Categories
are these guys 12 years old? block that metaphor boner rage chivalry citation needed crackpottery creepy evil women excusing abuse I'm totally being sarcastic irony alert kitties mansplaining men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny MRA pedestalization reddit vaginas victim blaming

A dude named Sizzletron shares his “honest opinions that are entirely merit-based, about women.” (Spoiler alert: They actually aren’t.)

This picture has nothing whatsoever to to with the post. I just like it.
This picture has nothing whatsoever to to with the post. I just like it.

It’s Friday. Why not welcome in the upcoming weekend with a picture of an anarchist cat and a completely unrelated,  completely unhinged manifesto from the MensRants subreddit, the Men’s Rights subreddit’s unruly younger brother.

In a post with the somewhat roundabout title “Just posting this publicly gives me an ulcer. But I won’t let it stop me,” an angry fella who calls himself sizzletron set forth his opinions about, well, a lot of things having to do with women. It’s a piece that’s pretty much impossible to summarize, since sizzletron apparently finds it difficult to keep the thread of an argument going from one sentence to the next.

Let’s dig in:

I think most women are very unfamiliar with being challenged to be better adults. I also think I have a lot of honest opinions that are entirely merit-based, about women.

We’re off to a good start with two sentences that have no logical connection to one another aside from the fact that their author is really, really mad at women.

I think that collectively most women, in the West especially, don’t have an understanding of ANY motivation that doesn’t support women blindly.

Uh, what? Motivation? I’m beginning to get the impression that sizzletron chooses a lot of his words by flipping through books and pointing at random selections.

For example, chivalry should dead and gone by now. I know it. Most guys who aren’t trying to get laid dishonestly know it. So why do women persist with claiming some sort of implicit right to it? Because it obviously benefits them to have men do shit for them, protect them (often from themselves, which would be hilarious were the net result so often fatal, or judicial, again for men), provide for them, admire them, pedestalize them. Feminism isn’t helping women. It’s putting baby in a very stupid, very un-respectable corner.

What does this even mean? How is chivalry the same as “putting baby in the corner.” Also, since when are feminists the ones promoting chivalry/

But sizzletron quickly moves on to a new topic: women’s intelligence.

Women are getting stupider by the day. Not hyperbole. Intelligence isn’t getting book smart. Intelligence is problem solving on your own without the agency of a mob apparatus.

What? What agency? What mob? What apparatus? WHAT IS GOING ON?

Ask me how much I actually respect the advances, societally, of a mob of hairshirts-for-men feminists? Not even a bit.

Wait, feminists are making men wear hairshirts? Even as a weird metaphorical accusation that makes no sense. People in certain religious traditions wore hairshirts as a way to show repentance; they didn’t force other people to wear them.

Now how many of those same organizations and feminists are alluded to lamely in a debate-by-the-numbers exercise that regularly passes for a discourse on gender relations?

Ok, I give up. I have no idea what the hell he’s even trying to say here.

You know what I do everyday?

Smoke weed? Read the “Ziggy” cartoon in the newspaper? Have a bowel movement?

I read the fashion mags my GF’s sister bequeaths us. My respect for women has absolutely PLUMMETED since I started doing so. Vacuous, vagina-centric, vapid, vicarious, venereal-in-waiting. All the ‘V’ words.

Uh, vicarious? “Venereal-in-waiting?” If you were going for something that was even vaguely coherent, you probably should have stopped with “vapid.”

But Mike, what about the good women, they aren’t all self-interested limelight addicts expecting money for nothing and sex for free. No, you’re very correct about that.

Ooh, a Dire Straits reference. It doesn’t actually make much sense, but way to show you’re up to the minute with what the cool kids are listening to these days.

But they aren’t calling out the chickenshit manipulations of the modern feminist message, either: You can be a strong respectable female AND a major victim when it bloody well suits you to do so. You can identify with abused women even if you’ve never been abused.

Yeah, I think that’s called “empathy.”

Blindly protect women without ever asking how much of the modern women’s plight is due to or contributed to by stupid women. Let’s start IQ testing all the victims of abuse and see what the median average is.

You’re going to blame the victims of domestic violence because you think they’re “stupid?” Really?

Really. Let’s do it! We’ll never know if I’m right until we do.

