The war of short-haired women against dudes and their pants feelings continues. Indeed, it’s gotten so bad that pickup artist/rape legalization proponent Roosh V is calling for state intervention.
In a blog post today, Mr. V cites a passage in an Evo Psych textbook suggesting that men tend to prefer long hair on women because healthy hair is an indication of good health and diet, and therefore of “higher reproductive value” in women.
And if cutting off this hair is displeasing to the boners of dudes like Roosh, well, it must mean that women who wear their hair short are, quite literally, mentally ill. No, really; that’s what he thinks. (Emphasis mine.)
If a woman cuts her hair to a short length, or shaves it outright in a Skrillex haircut, we can now confidently say that she is making herself appear less fertile, less beautiful, and less healthy. A woman cutting off healthy hair is one step away from literal cutting of her skin with a sharp object, because both behaviors denote a likely mental illness where the woman presents herself to society as more damaged than her genetic condition would indicate, suggesting that she has suffered environmental damage that has reduced her overall fitness.
Or maybe she prefers short hair because it’s easier to manage? Or because she thinks short hair looks cute? Nah, couldn’t be. She’s clearly a danger , not only to Roosh’s boner but to herself!
She must be monitored by state authorities so she doesn’t continue to hurt herself.
Roosh posts pictures of women he thinks have committed “self-harm” by cutting their hair short, thus transforming themselves from sexy ladies to hideous short-haired monsters.
Really? I’m pretty sure that all this proves is that Roosh has such a hard-on for long hair that he’s unable to see straight. To my eyes, and I suspect a lot of others, these two women — actresses Ginnifer Goodwin and Keira Knightly — look fine with long hair, and fine with short hair. (I actually prefer their short-haired looks, but, you know what? It’s really none of my business.)
But Roosh not only sees short-haired women as an affront to his manhood; he also sees them as a threat to Western Civilization itself.
What should we think when deluded women are actively encouraged by society to harm themselves by cutting their hair instead of growing it out and looking beautiful? One that doesn’t care about the fertility of its women and, in turn, the needs of men who want to mate with fertile women. Unless there is something within a society that promotes beauty in the form of long hair, we have little choice but to conclude that it is sick, grotesque, and sterile.
Roosh goes on to argue that art should reject such cultural sickness and celebrate the fertility of young women.
Oh, wait, that was Hitler.
Setting aside Roosh’s creepy, quasi-fascist obsession with female fertility, I do have a couple of questions for Roosh and the Evo Psych crowd in general:
What about infertile women with long hair? There are lots of women, cis and trans, who can’t do that whole pregnancy thing; many of them have long hair. Would Roosh lock them up for false advertising? (Actually, never mind; I’m sure he would, though probably not without hitting on them first.)
And what about short-haired men? Like Roosh and his pals, many evolutionary psychologists find it difficult to think beyond conventional gender stereotypes. All the studies listed in the Evo Psych textbook Roosh sites revolve around women and their hair, never men and their hair, even though the same reproductive logic would apply to them as well. Poor diet can reduce sperm count and cause infertility.
So why isn’t long hair on men “preferred across cultures” the way that long hair on women tends to be? Why isn’t Roosh calling for short-haired men (like himself) to be confined to the psych ward?
Could it be — possibly, maybe, sort of? — that there’s more to love and lust than what’s in our genes, or in Roosh’s jeans?
Fun story (well, IMO): so my dad did and said little things when I was growing up that made me realize that my dad is a feminist. Or that he, at least, empathized with feminism. One of those things happened when he drove me to a hair appointment as a kid.
We were sitting in the salon lobby, waiting for the stylist to call me, and I and another girl were perusing through hair magazines. She was slightly younger than me and she was with her mom. As we looked through the magazines, she spotted a bob cut that she really liked, so she asked her mom if she could cut her hair that short. The mom was aghast, and she said, in that sarcastic mom-kind of way, “Sure, let’s cut your hair that short! Your father will be thrilled! Just you wait when I tell him you want hair like a boy!” The stylist called them and my dad and I were left alone. He turns and says to me, “Why should the dad care? It’s not his hair. Stupid.”
I felt so proud of my dad that day. Though I only got a trim, not a bob.
