Here’s a meme posted recently to A Voice for Men’s Facebook page. I know, a graphic suggesting that any man who enters into a relationship with a woman is bound to end up “miserable, or divorced and broke” is pretty darn misogynistic.
The creator of this graphic, who has imaginatively picked “John Galt” as his pseudonym, explained his thinking thusly in several comments on the Facebook page:
In making it I was in fact thinking of the Nash Equilibrium in Game Theory, popularized by Russell Crowe in the Movie ‘A beautiful mind’. In a society where the hypergamous instincts of many women are driven to cruel extremes by feminism It is ever more relevant to highlight to men that being shamed or encouraged to compete for something that is repeatedly demonstrated as worthless is not only important but very healthy. …
[I]t is in fact Marriage I had in mind but these days cohabitation is the same as marriage under the law. Effectively it is impossible for men to trust even a purportedly good woman simply because of the law, but then it is up to women to change that – all we can do is defend our own freedoms and rights and that is what is most important to me. Of course competing for the right to be treated like garbage is the main point and intentions mean nothing without actions…for men that action must needs be self interest first – ironically the one thing we have been trained and bred to ignore.
So, yeah, in addition to being nearly incoherent, this is pretty much misogyny turned up to 11.
But I think we can do better. Let’s consider this graphic a challenge. I invite any readers here who have graphic talent — and those completely lacking graphic talent whatsoever — to come up with a fake AVFM meme that’s MORE misogynistic than this. BONUS POINTS if you can incorporate an actual quote from an AVFMer in the graphic.
To inspire you, here are some completely unrelated gifs of tiny animals being adorable. (I found them all here.)
If you don’t want to make a graphic, you can always post some more cute animal gifs. It’s been a long week.
Personal opinion, but if all you know about Nash Equilibrium was learned from a movie, you should probably stop talking about game theory.
For a second there, I was like “Has David lost it?” …and then I saw the critters. <3
“…But, as such a society is something I made up in my head for a misogynist RPG while brainstorming my brilliant username, just ignore me.”
“It’s up to women to change that.” Right. Like it’s up to women to change male rape, male domestic violence, male on male assault/murder, unfair custody for fathers, what else? Ah well those are the only problems I can think of that are actually steeped in reality. Mind you i cant leave out that ever so pressing issue of women not dropping their pants when asked and yknow, actually choosing who they want to sleep with. And not staying at home like they used to. How dare those feminists not pick up their game and fix this disaster! Misandry!
And I love how “hypergamous” is implied to mean “they’re having sex with everyone but me”. Not entitled at all, Mr Galt. 😛
I for one welcome the absence of assholes in the dating pool.
Bwahahahahahaaaa!
I love that the Jack Russel is trying so hard to get in on the action.
Sunnysombrera,
It’s also up to women to not make boners sad by having short hair, tattoos, wearing pants or being fat.
I’d like to introduce a new (personal) feature: Edit the Manosphere Ramblings. Wherein I copy edit the idiotic and cruel ramblings of a Manosphere denizen into something easier to read, less stuffed with blabby circular poor writing, removed of bogus terms and faux-intellectualism, and with a sharper focus on the horrors actually proposed.
Here is my re-write of Mr. Galt’s explanation for his meme:
I think that’s clearer… and, it just makes Mr. Galt look worse.
Uh, I think his sentence got away from him here:
Is he really trying to say that men being shamed is important and healthy?
Also, my takeaway from that scene in A Beautiful Mind is that everyone will be happier if every dude in the world didn’t chase after the one HB10. If anyone was being hypergamous in that example, it was the guys who wanted to get with the hot one.
No. He’s a crappy writer, and what he means in this tortured sentence is that is important to highlight to men that they should not allow themselves to be shamed, etc. It was this awful sentence that inspired me to try a re-write.
It’s up to women to change things so dimwitted, perpetually angry misogynists will want to date us!
…yeeeah, I’ll get right on that.
*it not “is”
Where can I go where muscular men (or weight-lifting women – arms are not gendered) are having arm wrestling matches to marry me? I’m not that down for marriage personally, but I’d like to watch the arm wrestling.
Actually, now that I’ve said it; I’m not sure any body parts are inherently gendered.
Divorced men possess vastly more wealth (like four times) than divorced women in North America so in addition to being misogynistic (BEING WITH WOMEN MAKES YOU MISERABLE BECAUSE BITCHES BE CRAZY YO), it’s factually wrong.
…and those that manage to escape this “mortal coil” of theirs find happiness in abusing sex workers of colour in Southeast Asia, it seems.
Wow, just wow.
Weirwood: it’s also up to women not to generate boners In the first place if they don’t want to get raped. Well, only in rapists, because #NotAllMen right?
Personally I’m all if favor of men who think like this ceasing to pursue women. I wish they’d just Go Their Own Way already and leave everyone else alone.
Challenge accepted.
And again. (TW: child sexual abuse, general fuck-up-edness.)
Holy shit. He actually writes like Ayn Rand! That is a spot on imitation of her style!
Another cute animal gif.
Umm, given that a Nash Equilibrium is the immediate self-interest solution (thus the worst over all) in any game in which agents can defect (I.e. Prisoner’s Dilemma), it makes no sense to cite it as an “inspiration” for the meme because you don’t want to be in a Nash Equilibrium. The MRA literally got the concept backwards. As far as I can make it out, the MRA thinks the graphic is encouraging men not to compete over women, and that means men move towards a Nash Equilibrium. But that’s wrong, he should have cited the Pareto-optimal solution, when people agree to cooperate.
If you are going to misapply game theory, at least gets the terms right.
Is it even a THING to compete for women? I haven’t ever had guys fighting over me, nor do I know any women who have been fought over. Maybe that’s just because we too hideous/fat/feminist or something though, so I don’t know, lol.