You’re an even bigger asshole than I thought. And I already thought you were a huge asshole.

Let’s start statistically plotting women’s propensity for violence, for ignorance, for mindless sorority.

Yeah, I’d love to see THAT chart.

Let’s start calling women out for being shallow appearance-concerned adults with a blind eye to the very pretense of such. No one really cares about your fucking furniture, or your sense of style.

Wait. Now you’re mad at women for having nice furniture?

No one of ANY value gives a shit about that stuff. Blowhards do. Frauds do. People who can’t DO, do.

Backing away now.

It is high time women grew the fucking pair they keep insisting they have, or STFU about it already. You’re starting to look like fools. I can’t ignore it any longer.

STFU about what? What is “it?”

And to all the white knights out there, stow it. <===This last line is for the benefit of my FB ‘friends’.

What a treat it must be to have Mike/Sizzletron here in your Facebook feed.

152 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
alternatesteve90
10 years ago

Hey Dave & company. Speaking of Dire Straits, I just listening to “Sultans of Swing” on the radio this morning…..damn, is that tune awesome. =)

Dvärghundspossen
10 years ago

Because it obviously benefits them to have men do shit for them, protect them (often from themselves, which would be hilarious were the net result so often fatal, or judicial, again for men)

As you all know, not a native speaker, BUT shouldn’t there be a “not” in this sentence? Isn’t he saying that it would be hilarious if men died (while protecting women from other women)?

Viscaria
Viscaria
10 years ago

Feeling really bad for this dude’s girlfriend, and for her sister.

Brooked
Brooked
10 years ago

Now how many of those same organizations and feminists are alluded to lamely in a debate-by-the-numbers exercise that regularly passes for a discourse on gender relations?

He should look up the the definition of “allude”.

Vacuous, vagina-centric, vapid, vicarious, venereal-in-waiting. All the ‘V’ words.

Va va voom, Vietnamese, viscous, Voodoo, V: The Mini-Series

weirwoodtreehugger
10 years ago

Is this guy saying that feminists love women’s magazines? Of course you can be a feminist and still read them sometimes. I’ve done it. But feminists have criticized them plenty. I don’t think he did his research.

Also, if you’re going to criticize people for being stupide, you should make sure your own post is at least somewhat coherent.

Maybe my lady brainz are just too full of shoes and make up thoughts to comprehend his majestic and revolutionary prose style!

Howard Bannister
10 years ago

Now how many of those same organizations and feminists are alluded to lamely in a debate-by-the-numbers exercise that regularly passes for a discourse on gender relations?

Ooo, ooo, I get what he’s saying here!

He’s saying that when you cite sources or provide facts gathered by others instead of just assfax as he prefers, you’re the one who’s being anti-intellectual and lowering the standards of the debate!

Checkmate, feminists!

weirwoodtreehugger
10 years ago

Stupid not stupide

hellkell
hellkell
10 years ago

Put down the Cosmo, dude. That rag has very little relation to real life.

He writes like he’s 80 and has never actually met a woman.

gillyrosebee
gillyrosebee
10 years ago

Furniture mags are what has this guy’s undies in a bunch?

I wonder if he’s worried about hard chairs or soft ones? Sofas? Although, if he wants to take a stand against chaise longues, I’m totally with him. No one should be proud of having chaise longues. Chaise lounges. Longueseseseses. Those fainty-couchy things that I can never remember how to spell.

And tassels. Tassels are contributing to the downfall of western civilization, and that’s real.

hellkell
hellkell
10 years ago

He’s saying that when you cite sources or provide facts gathered by others instead of just assfax as he prefers, you’re the one who’s being anti-intellectual and lowering the standards of the debate!

AHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!! I HATE this line of sloppy thinking. I blame Fox News.

neuroticbeagle
neuroticbeagle
10 years ago

And tassels. Tassels are contributing to the downfall of western civilization, and that’s real.

That must be why our kitty overlords love to play with them. Tassels are a tool of the Furrinati.

Brooked
Brooked
10 years ago

Let’s start statistically plotting women’s propensity for violence, for ignorance, for mindless sorority.

Yeah, I’d love to see THAT chart.

LOL. I love how Mikey thinks throwing the word “statistically” in there turns this raging screed into a science project.

