Oh dear. Fantasy author and garbage person Vox Day is having one of those (vox) days, and has decided to take it out on, you guessed it, feminism, pounding out an overwrought little rant on his Alpha Game blog.
Never give feminists an inch. Don’t agree with them, don’t tolerate them, show them no mercy whatsoever. Feminism is a Satanic, anti-Christian, anti-reason, anti-science ideology that destroys literally everything it touches and everyone who embraces it.
Wow. He’s so mad he’s practically plagiarizing Pat Robertson’s famous quote about feminism being “a socialist, anti-family political movement that encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism and become lesbians.” I’m not sure how Vox managed to forget the lesbian witchcraft angle.
Reject it and its adherents the way you would reject someone offering you plutonium on their bare hands; to accept it is to begin to die a slow and painful death.
Might I offer you some notes, Vox? This bit seems a little understated. I mean, the plutonium thing is pretty good, but a person handing you plutonium isn’t anywhere near as scary as having, say, a bear do it. Or a shark. Or a bear-shark. Or a bear-sharknado.
The problem isn’t merely that feminists are ugly and hateful, or that their ideology is incoherent and deluded, but that by mere toleration of them, through mere intellectual contact with it, you are permitting your life to be infected and degraded.
Clearly Vox, a dude who clings to memories of his D-list celebrity as a former member of an angsty dance band two decades ago, and who devotes much of his life to pounding out hateful and unintentionally self-parodic rants on the internet, offers us the very model of a healthy and happy life well-lived.
Reject all of it. Reject their appeals to equality. Reject their pretense to intellectual standing. And most of all, personally reject all of those who subscribe to it in any way, shape, or form. Any man who calls himself a feminist is ideologically transgender and mentally unstable.
Ideologically transgender? Wow. He’s come up with an even more obnoxious way to call someone a “mangina.”
Vox, you’re so cute when you’re angry!
And by cute I mean a you’re a pathetic, hateful, disgusting excuse for a human being.
I work in business, namely marketing and sales, where EVERYONE wears a suit. Would like to state that the Matthew types that sometimes join rarely last more than a month. Sometimes not even two weeks. Even if they agree to wear business dress, their refusal to listen to instructions gets them the boot. If they didn’t wear business dress they wouldn’t make it past the interview.
Precisely. Maybe it doesn’t affect him personally (yet) but I am perfectly okay with the club being punished for deciding to sign a rapist in a high profile position. Major props to that sponsor, too, for a beautifully classy set-down.
Intravenous lines are vein rape. And nasogastric feeding tubes are nose-stomach rape!
PoM: good point.
Also an edit on my above post – sometimes people who don’t wear suits on the interview DO get employed, if they’re seen as promising enough. The company does look for the best person, not the best dressed, and it’s understood that unemployed people generally don’t have the money to buy business wear. But attitudes like Matthews? Unacceptable.
QFT
I understand that Evan’s fiancee’s father has guaranteed to replace any losses incurred by Oldham as a consequence of the signing. Can you imagine being so keen on your daughter marrying an unrepentent rapist that you’re prepared to pretty much buy him a football club? The mind, it boggles!
And brain surgery is brain rape.
Since the brain is the most sexual organ that we have, it’s obviously the worst kind of rape.
WAKE UP, SHEEPLE!
[An aside: I love it when people use the word “sheeple” in earnest. It lets me know not to take them seriously. That one little word can cut out so much extraneous conversation and attempts at understanding.]
When I hear sheeple, I imagine a centaur type creature but it’s a human/sheep. They are usually already awake 🙂
kirbywarp:
Funny thing: I’ve had meetings with customers where my boss told me beforehand not to wear a suit. Apparently, it’s important I look like a tech geek as well as sound like one.
@sunnysombrera Yep. There’s a big difference between not being able to afford a nice suit (but still making an effort to find dressy-looking pants and a collared shirt), and walking into an interview with a big chip on your shoulder.
The fact that he says “the interviewer’s supposed authority” – he hasn’t even walked in the door, and already he’s hostile and insubordinate.
Also, his real name is on his blog, and employers know how to use Google. I’d say his chances of getting hired for steady employment are about the same as Roosh’s.
@Moggie:
Ha. I guess we work in very different places. Is there a particular type of “tech geek” look that you were meant to go for? Or did they just rely on you naturally falling in to the correct look?
I guess in that situation, Matthew would purposefully where a suit, just because he thinks appearance shouldn’t matter so he should be able to do the opposite of what is expected?
I’m browsing his blog now… and wow, appropriate title. He definitely has issues with authority. Somehow he latches on to really absurd and absolute beliefs that occasionally come from kinda-reasonable beginnings. It really reads like a personal blog of a young adult, though, since his dialogue is solely with himself and not with anyone else,
It feels like someone could sit him down and give him a stern talking-to, and he’d turn out alright. Like, if someone let him know that cultural norms existed, and that was a thing that made mundane things important or made problematic things wide-spread.
Maybe it would at least make him realize that many of his issues with society stem from personal insecurities that he projects onto everyone else.
Dammit, I read some posts on Matthew’s blog, and now I kind of hope he comes back so I can ask him some questions. I’m actually really curious –
if you shouldn’t have sex because it might make babies, does that mean that if you’re infertile you’re in the clear, then? I can’t get pregnant. So that’s cool, right?
Or should I not know that I’m infertile because a “doctor” diagnosed it by “penetrating” me?
