How stupid do you have to be to actually believe the following nonsense? Not just regular stupid. Men’s Rights stupid.
Heck, this is even stupid by normal Men’s Rights standards. It made me think of this line from Ruthless People.
Now, horqth could very well be a troll. His account is brand new, and, I mean, this is just amazingly dumb. But here’s the thing: his comments are being treated as if they are completely reasonable by the Men’s Rights subreddit. I noticed only a couple of mostly ignored comments out of more than 100 even raising the possiblity that he was a troll.
Not only has his post gotten dozens of upvotes, but in the comments there are numerous other Men’s Rights Redditors — not trolls — who’ve actually managed to outdo him in the sheer ridiculousness of their opinions. And they’re getting upvotes too.
Milessycamore seemed to suggest that horqth had understated the degree to which men were being victimized in both places, and more than 200 Redditors agreed:
Saxonjf thought it would be nice if more women would act like these strippers and make men feel “important special.”
Itchybrain, putting his economist hat on, suggested that the root of the problem was the massive over-valuation of women:
So how did the ladies get so overvalued in the first place? Blame the government and all that darn welfare. Responding to one contrarian Men’s Righster who suggested — get this! — that women are appropriately valued — FloranHunter laid down this truth bomb, by which I mean a bunch of complete and utter crap:
If only we could return to the good old days, when women would starve unless they were super nice to unattractive dudes who pestered them in bars!
Lawtonfogle also has no problem with the idea of men being valued for their money; he just wants to get more bang(s) for the buck.
![Lawtonfogle 10 points 1 day ago (12|2) Government intervention in the means of social support programs that result in a woman having far more bargaining power in relationship dynamics. If it weren't for laws that provided support for children and forced fathers to pay for children (even when they aren't the biological father), it would be a very different issue. Men would still be valued for their money and women for their attractiveness, but money would hold more value and being a male willing to commit would also hold (more) value. permalink source parent save give gold hide child comments [–]IOIOOIIOIO 5 points 23 hours ago (7|2) Effective male contraception is going to be amazing.](https://i0.wp.com/www.wehuntedthemammoth.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/lawton.png?ssl=1)
I give up.
I’m pretty sure that condoms are effective male contraception.
I just… Wow!
Did I misread that or did FloranHunter complain about women being too safe from violence?
The key problem – known to everyone intuitively, but now deemed politically inadmissible – is that men (but not women) need a good job in order to ‘have a life’ – that is, to acquire a partner and have a family. The explanation for this could not be clearer. Males possess mate-value in terms of the degree to which they possess ‘good genes’, regarding which male status is the major indicator. This is not the case for any woman: there being no overlap with men here, because female mate-value is ‘fertility’, not ‘good genes’; and as such is unrelated to status. Status is purely a measure of male mate-value. Inasmuch as the scope for males to achieve status is ever more narrowed by deliberate government anti-male discrimination and in artificially favouring women — and inasmuch as this is exacerbated by an inexcusably elitist-separatist motivation by those who have placed themselves within the government-media-education über-class — then many or most men indeed will not be able to ‘have a life’. The predictable impact of this is serious social breakdown, one major manifestation of which would be likely violence against the government-media-education elites, given that they are clearly identifiable as being responsible.
Someone please tell these d00dz about vasectomies.
Cat lady: what the fuck? I hate to be the one to break it to you, but men are not undervalued.
Obvious troll is obvious.
What I have learned from this post:
1. Men want women to make them feel “important special.” It doesn’t really matter what the woman actually thinks about the man.
2. The life of a single mother on welfare is cushy and glamorous.
3. It would be better if it was back in the old days, when, without a man, a woman starved or fell prey to violence.
4. Men are valued for their money and women for their attractiveness. Women’s attractiveness value has been over-inflated by government intervention. The only way to right this is to make sure money is valued way more than attractiveness. Women cannot be valued for their money and men cannot be valued for their attractiveness. No one can be valued for their personality.
5. Fathers shouldn’t have to help support and raise their children.
6. All women are essentially like strippers; they all pay attention to men for monetary gain.
Yep, greatest human rights movement of the 20th century.
How about this? How about: “Strip clubs are about the only place in the universe that Mens Rights’ maxim of ‘women are only after men’s cash’ becomes true”? SHE IS BEING NICE TO YOU BECAUSE SHE WANTS YOUR MONEY. That is her fucking job.
Didn’t quite follow all of that, Cat Lady, but I’m guessing your key theme is that love conquers all?
*sssssiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiigh*
@cat lady
i hope you realize that made no sense.
are you forgetting that “status” as a men benefits them? Like, if you have a well paying job, you get lots of money if you have a fancy title you get respect.
those status things are for men. they’re to benefit them. and if they’re whining that it’s not getting them women, well, no one is obligated to date anyone else.
