So Em Ford, a popular YouTuber known for her makeup tutorials, recently put up a video detailing some of the nasty and abusive comments she got when she dared to put up some pictures of herself without makeup, revealing red skin, pimples, and, you know, other human imperfections.
Someone posted about her video to the Men’s Rights subreddit, and the regulars there offered some nuanced and measured thoughts on our society’s beauty ideals.
Just kidding! They attacked women as fickle, hateful narcissists who use makeup to deceive men — and who should probably not be allowed to run companies.
As Ultramegasaurus sees it, ugly men are the real victims here.
Make up is a privilege if you think about it. A woman can cover her ugliness (the model is a perfect example), yet man has to live with his facial ugliness (or height).
Uh, I’m not so sure about that height thing. I’m pretty sure you can do something about that.
Actingverystrangely, meanwhile, seems quite upset that while women can cover up their pimples with makeup, men who lie about owning Ferarris are looked down upon by society.
So hiding your spots with make up is not deception. But pointing out that you don’t actually look the same without make up as you do with make up is wrong. …
As an experiment, why not tell the next woman you meet that you drive a Ferrari and have an Amex Centurion Card and a luxury yacht moored in Monaco? When she asks to go for a drive in the car, look wistfully into the middle distance and say
“It is society’s unrealistic expectations that forced me to present myself as affluent and successful. But I’m sure you recognise that I am successful in my own way, and that …wait! Where are you going? Wait, I can explain…
But it is coolsanta who wins the thread with his spirited defense of ugly men — and his even more spirited attack on the makeup-wearing women who (allegedly) hate them and want them dead.
Fact: Ugly men are much more likely to be accused of being creepy than good looking men. Woman generally regard unattractive men as a nuisance. When she puts on the make-up and that revealing dress to impress mostly her bisexual friends and to some degree the handsome men out there the last thing she wants is for the ugly (= creepy) men to notice.
Yep. that’s right, fellas: when women dress up, it’s mostly to impress — and possibly sexually frustrate? — their bisexual friends. Who knew?
That makes them feel abused while similar attention from a good looking man would have the opposite effect. If an ugly guy should manage to woo them and get them into bed there is a very high likelihood of regret followed by a rape charge.
Or possibly the woman simply won’t go out on a date with that guy again? From the point of view of the regretful woman, this seems like much less of a hassle than, you know, going to the police with a false rape charge, having a rape kit done, having yourself attacked in court, and so on and so forth.
They would prefer the undesirables eradicated from society, and would think nothing of it, as they serve no purpose in their eyes.
That’s right: all women are secret Hitlers who yearn for a world cleansed of ugly dudes.
Less attractive men will always be socially disadvantaged / undermined with women in control, to keep them out of social circles.
Wait, women are in control?
Indeed, even movie directors know its ok if the short, bald, fat, ugly, bespectacled guy is torn in two by the dinosaurs… The fat guy seems to be cowardly and deserving of his fate – however, he is afraid with good reason.
Woah, dude, what happened to SPOILER ALERT? I haven’t seen Jurassic World yet.
Dressing up pretty, with high heels and make-up are women’s confirmation of this important fact – the importance of looks.
Wait, now women are “dressing up pretty” to keep from being eaten by dinosaurs? Bisexual dinosaurs?
It takes a special type of person to read this and not recognize the danger of giving so much legal and social power to such a fickly, sometimes hateful, creature.
PURE STEM MANLOGIC Q.E.D.
In the board room they won’t tolerate the fat, bald and more capable guy ruling over the handsome guy – it clashes with their psyche because in nature they would have ended up having to have sex with the guy in control.
I hate to break it to you, dude, but there are plenty of fat, bald guys in the world’s boardrooms. Do I need to pull out the pictures again?
Other than that, though, your theory seems solid as hell.
H/T — r/againstmensrights
I’m 5’10”. Most men are shorter. It’s never been a deal breaker for me. Being a shorter man is not the reason you are being rejected. Spending all your free time bitching about your lot in life to other clueless idiots like yourself, and the stunted personality that results from such behaviour, is the reason you are being rejected.
ok, I guess I should go get my scented candle now.
Re: the height thing
I *like* dating short guys. I have never used height as a rejection criteria for dates. My longest-lasting relationship was with a guy who was ‘5 “7. My current boyfriend is about the same height. I *like* dating men close to my own height (‘5″5), and whenever I dated dudes substantially taller it never really worked out. They were assholes to a man; I don’t ascribe that to their being tall but maybe it contributed. After all, they spent the adult lives looking down on women and most everyone else.
These MRA jack offs whine about height because they want an external reason beyond their control to explain why women find them so god Damn repellent.
But it isn’t their height or lack thereof that drives the shorties away. More likely it’s their repellent thoughts about makeup and nice clothes, or the transparent lying about being Christian Gray. Who, to be clear, is also not good IRL relationship material.
The real secret to attracting bi-sexual dinosaurs is jewellery and scent, preferably with undertones of musk. Bi-sexual dinos cannot resist the shiny or the stank. True science.
I’ll be honest, I’ve always been a bit reluctant to date shorter guys because I’m afraid of being cut by the chip on the shoulder. I’m willing to admit that this is wrong of me. But I’m 5’5″. And I’ve never had a problem dating ‘short’ guys – and looking back my preference seems to have always been guys who are my height and up to maybe a few inches taller. I’ve often thought ‘hmm, too tall for me’ and very rarely thought ‘too short’. But these guys wouldn’t actually ask an actual woman…
However, they’re not wrong in that there are many societal advantages to being more attractive and there are advantages to height as well. But these apply to women as well as men and while height is an important factor for women, it’s probably not as important as it is for men. But women are judged more harshly on other factors. Like weight. Or how much makeup they were (with women gaining professional and other social advantages for wearing makeup).