@weirwoodtreehugger
I’m SO SAD that I do not have this one convo logged, as I was chilling in a chat place with a bunch of arty types, and then-regular chat pest logged in and started to dispense his infinite wisdom.
When he asked for some art references he could study (because he also basically insisted that art did not exist before 20th century — ???? WTF ????), we listed some of the Old White Dude Classics, such as Rubens.
He went “ew”. No fat chicks. THE ONLY POINT OF ART IS TO PLEASE HIS BONER.
He literally said that. I so wish I had those logs. Y’all should see it. But wait! That’s not all!
ANYTHING THAT DOESN’T GIVE HIM A BONER IS NOT ART.
Dude what.
No, seriously, what.
(It probably won’t surprise anyone that later he got into a fight with an op and got permabanned?)
Just to stick it Roosh, Spartan women wore their hair short, wore short skirts, spread their legs out, and slept with multiple men. They must have all been mentally ill.
Reblogged this on The Life Of Von and commented:
Happy Saturday!
I had my hair cut short and I swear it did absolutely nothing to my uterus.
But if I had a dollar for every man who thought he had a right to give me his opinion of my short hair, it would have paid for the cut AND the colour.
I still have waist length hair. Since my chemo, it’s in a box in the spare room. I plan to make a plait or some kind of thing with it one day.
Neuroscientist Shaves Her Head to Better Illustrate How the Brain Works
I hope she’s being monitored bc she’s obvs going to do great harm to herself and society otherwise.
@bluecatbabe hope the chemo is going/went well! I came across Victorian hair jewellery about a week ago (can’t remember why or how) but… maybe some interesting ideas here at the Hairwork Society?
odaran-“And it is so common that these men like to brag how rational or logical they are.”
I know! It’s funny how they think that they are being rational or logical while they are being extremely irrational or illogical. It’s quite hilarious how this guys lack any self awareness at all, that they get themselves completely backwards. I see it often of youtube or on the comment section of many articles. Whenever I see a username running along the lines of logical, rational, realist, impartial, etc I know they are going to be the exact opposite.
Women can’t be neuroscientists. It’s probably just one of her delusions. Silly little thing!
Skirikki,
That’s hilarious. So, to take the most famous and obvious example, Monet isn’t art because water lilies aren’t sexy to him (one assumes)? That takes solipsism to a level I didn’t even know existed. That would make amateur internet porn more art than a Frida Kahlo self portrait, or one of Matisse’s Jazz series. My mind is truly boggled.
So…if scat porn, say, pleases his boner, is THAT art?
These guys. It’s like their boner is the axis around which the whole damn world revolves. Except that in reality, no one cares.
@Bina
Exactly. And what’s most annoying is that they then whine when people around them display their lack of caring.
@weirwoodtreehugger
@Bina
I KNOOOOOWWWWW. It didn’t make any sense! And we told him. Repeatedly.
I mean, there we were, a chatroomful of mostly digital artists (good half of them women, too, with years of experience under their belt), with some who have background in more traditional forms of visual arts, and this guy… this guy.
It was such dark comedy that I regret I don’t have a chat log, although to my defense it wasn’t an IRC-based chat and had their own wonky client that didn’t want to log it, no matter how I tried and screencapping it all was not gonna happen at that rate of convo (like 15+ people trying to puzzle out WTF is up with this guy who showed up couple of days ago and stuck around like a bad fart).
I’ve been doing a lot of thinking about things like this after reading a great book by Julia Serano “Whipping Girl: A Transsexual Woman on Sexism and the Scapegoating of Femininity “, (particularly Part 2, where she describe the changes in behaviour by others towards her as she transitioned).
Julia is, like myself, MtF transgendered and the book is largely aimed towards that, but I’d still recommend it for cis-women (cis just being a shorthand term for those whose born gender matches their mental gender) as many of her observations are very pertinent for every female.
A part of Julia’s observations and analysis is that (and I agree totally) there are a heck of a lot of males who define their ‘maleness’ as just ‘anti-femaleness’ (or ‘femininity’), that is that being a male is just being the opposite of (an almost always imaginary) ‘femaleness’, rather than a more positive definition of ‘maleness’ that is something to aspire to (say like my grandfather). I think this is a fairly large sub-group of these ‘red pillers’, alongside the ‘true misogynists’, the sociopaths, the emotionally stunted/damaged, arrested development, etc sub-groups.
