the number of future offspring that can be expected from a female of a given age.
The reason that an infant girl has a higher RV than older woman is that she still has the whole of her reproductive lifespan ahead of her. This shouldn’t be interpreted to mean that it is biologically better for a man to initiate a sexual relationship with an infant than an older woman.
Questions? Why are you such a creep? Why do you think people should accept your attempt to justify pedophilia? Why do you like to Google yourself so much (which is presumably how you found this post)?
Wow, he’s willing to admit to authorship of those childish scrawls. I suspect the dunning-kruger effect is at work here.
Questions:
Why do you not understand that sex is not a “market”?
Have you always been a confirmed misogynist?
Can you define “scientific method”? (Hint: it’s not what you did).
Why are you here?
Oh, also – why are your graph-making skills so shitty? I could have done better than that in third grade.
No, but I think we have to shun you now.
I’ll ask my cats.
I read atomic wheelchair’s comment and laughed because I mistook it for a regular commentator mocking the people who believe that shit… I’m constantly amazed at how much of a parody of themselves they are.
Seriously dude, did you flunk out of 8th grade biology class (then steal the text book to use for your charts)? I have a Bachelor’s in Biology but I don’t think correcting his foolishness is worth my effort. Not like willful ignorance can be cured anyway.
See, now I want to take random graphs from text books, add my own made-up wordings and posit them as scientific proof of something. If only I could decide which ridiculous idea to “prove” by this method …
Now remember, Auggz, biology is misandry.