SeaLenz
SeaLenz
10 years ago

Delurking cuz this was so glaring to me:

“No one of any value” cares about sense of style at all, because that’s shallow. So it would have to be safe to assume that Sizzletron here wouldn’t care if a woman, say, didn’t shave her legs? Right?

gillyrosebee
gillyrosebee
10 years ago

Hello, SeaLenz! Please enjoy your complimentary Welcome Package!

You’re forgetting that buying matching towels or having nice furniture is shallow, valueless style. Women refusing to shave their legs or (heavens forfend!!) their armpits is against the Right and Proper Order of Nature!

Falconer
10 years ago

Ooh, a Dire Straits reference. It doesn’t actually make much sense, but way to show you’re up to the minute with what the cool kids are listening to these days.

Now trending on Twitter:

#HowDoIWorkThis
#LargeAutomobile
#MyBeautifulWife

Brooked
Brooked
10 years ago

read the fashion mags my GF’s sister bequeaths us. My respect for women has absolutely PLUMMETED since I started doing so.

My respect for non-misogynist men has not been diminished by all these impossibly stupid, poorly written, irrational manosphere hate rants, because I don’t ignorantly stereotype large swathes of humanity. Unfortunately, since Mikey finds empathy incomprehensible, I’m guessing bigotry comes easy to him.

titianblue
titianblue
10 years ago

I don’t read fashion mags myself. Is incoherence a common result of reading too many of them? Or is it that he’s been fapping off too much over the models in them?

sparky
sparky
10 years ago

Fizzletron reads fashion magazines everyday, and from these he’s formed an “honest” and “merit-based” opinion of women. And all women everywhere are the ones who lack intelligence.

Blindly protect women without ever asking how much of the modern women’s plight is due to or contributed to by stupid women. Let’s start IQ testing all the victims of abuse and see what the median average is.

Ah, I see, he’s just an abuse apologist. A woman gets beaten and abused because she’s stupid; not because the one doing the beating and abuse is an asshole.

Mklein
Mklein
10 years ago

And a really scary thing about that whole “let’s chart the IQs of abused women” part is that historically, people (especially women) who are likely to have markedly lower IQ test scores – namely intellectually disabled people, cognitively disabled people, developmentally disabled people, mentally ill people – have an especially high risk of abuse from their families, caretakers, and spouses. This is the kind of ableism that gets disabled people killed.

Viscaria
Viscaria
10 years ago

“No one of any value” cares about sense of style at all, because that’s shallow. So it would have to be safe to assume that Sizzletron here wouldn’t care if a woman, say, didn’t shave her legs? Right?

Sizzletron himself has evolved beyond the need for clothes. Or couches.

Chie Satonaka
Chie Satonaka
10 years ago

These guys like to argue that their “standards” regarding female attractiveness are biologically based, and at the same time, they denigrate any woman who spends time focusing on her appearance. Yet again, women are wrong no matter what they do. You’re ugly — you’re a terrible person. You spend time trying to look good — you’re a terrible person. I’m beginning to sense a pattern here…oh yeah, these assholes just flat out hate all women.

Brooked
Brooked
10 years ago

I’m calling “cool story bro” on his claim to have actually read a bunch of women’s magazines. He clearly wants to distance himself from the source, so he came up with the sketchy “my GF’s sister” angle.

Also women’s magazines are an ubiquitous target of MRA contempt, so much so that they function as part of the Unholy Trinity of Female Suckitude, along with Sex in the City and Jezebel.

Ivy Shoots
10 years ago

Somebody should “bequeath” him a stack of GQs, Esquires, and Playboys, so his respect for men can similarly plummet.

Lids
10 years ago

He forgot the most important V of all: Ventriloquist.

opium4themasses
opium4themasses
10 years ago

@Ivy shoots I don’t read the rest of Esquire, but I do like reading Charlie Pierce’s work on their politics blog. He has a propensity for using ableist language when referring to the fringier aspects of conservative err… thought. However, his analysis is usually good

Also, his blog has the best motto “Fk the deficit, people got no jobs, people got no money.”

As to this asshole in the OP, this screed seems fairly generic. Sounds a lot like the people yelling about kids these days and their rap music.

The lack of coherence wasn’t even entertaining. 2/10.

1 2 3 7