Note that term ‘imaginary’, because women in reality exhibit a vast range of behaviours and public presentations (duh), but these males usually (always?) have a ‘cartoon’ like idea of what ‘femaleness’ really is. This is accentuated by the groups they socialise with, which tend to have the same mindset and then they egg themselves on, or live in fear of being ‘found out’ by the group that they are not quite as ‘anti-female’ as they pretend.
And they get confused, threatened and angry when (a) other males transgress this and show what they think of as ‘femaleness’ (b) females transgress this and show ‘maleness’.
This hair nonsense is a classic example of that.
So they spend their lives ‘policing’ other males to keep them ‘male’ (with the very worst offender being MtF transgendered) and also ‘policing’ females to conform to their imaginary idea of what femaleness is. “Policing’ meaning bullying, putting down, beating up, raping or even murdering.
Because those who transgress this attack their very being, their whole construction of themselves. If females appear more ‘male’ (in their minds) then their definition of their own identity as ‘anti-female’ collapses.
Hence they always have a collection of concepts all at once: a generalised misogyny, anti-gay, anti-feminist, anti-TG, anti ‘perceived female traits or looks’ males (even if they are straight), children that don’t conform to their beliefs and so on.
You can’t reason with these people because it is embedded in their very definition of themselves (and their attitude reinforcing groups). Because their definition of being a ‘male’ is just as being ‘anti-imaginary female’ then they tend to be very shallow and brittle, as well as pretty awful people overall as (usually) things like empathy, caring, gentleness, self control, politeness, niceness, loyalty, cooperation, heck even basic manners, etc are seen as ‘female’, so they go the opposite direction becoming ‘thuggish’ or ‘loutish’ in behaviour.
This explains all sorts of bizarre behaviour. Take the all too common shouting out at women in public, even those doing it know they have zero chance of a woman turning around and then grabbing them off to bed. They are actually doing it to (a) broadcast to other males that they are ‘real men’ (b) ‘police’ women. “See I am a real man because I am offensive and boorish and I am also disturbing women to keep them in the place I want them to be in”.
At a more extreme level, we all note how far too many of them are borderline paedophiles, this is because they probably think children are (or can be forced to be) closest to their ‘cartoon ideas’.
If they were not so offensive and physically dangerous (to TGs, females, gays, perceived ‘feminine’ males, children, etc, etc) you could almost feel sorry for them, they are pretty screwed up people, they have no real self identity except as expressed in negative terms, they have no inner positive drive at all.
The reality is that it is they that are actually the shallow ‘cardboard cut outs’ of human beings, not the women they endlessly accuse of this.
MtF transgendered are often a great resource for both males and females to help them understand each other (trust me, I can spot a ‘dud’ male in a pub at 50 meters, lol).
The reason is that when you are MtF transgendered you spend a lot of your life ‘passing’ as a male to fit in.. This requires very careful observation of other cis-males to be able copy and act like them. Then, because we have usually missed out on ‘natural’ socialisation during childhood and adolescence. we also have to observe cis-females closely to learn how to publicly present as being female (though our feelings are as females, presentation to fit in requires practice and work).
So by necessity, we have to be acute observers of behaviours that cis people learn by ‘osmosis’ when growing up.
We are also nearly 100% feminists, this is because when we transition and lose ‘male privilege’ we really notice it. A lot of cis-females actually underestimate just how bad it really is, because this is what they have always been used to and they are sort of habituated to it.
In a lighter note I’ve found a great way to get rid of unwanted attention, though difficult to do if you are not transgendered unfortunately.
Three of us (one part time, two of us transitioning) sitting at a table in a bar and talking away and a guy came up and introduced himself. We said hello politely but explained that we were having a private girl talk session, he didn’t take the hint and hung around.
Unfortunately for him were were talking about genital reassignment surgery and were comparing and talking about all (and I mean all) the gory details in nitpicking detail…he turned a bit white and left quickly…lol.
@Tracy
Hair jewelry? You must have stumbled on some memento mori. That particular type of memento mori was made from the hair of a recently departed loved one and worn mostly by widows.
@Lisa You probably pass as a better woman than I (as cis) do. I never picked up how to be female through osmosis, mainly cos I was never interested in the things females are supposed to be interested in.
