Fellas, make up your minds! Are feminist ladies wily seductresses out to entrap innocent men using the power of their sexiness? Or are they evil uggos who never get laid?
While the zeta males over at A Voice for Men lament their alleged victimization at the hands of an alleged undercover feminist honey trap, who allegedly lured them into skeezy behavior by, among other things, crossing and uncrossing her legs, our old friend Heartiste once again assures his readers that feminist ladies are icky fugs:
A powerful shiv to the bloated gut of feminism is to remind normal, attractive women of the gross, ugly, and deranged feminist women (and their effete male lackeys) who purport to speak for all women. Women are nothing if not herd followers, and if it’s made clear to the Normal Majority of women that feminists are unbangable fugs no worthwhile man would touch with a manlet’s micropeen, then the herd will change course and leave the losers in its dust.
Hate to break it to you, dude, but you’re not the first person to try to defeat feminism using the brilliant strategy of calling feminists ugly. It never works.
Social Mangina of Grumpy Justice, perhaps.
Apparently in 1914 the worst thing a woman could do to ruin her appearance was get a sunburn.
@GrumpyOldMangina – did I read it right that they were originally accusing you of being another sock of that one lady they keep appending names to, before deciding you must be a sock of David? And that they didn’t so much as skip a beat between the two accusations?
Re Ad hominem arguments… Occasionally, in philosophy, you encounter the following use of the term “ad hominem”:
Professor A: I argue that X, because blablabla.
Professor B: Professor A, you’re inconsistent. You argue that X now, but normally, you argue that Y, in fact, you’re famous for arguing that Y. And Y actually implies not-X
Professor B (continues): Of course that was merely an ad hominem – I do believe, however, that there are independent reasons as to why we ought not to accept X, regardless of whether we believe Y or not, such as blablabla.
I sometimes wonder whether that’s the original use of the term “ad hominem”, and later on it went on to cover “you say so, but you’re FAT!” as well. I mean, professor B above, in his first argument, does attack professor A (for being inconsistent) rather than his argument, but it’s a personal attack on a wholly different level than “well you’re FAT!”.
The ‘all feminists are ugly’ thing is SO old and obviously inaccurate, and could only possibly work on extremely insecure girls and women, whom I believe are the preferred targets of the PUA’s as they can be manipulated more easily into sexual acts. This is the problem, that PUA’s like to target young vulnerable women. What they think of any feminists appearance or features is of no consequence to any secure and self respecting person.
Fear of being alone is pretty powerful, especially for many women, who face more intense pressure to get coupled up and have babies (if wanted) at an earlier age.
However, Heartiste and ilk, in their rush to leverage that, have failed to realize that they are a fate much, much worse than being alone. They’re an embarrassment, a resume stain, a pestilence. They’re a terrible and easily forgotten one night stand at most, a creepy loser annoying people in a nightclub, following women into restrooms, sending angry texts, leaving stalkery voice mails. They are not what women are looking for. Being called ugly by them brings the same sense of relief as being turfed out from hell by Satan.
It’s an interesting glimpse into their mental gymnastics, though. They need to divide up the whole world into “teams” and pretend that all the pretty girls are on their team, otherwise it’s game over as far as ever getting laid.
QFT.
And GOM (& anyone else commenting over on the GQ article): You’re fighting the good fight.
I certainly can’t.
Anytime I inadvertently get into a “debate” with one of those fuckers (they’re really do flood *anything* having to do with feminism, even PBS & NPR FB comments sections) I always have something else to do. They then congratulate themselves on their “victory” after I stop responding to their (nearly frikkin’ limitless) bile.
I learned that feminists were called ugly as some sort of pathetic half assed argument against them when I was in 5th grade and doing a report on Susan B Anthony and the suffrage movement. I rolled my eyes then. It’s pretty cute that they think it’s going to deter the majority of grown women.
*squints*
I either meant “they really do flood” or “they’re”….no, I meant the first one.
Either way,
http://40.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lxdzrdBm101qc1ltro1_500.jpg
Too true, Buttercup Q. Skullpants. Being told you don’t possess the qualities PUAs find attractive is like being told the same by a dog’s pecker gnat. I don’t think it has the effect on women they think it does.
They are relying on a culture that teaches women that their only value is in their looks being appealing to men. Feminists have spent years dismantling that culture and misogynists hate the results.
“You’re Ugly”
OK
“You’re fat”
OK
“You are worthless and no one will ever love you.”
Um…no. Toodles!
WWTH: “Ugly” is irrelevant to feminists, as we still see the person as a person (thumbs up to whoever wrote proxieme’s quote). But to Heartiste and his lapdogs, a woman’s only value is in her looks and he is projecting that attitude onto women as well. Thinking that since we value ourselves for our appearance we’d be crushed by being called “ugly”…sorry dude, not how that works.
It would be a bit like trying to stop me from my goals by saying I’m bad at maths. Even if that was true, maths has nothing to do with my goals so why the hell would it bother me?
Damn you Lea, you ninja you.
I would think that just about any woman, no matter how she looks would rather join a group that tells women we’re people than a movement that tells women they dislike that they’re ugly (and therefore worthless) and tells men they dislike that they’re effeminate and small peened (therefore worthless).
