It’s the eternal question: do misogynists spend their entire lives looking for excuses to get mad at women, or are they so naturally enraged by any evidence of female autonomy that they can’t help but erupt in rage over the tiniest of things?
We may never know the answer to that question. What we do know: almost anything can provoke them, no matter how trivial it is, no matter how misguided their anger might seem to anyone who doesn’t actually, you know, hate women. Let’s look at some of the latest things to cause women-haters to lose their shit.
1) British tennis champ Andy Murray’s announcement this week that he was hiring former female tennis champion Amélie Mauresmo as his coach. Even though she’s, you know, a lady.
On Twitter, as Buzzfeed has chronicled, some have taken exception to Mauresmo’s status as a non-man.
https://twitter.com/zainmohammed786/status/475642785979449344
https://twitter.com/ollieman_95/status/475620687391260672
Others have suggested that maybe she’s more of a man than him – ho ho!
Amelie mauresmo to be andy murray's new tennis coach! About sums him up he plays like a woman only she's more man than he'll ever be.
— Paul Kemp (@53pkempy) June 8, 2014
Why it would matter to any of these people just whom someone who is not them wants as his coach remains unclear.
2) An article on the Huffington Post noting that on D-Day, one woman – war correspondent Martha Gellhorn – accompanied the 150,000 men who stormed the beaches.
It’s an interesting story: all the female correspondents who requested spots on the boats were turned down, so she ended up sneaking her way into the invasion by hiding in a ship’s bathroom.
But over on the A Voice for Men forums, someone called Humansplaining w/ Jarred is outraged that “Feminists can’t even let Men have D-DAY for themselves!”
Here we are on the 70th anniversary of a watershed moment in one of the bloodiest wars in human history, where thousands of men selflessly gave their lives, and some Feminist feels the need to devote an entire article to the fact that there was also ONE woman involved! There you go, it’s official – the ratio of worth from women to men, is 1:150,000. Those two are completely equal in the eyes of many Feminists, apparently. You can spend all your time relaying the experiences of that one female in great detail, without even the slightest nod to the individual experiences of those 150,000 other human beings that were involved, many of whom perished in the process. Because VAGINA.
Yep. That’s right. Telling the story of one woman on D-Day is an attack on all the men involved. Hell, let’s take that further. Any story told about any individual person involved in a collective effort should be considered a grave insult to all the others. Saving Private Ryan is an insult to all soldiers who weren’t Private Ryan!
3) LEGO is launching a new series of scientist minifigures – only this time, they’re women!
On the Justice for Men & Boys (and the women who love them) website, British MRA and would-be politician Mike Buchanan sniffs that this move by LEGO belongs in the
‘You couldn’t make this s*** up!’ file. Doubtless it will sell well to hatchet-faced mothers determined to quash any signs of femininity in their unfortunate daughters.
Apparently acknowledging the existence of female scientists is somehow an injustice to men and boys?
4) Older women sometimes have sex with younger men.
There’s a certain kind of man who likes to loudly declare just which women – or categories of women – he “wouldn’t bang.” Our old friend Heartiste – the white-nationalist, purple-prose-writing pickup guru – is a member of a slightly smaller subgroup: he gets angry when other men have sex with the women he’s declared unsuitable, a group which apparently includes all but 0.1% of women his age and older.
In a recent post, Heartiste lambastes the dating site CougarLife.com as a symptom of our “rapid cultural collapse.” Its crime? Matching up “mangy cougars” and their “dusty muffs” with “inexperienced younger men hauling a knapsack of blue balls.”
While Heartiste directs most of his hate at the so-called cougars themselves – for the crime of having sex while female and forty plus – he’s indignant that younger men, in his mind, allow themselves to resort to
the shabby hole of a bottom shelf jezebel to alleviate your incel. … a tepid squirt of pallid pleasure in exchange for your dignity and psychologically distressing confirmation that this is the best you might ever do.
Apparently the idea that a younger man and an older women might actually enjoy having sex with one another is too much for his fragile misogynist mind to take.
Indeed, it’s hard not to wonder if Heartiste actually likes sex at all – or if his own alleged lovemaking prowess extends much beyond a “tepid squirt.” This, after all, is a guy who thinks going down on a woman is “beta,” because burying your face in what he calls that “fetid, humid mess” is sort of icky, and might lead her to think that you think she’s hot.
And last but not least:
5) Some people are trying to get colleges to take rape more seriously.
In a column in the Washington Post, George Will sniffs that colleges, by addressing what he calls “the supposed campus epidemic of rape” are bestowing upon “’sexual assault’ victims” a “coveted status that confers privileges,” thus encouraging others to jump aboard the victimhood express.
Others have already torn apart Will’s argument pretty thoroughly. So I’ll just note one not-so-little irony: the headline for Will’s column, as it ran in the Post, was “Colleges become the victims of progressivism.”
Why is it that the people who most loudly condemn the supposed “cult of victimhood” are the first to claim that they’re the ones who are really being victimized – by “progressives,” by feminists, by female tennis coaches, by stories about women in war, by LEGO figurines of female scientists, by women they don’t like having consensual sex, by anti-rape activists trying to create a climate in which more than 12% of rape survivors on campuses feel safe enough to report their rapes?
You forgot the ring finger length bullshit.