So I never really tried.
Of course, not trying is in itself probably cis privilege.
But I never wear makeup (except for fancy dress), hardly ever wear skirts or dresses, am not interested in discussions of such, have 2 pairs of shoes cos..why is this a thing ? They keep your feet off the ground and are comfortable.
OK, this seems to have gone off topic just..I never fit in with women, and though it led to me having no friends until Uni, I never tried.
Also, I hope I never used any offensive language, I intended no offense.
I wonder if these guys who define male as “not-female” or “opposite-of-female” or worse, “anti-female”, have any clue that up to the eighth week of embryonic development, all human embryos are anatomically female. (The eighth week of gestation is when an embryo becomes a fetus…and sex differentiation begins to take place.)
Meaning, all these guys…were once, at least for eight weeks, biologically GIRLS. The very group they hate and despise, even though they also want to have sex with them.
I can just hear the screaming and shrieking and rage-wanking already.
Evo psych has no credibility because it’s based on the flimsiest of evidence but worse than that it has no ethical standards that I’ve ever been able to discern. I have yet to see one of the “respected” researchers in the field come out and denounce how it is constantly used to justify sexism and even violence against women. And not just on the MRA sites by any stretch. Mainstream publications regularly put out articles dispensing advice to individuals based on half-baked theories of how our cave-dwelling ancestors lived and that advice always just so happens to prop up male entitlement while intensifying female insecurity and the expectation to cater to men.
gilshalos: What you (and so many cis-women) do is such a great comfort and support to us that are MtF transgendered. Seeing women who are confident in expressing themselves in the ways that they want, really helps my (and I’m sure many others) confidence a lot (and I need the help…lol).
Basically I am a jeans and top/t-shirt girl and I am more comfortable in that than anything else. It was seeing (being such a watcher) other women being totally comfortable doing that that gave me the confidence to dress and present in the ways that I feel comfortable with, without feeling ‘strightjacketed’ into just one (or a few) ways of expressing myself, to ‘fit in’.
Not only is it great that women have the confidence to do it their way, but it so helps people like me knowing that I can be (finally) myself as a female, but I can express that in just about any way I want and I can achieve anything I am capable of. I can be myself with my own ‘life script’, I don’t have to follow anyone else’s.
Funnily enough I felt more pressure to conform to a narrow range of behaviours and expressions as a male, than I do now as a female.
A lot of males really police each other for aberrant behaviour (and looks, expression, etc) and are very quick to condemn other males if they step outside of pretty narrow boundaries. It is bad enough in socal life (where at times it can escalate to violence), but a heck of a lot of corporate/work culture is even worse (march of the clones basically).
Even little things like being too expressive with your hands can raise eyebrows (in Anglo Saxon cultures). I know one TG woman who still tends to sit on her hands, because that is what she did as a male to not overdo things and to make sure she ‘fitted in’.
I have the strong suspicion that a heck of a lot of cis and stright males are actually ‘acting’ as ‘acceptable males’ as well, that if they thought it was ‘allowable’ they would be quite different. Bascially they are crippling themselves to conform.
@Lisa
Wow. I mean, hand gestures, really? That’s just…weird. I’ve never noticed people “over-gesturing” with their hands, although people have noticed I use hand gestures a lot. Pfft. I always figured hand gesturing is just showing how much you’re into the conversation and stuff. I think all the people I’ve ever noticed hand gesturing were the really fun peeps who told jokes and messed around and shit, who were mostly guys (admittedly one’s gay and another is bi but there’re plenty of straight dudes too). Maybe it’s a regional thing or country differences or something? Or maybe they don’t give a shit?
@Lisa
Thanks for your comments. I have a response I want to post but I’m in bed and on my phone, so I’ll try to remember to do it in the morning. 🙂
Roosh is 35. That makes him old enough to run for president (although I’m not sure if he’s a natural-born citizen or not). If he were to run in the already-crowded Republican primary, it’d certainly be interesting to watch. If he somehow made it onto the debate stage, it’d be interesting to see how (and if) the mainstream Republicans end up distancing themselves from him.
@Elliot
HA! HAHAHAHA! Now THAT’S a fantasy. Roosh running for any sort of office. Pfft. He finds it work just wiping his ass.
He wouldn’t even be on the Republicans radar.