I get that they think women are worth nothing beyond our looks, but I guess it just cracks me up that they have never heard the adage “you catch more flies with honey than with vinegar.” Most toxic movements do realize that, but the manosphere doesn’t and that’s why the revolution the hope for will never come. Nobody will ever be attracted to them besides the people already of that mindset to begin with.
http://1.viki.io/d/1863c/8b75dc48c9.gif
To be damned by the devil is to be truly blessed. And to be called unfuckable by a guy no one wants to fuck is the same.
Low level street harassment is called the ‘pretty girls’ problem. I don’t actually agree with that, but if sleazebags WERE responding to my ‘beauty’ THAT was what made me a feminist! By the age of 13 I had been harassed probably at least 100 times, and when you are a child it is that much more scary. That was when I became a feminist, knowing that this objectification was a direct result of mens’ power over women and girls, and nothing to do with my looks.
@Ellesar Exactly. It’s all excuses to try and deflect responsibility. Assholes have been doing it for years and the MRM continues to. Remember: no matter what the issue is, it’s always a woman’s fault.
sunnysombrera – they constantly contradict themselves – the harassment is supposed to be a ‘compliment’, ie they think we are attractive (like I gave a shit!), but then as soon as we do not like being humiliated by screams of ‘get your tits out’ etc and let them know this we are ‘ugly whores’!
@Ellesar – which pretty much proves that for them, “attractive” is nothing more than a synonym for “willing to put out”. It’s not like your looks change dramatically in the 30 seconds it takes for them to go from “hey baby baby ur gorgeous” to “ugly frigid lesbo skank, no one would want to fuck you anyway”.
All in all, this is a delightfully terrible vintage from Chateau Heartiste, made from the sourest of grapes.
@Kootiepatra: Yeah, at first they thought I was a sock for a woman named (IIRC) Diana Boston — who must be a hell of a woman if she has gotten under the MRAs’ skin to that extent.
The newest post on the thread is a call to “investigate” Jeff Sharlet — i.e., dig up dirt if possible, maybe a bit of doxx-and-threaten. Sharlet is a faculty member at Dartmouth, and Dartmouth has plenty of ways of protecting its own, so if they go to threats they might find their asses in a sling. He’s not going to be easy game like Zoe Quinn or Anita Sarkeesian, who don’t have powerful organizations watching their backs.
As to street harassment, I think it is mostly done by men who feel powerless, who look at “attractive” women as toys for more powerful men who think they are too good for guys like them. Trying to take them down a peg is very much a sour grapes thing. My wife once got me a job doing grounds maintenance at the office building where she worked. The men never verbally harassed anyone — they would have been fired on the spot — but also they were nicer to the women (and vice versa) in person than they needed to be. But they spent the last half hour of every day sitting in the garage analyzing the women in fairly graphic anatomical detail. I always felt that the real issue was a class one — the mostly college-educated women in their mostly stylish business attire pursuing mostly middle to high-level careers vs the far less well-educated men in grubby work clothes with very restricted career possibilities. The anatomical analyses seemed to be a way of trying to cut the women down to size. It was more resentment than anything else. There’s the perception that if you were single and she was single and you asked her for a date, she’d laugh at your presumption — the old Margaret Atwood syndrome.
On a deeper level, it comes from the fact that society tells you what you need to do to be a “real man” and then denies you a chance to achieve it. It is very similar, in fact, to the way society seems to require unachievable beauty of women.
GOM: That was deep. And an excellent point.
I also wonder if they’re trying to use interaction with women as a way to boost their day a little. To feel better about themselves. They expect women to talk back and when they don’t the men flip out. Their good feels had been denied by the bitch. Cause there’s totally nothing wrong with what HE’S doing, no sir.
I’d be quite surprised if they went after Sharlet and not Blair, since she’s the woman and therefore infinitely more deserving of their venom. And she might not have Sharlet’s resources, either. (That’s pure conjecture, though.)
These guys usually go for whatever their warped perception tells them is the “softer” target.
The GQ piece doesn’t do one single thing for women or feminism. Look at who their subscribers are…. the upper crust of the Patriarchy. This article just gives them someone to feel superior to… the embittered losers of the MRA crowd. But all the while they will continue hawking their luxury goods to the world’s male noveau riche and setting up playgrounds for them (just google their club in Dubai) where they can use their riches to have their way with young women from Russia, Lithuania, or wherever. They are not allies. Not in the least.
Ummm…so, now we are not just ugly and evil, but we are herd animals as well. Duuuuudes… get real! It ain’t WOMEN signing up to start and fight wars in mass herds. That herd mentality? IT BELONGS TO YOU!!! Yes, some women enlist, but women, in general, do not create militaries, break down folk in boot camp and then rebuild them as soldiers so that they – our sons, brothers and friends – can be thrown at each other for old men’s profits and power! And women do not, at the age of 17 or thereabouts, look for a gigantic, heroic and violent herd to belong to.
The older I get, the more I think that it is not women who are the obedient and pliable sex. That belongs to the menfolk. At least to those guys who have not outgrown the need to “belong to something greater then themselves.”
Sorry for the rant-like feel to the above. I was just thinking about a young man I once knew. He was a sweetheart – a gay boy who wanted to be, and would have been, a great dancer. His father was so ashamed of his “wimpy” son that said son, in order to get his dad to love him, enlisted, went to Viet Nam and never came home. He was my friend, and his father had the nerve to tell everyone how proud he was that his kid had died for him and his country. I still hate that bastard.