Kim, those are lovely smiles!
Quackers, you nailed it. MRAs, PUAs, the whole lot of scrotosphere types – they don’t seem to have the first idea about enjoying anything. They really are the most miserable, angry idiots, and willfully so, it seems to me. I know one can’t wish oneself happy, but like you said, there doesn’t seem to be anything they enjoy except the perverse pleasure of trying to make women unhappy or afraid. Such losers, really.
It’s a double win: it means almost every woman is safe from being approached by him!
I don’t even remember how the finger thing worked, just that it would supposedly tell you who was gay. Why asking the person if they’re gay if for some reason you really have to know isn’t an option remains unclear. But I’m picturing him skulking around at bars staring at people’s hands and muttering to himself about relative finger lengths, which would be comically creepy.
I was talking about the MRA’s usage of the word, not whether the word itself is related to trans women in any way. As you probably know, some words that are innocuous in meaning can be leveraged against oppressed groups in order to insult them. Kind of like the term “mentally ill”, which on its own is not disablist but can easily be used to attack mentally disabled people.
That’s the one.
On the term hatchet face; I’ve only ever heard it in the movie Crybaby so I thought it meant ugly. I didn’t know it meant thin hard face.
Ally, we do know this, but that’s not what you said at first. You said you felt like it was a transmisogynist slur, and that’s not the case. Could it be used that way? yes, but so could a lot of things, like you said.
The first time I ever heard it in the US the person was talking about Matthew McConnehey (sp?), btw.
At least this time around. I also heard it used to refer to someone’s mother in law back in the 80s in Texas. It’s always been an insult, ime.
I’d bet real money that it was mostly used in the US as a slur against Native Americans.
In TX, I could definitely see hatchet-face being flung as an insult.
He’s using it as a standard misogynist trope against feminists, same sort of shit the suffragettes had thrown at them. I wouldn’t be in the least surprised if they use it against trans women too, if they know it. It’s an old-fashioned as well as just old description, I seldom see it used at all. That doesn’t mean it doesn’t get used against trans women, but with most MRAs I’d be mildly surprised if they even knew the term.
It was Mr C who used it to refer to actor-whose-name-I-can’t-spell. Which, to refer back to the thread of dread and woe for a moment – beauty standards are not universal! Mr C was raised in Asia till he was 13 and often finds what’s considered attractive here a bit odd, especially in men.
Did anyone in the US see that house majority leader Eric Cantor just lost in the primaries? The winner David Brat is even worse. He’s super racist. Hopefully this will give the Democrat a chance to win the general.
Even if Brat does win, his voting record won’t be any worse than Cantor’s. That’s why I’m kind of gleeful about this. The Republican party created a monster by nurturing extremists and now that monster is turning on them. They thought they could play up all this anti-government right wing sentiment to fire up the base and still control that base. They can’t. It’s hilarious.
The guy’s actual family name is Brat? Oh please let him throw a hilarious tantrum that gets captured on camera at some point.
Is is Freddie Mercury? The mo and hair are very reminiscent.
@kittehserf
It’s quite sad. I have low grade depression myself, so I don’t really feel truly happy that often. But I do have hobbies I enjoy, friends I like to hang out with. The only enjoyment the scrotosphere (I love that term btw) seem to get is when they are hurting women, or think they are hurting women and especially when they think they’re hurting feminists. I remember when Fartiste would post evo-psych “studies” and write about how he imagined feminists and “manboobs” would get all angry and upset at it, when really it’s just the same old eye-rolling crap we’ve seen since forever.
If your source of happiness is imagining your “enemies” being hurt and miserable, and on top of that being hurt and miserable specifically because you think studies are saying they are inferior or somehow lesser than men, then you need serious help.
I can understand that! Even born within this culture, the whole “dude whose face was drawn with a ruler” look as being the last word in gorgeous leaves me scratching my head in puzzlement.
Gosh, I wonder why that could be? If only there had been decades of studies and books and commentary examining this mystery!
Yes and yes. Do try to familiarize yourself with reality sometime.
This is so random and idiotic, it deserves a gold star.
Ooh, we played something like this in the states! It’s called “foursquare” and it’s played with one of those big, bouncy rubber balls, like you use for dodgeball.
Quackers – truth!
@ Kittehs
Yeah, I like soft features in men. During my two brief residencies in Texas everyone tried very hard to talk me out of that preference, but nope, didn’t work. Male coworkers/friends still try that now sometimes, actually. They’ll be all “but he looks like a girl” and I’ll be all “yeah, isn’t he beautiful?”. Frustrates the hell out of them.
this isn’t really a thread that needs brain bleach, but here is a video of a raccoon eating grapes. At the table. With it’s hands.
Women, who are seen by society as inherently weak and incompetent, are pushed out of jobs by men that involve physically demanding tasks.
such contrary
much cogent
so disprove
w0w
Quakers, that’s the exact opposite of brain bleach for those of us who have the fuzzy bastards taking up residence in our residence.
double for tree rats
I played foursquare when I was a teenager. I used to beat guys too, so it’s clearly a misandrist game. 🙂
/in a quiet voice my main preference in men is very little body hair. I don’t like hairy backs, chests, feet, toes, arms. I’m even fine with no leg hair. I’m also not a fan of facial hair either.