So over on the Men’s Rights subreddit, they’re having yet another invigorating and insightful discussion of economics. Not micro- or macroeconomics. Pussyconomics.
Stalgrim starts off the discussion with a call for more affordable, er, pussy:
The pussy is too damn high!
Demonspawn, a noted pussyconomist, explains the importance of having a well-regulated pussy market:
When another Redditor claims that the pussy market is already heavily regulated, what with prostitution being illegal and divorce laws and all that, Demonspawn gently corrects these common misunderstandings of pussyconomical thought.
“Perhaps you don’t understand what the pussy market is.”
“Perhaps you don’t understand what the pussy market is.”
“Perhaps you don’t understand what the pussy market is.”
Mammotheers! Your challenge for today is to see how many times you can work “perhaps you don’t understand what the pussy market is” into conversation. BONUS POINTS if you precede this comment with the words “au contraire,” or, even better, “au contraire, mon frère.”
The charming 5th_Law_of_Robotics suggests that we may be headed for pussypocalypse, pussyconomically speaking.
![5th_Law_of_Robotics 3 points 8 hours ago I've heard concerns that we're rapidly approaching peak-pussy. I dismiss those as alarmist. Surely when we get near that point some sustainable alternative will have been developed. /perhaps some sort of corn based solution exists . . . permalink save parent report give gold reply [–]Demonspawn 1 point 2 hours ago I've heard concerns that we're rapidly approaching peak-pussy. It's more like a pussy bubble. The government that has been artificially increasing the price/value of pussy collapses and we return to a more natural market.](https://i0.wp.com/www.wehuntedthemammoth.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/peakpuss1.png?resize=512%2C308&ssl=1)
I’m honestly a little baffled by this discussion. My own pussy supply is quite stable. Except sometimes when it gets bored and bites me.
News to Men’s Rights Redditors: “Inversion of the market” does NOT mean “something that annoys and scares me personally and is therefore evil.”
I remember the day my twin pussies and their two siblings were supplied – on our bed, by their mother Roxy, who definitely wanted us to be involved.
For a while there was a thing like a bone china teacup handle protruding from Roxy’s rear end. Couldn’t for the life of me think what it was or what I ought to do about it. Then after a few heaves, it turned out to be the tiny tail of firstborn kitten, Twiglet. All Roxy’s kits were breach.
Prostitution sets a cap on the market for the value men must supply in order to obtain sex? Whaaaa?
Is this guy actually saying that because prostitutes exist, gold-digging women will have sex with poor men, instead of going for the rich ones?
This whole thing just… It makes no sense.
“We care about universal equality.”
“Women aren’t human beings, but instead property that’s gotten away from us.”
“GamerGate is about ETHICS”
“Feminism isn’t an inclusive movement”
Wait, what was that middle one again?
“Gamergate is about ethics?”
How does this movement have any serious adherents anymore?
I think they’re just complaining about anything, just as an excuse to complain, because they’re all so cranky from the chronic diaper rash they have from not bothering to wipe their behinds “thoroughly,” unless they have a hot date.
The thing about diaper rash, though, is that you have to stay on top of it. You can’t just wipe on a Saturday night, and think the rash will go away and never come back. You have to wipe consistently, in order to first beat the rash, and then keep it at bay.
Skidmarks on underwear are a mark of diaper-rash to come, or else it already exists on the behind of the underwear’s owner.
So, next time some MRA starts making asinine complaints that make no sense at all, just check their diapers… I mean underpants, and see if they have a rash.
Someone alert Desitin. They could market to MRAs and make a fortune!
I take it 5th_law_of_Robotics and Demonspawn are taking the piss out of pussy economics? I than think of a truly horrible interpretation of Demonspawn’s argument (i.e. welfare-raging), but outside snark, the only possible interpretation I can think of for 5th_law’s comment is this:
The only pussy supply that matters is the kind that meows and purrs. Around my place, I need it to catch mice. And since my two are spayed, there won’t be any lowering of the value anytime soon.
Oh wait…that’s not what these dorks are on about, is it?
Well, it’s pretty clear that the posts were written by bored students in a macro-economics class, for which said students will be receiving a “D”.
It never ceases to amaze me that these men don’t really get that they are talking about body parts. What about, for example, handconomics? Sometimes I could really use a third one.
When I was in high school, a guy made a comment about my pussy. I just looked at him blankly, and replied, “Oh, no. I don’t have a pussy. My landlord doesn’t allow pets.”
I then went on to tell all about the “fake cat” my dad had purchased, to give us the heart-healthy benefits of petting something furry. It was literally a tubular pillow, with a fake-fur covering, but you know, it was soothing to sit with it on your lap and pet it.
Still, noting beats real pussy.
I didn’t understand his reaction until a few years later, when someone kindly explained the slang to me. Frankly, I think the MRA’s hatred of cats is intimately connected with their hatred of women, a.k.a. “pussy.” If vaginas had been dubbed “canines,” the English speaking MRAs of the world would have decried dogs, and touted the value of those alpha pussy-cats.
“So over on the Men’s Rights subreddit…” are rapidly becoming the most terrifying collection of words in the English languish.
