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.
AAAAAAAH
AAAAAAAH OH GOD
THERE’S A TRANS GUY TALKING ABOUT TRANSITIONING TURNING HIM RED PILL
AAAAAH
(PS: this is why I tend to actually be a little sketch around a lot of trans guys. I swear, some of ’em take their first bite of male privilege and are hooked forever. Eugh.)
Oh, PaulE’s projecting like an IMAX again:
OK, Paul. Sure, you’re talking about that other guy.
Once again, MRAs show that their idea of men can fit into a thimble and be swirled to check colour and consistency.
I’d also like Biology Man to teach me how 12-16 became the “pre-pregnancy years”.
@Australians
After coming back from Australia to one of the worst winters Canada has had, I miss your weather so much. Especially QLD and it’s sweet, sweet QLD weather
Paul Elam’s letter is dictionary definiton lack of self awareness. The finest mind the MRM has produced for real.
Found it!
Figure 12.7 The curve of reproductive value for women (in traditional societies), showing how many children a woman is likely to have in the future as a function of her current age. From Buss, David M. Evolutionary Psychology: The New Science of the Mind © 1999. Published by Allyn and Bacon, MA. Copyright © 1999 by Pearson Education. Reprinted by permission of the publisher.
Figure 12.7 shows the average curve of reproductive value for women plotted against age. As might seem obvious, the future reproductive prospects for younger women are much greater than those for older women.
So that’s why it isn’t zero at age zero, it’s about potential, not actual, fertility.
{Trigger Warning, rape}
And further down it has these charts:
Figure 12.15 Divorce rate in the United States is a good predictor of rape. See text. After Alcock (2001), from data in Starks & Blackie (2000).
It correlates higher rates of divorce with higher rates of rape, surprise, surprise.
Figure 12.16 Men who rate their own mating success highly are more likely to indulge in coercive sex. See text. After Lalumiere et al. (1996).
You mean guys whose ego is built on perceiving themselves as sexually ‘successful’ are more likely to be rapists!? Surprise, surprise.
{/Trigger Warning}
It’s almost like dudebro didn’t actually read the book he ripped those charts out of.
But regardless, all of this means nothing outside of general biological trends for humans as a species and nether prescribes behavior nor takes into account cultural influences over behavior. So, meh.
It turns out that MGTOW forums, like MGTOWs themselves, has a hard time really just going away.
Okay, last one. From the same book:
When talking about explaining the existence of rape from an adaptive standpoint:
This does not in any way lessen its offensiveness in a social context; it simply explains why it happens (the argument that explanation somehow provides justification crassly misunderstands both processes).
THANK YOU!
A snapshot of the wrong, from the AVFM article:
Because, it wasn’t a bunch of astrophysicists, engineers, and other scientists working together on the project. It wasn’t as if those scientists weren’t building off the previous work of others. it wasn’t as if the whole project never would have gotten off the ground without funding provided by Congress. It wasn’t a cooperative project at all. It was a competition. Which I think says something about their worldview, when something so obviously cooperative and collaborative is viewed as a competition.
Bonus! Women would have made great astronauts, if sexist attitudes hadn’t stood in their way:
http://m.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/07/the-women-who-would-have-been-sally-ride/260246/
And the atomicpedo can just take his creepy pedophilia and go fuck off.
Ahh so it isn’t steady from birth to menstraution to account for deaths in childhood (0 reproductive potential). That makes a great deal of sense. Basically follows the same curve as life expect I’d guess.
I’m betting whoever made those graphs wasn’t expecting “when you’re 12 any and all childbearing is still ahead of you” to be interpreted as “all men should aspire to fuck 12 year olds”.
Well it sorta was a competition between the US and USSR, otherwise you’re totally right.
No questions, Atomic Wheelchair. Just a sincere request that you stay the fuck away from children.
The few times I have commented, I have been called profane names. It doesn’t bother me, but this topic makes me wonder how much of a double standard exists between what this site’s conformists can do and what non conformists can do.
@sam
what names?
Delurkers (not pedo creep) – have a Welcome Package!
Yes, dog lovers are welcome. Dogs are part of the Furrinati after all.
catgirl – the handsome man in my gravatar is my husband Louis, aka Mr K. 🙂
I’m thinking now my IBS could come in really useful here.
cloudiah – hey, a furball’s no worse than being called the arse end of the world (as one of our former PMs did). 😀
And by “non comformists” here, Sam means people advocating for adults having sex with children.
With a side order of “you people don’t really think misogyny and pedophilia are awful, you’re just saying that to conform with the group”.
Drat, typo.
Hey Sam, if you come here spouting misogyny, yeah, you’re going to get called names as part of being mocked.
Boo Fucking Hoo.
I think Sam is actually comparing the treatment he’s gotten to the unapproved comments in the OP. Apparently we’ve said some things to him which are in some ways equivalent to calling for the death and/or beating of women, as well as shocking homophobia and racism. And the trivialization of child abuse. Wow, Sam, what exactly did we say to you?
Fuck off, creep.
LOL at “the few times” he’s commented. He’s derailed more than an narcoleptic conductor.
Yes, Sam, please provide links to those horrible things we’ve said to you.