Also, since you feel that doctors and gynecologists should never examine a lady’s private parts and that humans should go back to the way they live “(or didn’t)” before the invention of doctoring, you’re saying I should have accepted my own death as an acceptable cost of my dignity and just resigned myself?
I really want to know if Matthew would stick to his guns when faced with an actual human being rather than just the ideals he creates in his own head. I’m a pretty cool person, I think, and I think overall I’m glad a doctor saved my life by taking my uterus out. My “loss of human dignity” came with what I feel is a net benefit.
I’m not willing to look at his blog, but if anyone else who has can answer this for me, I’d appreciate it:
Does he think that all doctors are bad, or only OBGYNs? In other words, if he came down with rectal cancer, himself personally, would he be faced with the choice of either dying or compromising his beliefs, or does he reserve that “death is better” decision for the people with uteri?
PoM: I have a feeling that if his own life was on the line he’d about-turn on his belief at once. If it was someone else’s? I’m not so sure. Maybe. He does come across as a kid that’s just mouthing off without thinking about what it is he’s saying.
What is it about the field of computer science/software development that it seems to attract so many people whose thinking is so epically flawed who are at the same time so absolutely, unshakably convinced that they alone possess TEH TROO LOGIKS!!!
I mean, we all have cognitive biases and flawed habits of thought, and we all (to a greater or lesser degree) have the tendency to hold on to conventional wisdom and our own opinions and beliefs even in the face of complicating or contradictory evidence. But it’s been my experience that the field of computers generally, and software development particularly, is just stuffed full* of people who are pig-headedly, self-righteously, solid-down-to-the-core CERTAIN about things that are not just wrong but built on demonstrably faulty premises with mangled, deeply flawed, tautological faux-logic.
*beyond what I would consider a demographically representative proportion
Thus Spake Zarasunnysombrera:
Alas, I don’t think Matthew is a kid. Some of the date references in his blog suggest he’s close to my age, and that’s old enough to know better.
@Mouse Farts: I think he’d say that you’re mentally ill, because you can’t have babies and yet you still want sex, which is what he says about gay people.
No, wait, sorry, that is ascribing to him a consistency that he has yet to demonstrate.
He claims that his view on gynecology is not hypocritical, as he never ever plans to get a prostate exam.
Best I can make out, he is at least even handed about the doctor ban – he feels that you should exercise, eat healthfully, and “believe in yourself,” and if you have an issue, you should seek the kind of “natural” remedy humans favored before modern medicine. He also feels that gynecologists can still be doctor-y, but they should never ever touch a lady – ever. They should put together exam kits and write manuals on how to perform an exam on yourself or have a husband do it. This may result in less accuracy in diagnoses, but he claims that this is an acceptable cost to “preserving human dignity.”
Matthew has also disabled all comments because he has no interest in hearing any dissent. Like literally, that is what he says.
Oh, and he describes orgasms as “often disappointing.”
Speak for yourself, dude.
My theory about that is that coding requires logical thinking, and once these folks learn how to code they assume that they are already applying that same skill to all of their other thought processes.
They don’t actually examine and apply logic, they just assume that’s something they’ve already done, and so any belief or opinion they hold must have emerged in a logical fashion. However, the logic needed for coding is way shallower than the logic needed to examine a deeply-held belief, because the premises that hold up “women can’t STEM” are not clearly stated and must be unearthed, which is completely opposite to how things work in coding.
gillyrosebee:
I honestly feel the same way – the developers that I work and associate with are great people, but behind the veil of the Internet, I see coders being extremely arrogant in their beliefs and ways of doing things. Perhaps the sheer intensity of their belief comes from working in an environment where there are definite right and wrong ways to do things – password storage, SQL injection (or for Matthew’s benefit, “database rape”) prevention, and so on, and other people doing things wrongly so directly affects you and the efficiency with which you can work. I can’t say why it seems that those you see shouting are always wrong in their beliefs… perhaps they just shout louder than others.
Personally I admit I tend to hate everyone else’s code but mostly do it quietly 🙂
I think you found Dawkins’ problem.
I’d rather preserve my life than “human dignity.” Particularly if the dignity I’m supposed to be concerned with is my hypothetical husband’s. I guess Matthew and I will never be able to make this star-crossed romance work.
He may very well be. One of the many tragedies of heteronormative patriarchy is that people who are asexual often get the message that they are basically broken, as well as wrong and possibly even deviant, and it can inspire some interesting ego-protection (“I’m not the one who is bad, it’s all of you sex-crazed sickos who are the REAL deviants!!”). In a more enlightened world it might be possible for people to get the message that sexuality exists along a spectrum that is “normal” at a whole range of set points, and that not being interested in sex, or not finding sexual activity all that interesting or satisfying, isn’t any more remarkable than not having a taste for seafood. Some of us love it, others find it squicky, and then there is every possible stance in between.
In a perfect world, maybe he’d even find a partner with similar feelings and they could share companionship, love and intimacy that doesn’t rely on sex or physicality, and find happiness that meets both of their needs (I actually know a couple exactly like this and it IS possible even in our less-than-perfect world, but you have to be a whole lot less defensive than Mikey there).
I did a little clicking around his site and he seems of a piece with many of the folks I’ve met in CS fields: simultaneously horrified and fascinated and working up all that energy into a rigid wall behind which he’s huddled in a defensive crouch, unwilling to give an inch in case it calls attention to some other inconsistency. Overwhelmingly, after my first burst of annoyance and WTFery is past, all I feel is pity.