Perhaps we indeed do not understand what the pussy market is. I made some word substitutions to the subredditors to clarify, and it does begin to make a bit more sense (although still not actual sense):
I think they’re upset that their old forms of currency (money, home, protection, etc.) are no longer valid. Women have figured out how to get those things on their own and most of us aren’t willing to trade sex for them any more.
“It’s more like a pussy bubble. The government that has been artificially increasing the price/value of pussy collapses and we return to a more natural market.”
*rolls eyes*
For crying out loud; just what the fuck is it with these fucking idiots.
I already own three and that’s plenty.
Corn based alternatives? So he’s planning to take a corn cob, hollow out the middle, and then…
That seems unhygenic.
It always depresses me slightly when I can actually follow an MRA discussion, because usually it’s pretty vile. This is no exception.
He’s referring to the notion that, if prostitution is legalized, then lower-income men will be able to always negotiate a bare-minimum price for sex. There’s actual research that supports this–in countries where legalization has occurred, sex workers often report lower incomes and standards of living, because there are more women who are willing to resort to sustenance sex-work, since they don’t have to worry about being arrested. This is further enhanced by the fact that the cops often decide to also pass on enforcing the remaining laws regarding trafficking and so forth (and, of course, they just continue to outright ignore complaints of rape by sex workers).
Note the key word in that last paragraph–“sustenance”. This has nothing to do with women who rationally choose to engage in sex-work because they view it as fun, or somehow preferable. It’s simply the only thing available to them to put food on the table. It’s a desperation tactic, and regarding it as ‘consensual’ requires ignoring the economic coercion going on.
So this scumbag is basically figuring that he can take advantage of poor women more easily. It’s shitbags like him that got me to reconsider my position on legalization. (I still support it, but only after we actually have a functional social safety net that prevents women from reaching the point of choosing between streetwalking and starvation.)
“Your challenge for today is to see how many times you can work “perhaps you don’t understand what the pussy market is” into conversation.”
I accept this challenge, and have informed the cat who’s been yowling at me to feed him for the third time today that he clearly doesn’t understand what the pussy market is and how easily I could replace him with a less-greedy kitty.
(Not that I ever would, obviously; he’s far too cute. I’m just dread-gaming him.)
Kevin K:
I think this is extremely generous. I doubt either of these geniuses so much as half-watched a TED talk on macroeconomics, let alone sat in an actual classroom.
On a less-flippant note, this whole ‘omg pussy pass/pussy power’ MRA thing always confuses me and pisses me off, because they seem to do this weird thing of conflating ‘women I personally want to have sex with’ and ‘all women everywhere’. Even if you do accept their weird creepy ‘having a vagina gives you SO MUCH POWER because men want to get to it’ hypothesis, it STILL only applies to a small subset of women. Do they honestly think an 85 year old housebound woman also has ~too much power~ because she has a vagina and omg pussy market? Where does she fit into this? Or a severely disabled woman who can’t speak or walk without assistive tech, or a woman who weighs 400lb, or women with penises rather than vaginas, or pretty much ANYONE who doesn’t fit into their adorable little ~HB8+ category? Do MRAs not even think of those people as women, or do they just forget they exist?
Just weeks ago on this very site I read about how the value of pussy was at an all time low! I put everything in pussy and I can’t wait to sell it all at this new high and sit at home eating bonbons, laughing at the fools who thought the pussy market was too volatile to make a good investment! Your economic advice is always sound, David.
A lot of these guys like to talk economics, and I suspect a lot of them are pretty libertarian. Given that, why can’t they just accept that the market decided that they aren’t a desirable product? The invisible hand won’t even touch them.
Oh, is it dehumanizing to talk about men as consumer products? Wonder how bad being dehumanized is. :/
Except that they were never valid. Marriage-as-economic-transaction (at least in the sense that men exchange money for sex and women exchange sex for financial security) is almost completely ahistorical. The whole concept arose from the observation of a weird correlation between the availability of birth control and out-of-wedlock births and the attempt to explain this. The Brookings Institute put out a paper with the following, completely unsupported assertion:
You can read the whole thing, including the almost total lack of cited references, here: http://www.brookings.edu/research/papers/1996/08/childrenfamilies-akerlof
The context of this statement is that marriage rates declined because the stigma of out-of-wedlock birth declined, and so the incidence of “shotgun marriages” went down. That kind of makes sense? But there’s no evidence provided for it, and certainly no evidence provided that the stigma of out-of-wedlock birth arose because of a sex/marriage economic transaction. This whole model is based upon a just-so story surrounded by smoke and mirrors.
@NonServiam
I see what you did there.
Women just cannot be a low enough cast for these guys. That’s what they’re whining about.
Emmy Rae wins roughly 1/4 Internets with this comment.
Why 1/4? Because the recent increase in pussy value has led to an increase in the price of internets*, I cannot afford my usual rate of 1 internets.
*Both porn and cat videos are to be found there, and since the price of pussy is at an all-time high now, it’s safe to say that the demand for internets is following lead.
Then again, I’m not quite certain how things really work in the pussy market theory. Perhaps I just don’t understand what the pussy market is. And thank God for that.