Men don’t care about “good genes”. That is not a thing that dudes have ever invoked to justify their preferences, nope, never happened.
(Personally I don’t see why anyone should justify their preferences, as long as the people they prefer are all adults and capable of consent, but that’s a different argument.)
I do love how the original mister completely missed the entire point of strip clubs–to separate people from their cash.
I’m sure cat lady is not at all the catwoman who pooped in another thread a couple of days ago.
Is this Cat Lady troll the same as Cat Woman from the thread the other day? I call sock.
Ruthless People is one of my favourite films and that is one of my favourite scenes.
Of course Earl looks smart alongside MRAs.
Ninjaed by katz!
“20th century” should be “21st century.” Sorry, apparently I’m still preoccupied with 1985.
Cat lady: You do know that women also pass on their genes to their children? In fact half of everyone’s genes came from their mother. So, no, this:
…is complete and utter nonesense. Well, your whole post is complete and utter nonsense, this bit just stuck out at me.
There should be some sort of punishment for creating a nym too long to fit in the space available. Since she’s claiming to be a cat I say we spray her with water.
Which one was Catwoman again?
in cute animal updates, which are way more important than boring evopsych trolls who post walls of text, my sisters guinea pig is crawling all over my arms and seriously hindering my internet abilities
Cat woman was a very smelly sockish twit who did a driveby the other day. It was so boring I can’t remember the details.
Fade – squeee! 🙂
You know, guys. I’ve heard a lot of criticisms of welfare in my day, from all sorts of arenas: moral, political, economical. But this is the very first time I’ve ever encountered the complaint that welfare keeps a woman from fucking you. I mean, godDAMN.
RE: Cat Lady
Oh. It’s YOU again.
men (but not women) need a good job in order to ‘have a life’ – that is, to acquire a partner and have a family.
Uh, no. That’s bullshit. There are men who are supported by their families, or spouses, or by social support programs. *points to self* There are women who need to work or they’ll starve. *points to my mother*
Males possess mate-value in terms of the degree to which they possess ‘good genes’, regarding which male status is the major indicator.
Yup, because when I look at my husband, that’s what I think about. His genes.
female mate-value is ‘fertility’, not ‘good genes’; and as such is unrelated to status.
Where are you pulling this shit from? Oh, right, the Institute of Your Ass.
inasmuch as this is exacerbated by an inexcusably elitist-separatist motivation by those who have placed themselves within the government-media-education über-class
Did you even THINK about how you sound right now? Seriously, I’ve read Dr. Bronner’s soap lables less goofy than this!
The predictable impact of this is serious social breakdown, one major manifestation of which would be likely violence against the government-media-education elites, given that they are clearly identifiable as being responsible.
Well, that was a FASCINATING little fantasy, madam, but it’s just that: fantasy.
Wait, wait, I just realized something.
If hubby’s appeal to me is his genes… but I’m gay… and he can’t impregnate me… OH GOD HELP I’M BROKEN!
No, Catwoman is THIS, the greatest sock ever:
http://manboobz.com/2013/05/07/gullible-mens-rights-redditors-fooled-by-fake-jezebel-article-arguing-that-paternity-fraud-is-one-way-to-break-the-rule-of-fathers/comment-page-8/
11km, people.
Please tell me that was a Bowling for Soup reference.
Oh strewth, I’d forgotten the names of the Eleven Kilometres socks. 😀
But someone called Catwoman / Cat woman was here the other day, briefly.
Anyways, I’ve dropped a note to the Dark Lord to see if this is yet another escapee from the sock drawer.
The comments by “saxonjf” and “lawnfogle” in the OP are a stupid because they actually idealize the notion of women immitating strippers and fawning over men for profit. Aren’t MRAs supposed to oppose the objectification of men?
Also the whole analogy is stupid, because as far as motives are concerned, it equates men in a club setting with strippers. To me this seems overly simplistic at best and misandric at worst.
Ruthless people is in my top 5 favourite comedies ever. So many quotable lines :
“When my husband hears about this, he will EXPLODE!!”
“Either the police chief is a complete moron, and complete morons are rare…[sideways glance at Earl]”
“What’d he do? Hire a publicist??”
“I’ve been kidnapped by K-mart!!”
“We have 150 officers, 75 cars and 2 helicopters. He WON’T get away!”
“You’re very good at this. You should write children’s books.”
“I’m no criminal. I can’t even sell retail. And that’s legal!”
I could go on….
Oh yeah, the article. *snickers* I enjoyed the commenter that wasn’t a woman, and hadn’t been (allegedly) to a strip club, but still commented knowledgeably on the comparison…