So when my homeroom teacher back in high school insisted girls should not wear makeup to school, she wanted them to get eaten by bisexual dinosaurs?
This makes more sense then it should.
(small spoilers for Jurassic World/Jurassic Park)
It’s odd that someone references Wayne Knight’s character in Jurassic Park. He isn’t conventionally handsome, and he is torn apart by dinosaurs. He’s also a villain, and it would seem that part of the point of casting him was that his appearance lends itself to the audience believing that he would behave badly. But in Jurassic World the most graphic scene that I can remember is when the flying dinosaurs are set free, and they tear apart the assistant who’s guiding the boys through the park. A woman who is conventionally attractive, and who’s death is focused on with an uncomfortable amount of detail. In Jurassic Park the unattractive man was evil, in Jurassic World the attractive woman was merely doing her job, and helping children. Whatever merits either movie has, if we’re going to read into them on that level, it would seem film directors know that audiences want to see conventionally attractive women, who clearly aren’t evil, being graphically killed by dinosaurs. Considering the context in both films neither is making a statement that all unattractive men or all attractive women deserve to be killed. But if there is anything to be said for all of society based on those individual scenes, it appears to me that women have more reason to be afraid.
As usual these guys fuck themselves over. When they talk about women’s appearance they immediately disqualify any woman with the most minor perceived flaw as “ugly” or “unfuckable”, but then they turn right around and complain about some women preferring tall men. Whyyyyy can’t they ever look in a mirror.
One thing I know about myself is even though I have preferences for a partner’s appearance, those preferences go out the window immediately when I’m in a real life dating situation with an actual person. In my head the perfect woman might be 220 lbs with black hair, but if I find myself thoroughly enjoying spending time with a 180 lbs blonde I won’t hassle her to dye her hair and gain some weight. Because – cliché time – looks really are pretty unimportant in the end. This once again leads me to believe MRAs with these complaints don’t ever talk to actual women in real life. Everything they say comes off as something you’d only say if you never left the basement.
This biotroof bullshit bugs me to no end. It’s obvious to any historians and/or anthropologists that beauty ideals (as most of the stuff evopsych fans are talking about) are historically and culturally contingent. But then, of course, these are not Scientists(TM). Fatness, shortness etc. can be evolutionary advantages in the right circumstances. Survival of the Fittest doesn’t mean only those who go to the gym are evolutionarily successful.
Also reminds me of the Festival of Bad ad Hoc Hypotheses, although the entries to that are much, much funnier.
I’ve worn make-up and wow it’s fucking tricky. Sharp pointy things towards eyes. *shudders*
Well I’ve rarely worn make up and never wear heels. Weirdly I don’t get guys throwing themselves at my feet praising my natural appearance wherever I go.
FFS, A-List movie stars whose whole careers are built upon their exceptional beauty, still don’t look so hot out of make up.
I have exactly two makeup styles: “None whatsoever, not even nail polish” and “Full goth pancake.” I sort of wonder where I’d fit into these morons’ so-called worldview, but I also don’t care.
… I feel like I’ve posted this before on a similar thread. Oh well. I guess when MRAs have as few unique thought trains as they do, repeating myself is bound to happen. =P
I think these guys have forgotten about Maris Tomei!
Yes, tall men get more attention from women and a load of other advantages, as do women who are slim and considered attractive by conventional standards. So fucking what? We, KNOW all this, and it means that life just isn’t fair. Why don’t they look at the much worse injustices in the world? Oh, that’s right, they’re perfectly happy about other injustices because those injustices do not affect them badly, and some of those injustices actually benefit them.
I never wear make up, so am I a better person because I am so honest?! I do not think that any Manurespherian would agree as I am also fat, 50, and haven’t dyed my very white hair since it grew back from chemo!
Of course they are not talking about women like me, they are talking about women like Amy Schumer:
it’s just the same old same old “women are mean because they are people and not a 3D-version of the products I jack off to”.
Because they don’t want to accept that what the media is selling them is not real life and women have no obligation to and can never be the “perfect” little sex object guys like that want to own.
Wait wait are these the same guys who constantly try to trick women into sleeping with them?!
PS dudes wash regularly, comb your hair, trim yourselves and wear clean clothes. Someone will think you look cute, and everyone else will think you have your act together.
Oh, once again with these weird “equivalences”. A woman wearing make-up is equivalent to a man lying about his car and job! If you accept the one, you ought to accept the other! Eh, no. A woman carefully styling herself to look better than she does in her unstyled state is equivalent to a man carefully styling himself to look better than he does in his unstyled state. A man lying about his car and job is equivalent to a woman lying about her car and job.
Apparently coolsanta thinks “fact” means “idea he just pulled out of his ass.”
I’ve come to the conclusion that these guys really don’t know a lot of ACTUAL women and base their assumptions about women on things they see in movies, video games, porn and mainstream media. They have the idea that all women dress up in short skirts and high heels and put on a lot of makeup. They have the idea that only men with a lot of money attract women etc. I don’t think they actually know to many real women or have have had any meaningful, significant relationships with women as partners or friends.
@kylagb, or else they’re still in high school / haven’t interacted with other people since high school and assume that the real world works the same way as high school. Not that the entertainment industry does much to disabuse them of that notion.
Joining in to say that I never wear make-up. And I have dated some gorgeous guys. These days…while I still don’t wear make-up I am uninterested in rl partners whatever they look like.
Women literally cannot win. Don’t wear make up? You’re scruffy, unprofessional and plain. Wear a lot of makeup? You’re cheap and slutty. Wear ‘natural’ makeup so you look like you’re not wearing makeup? VILE DECEIVER!!!1!
And yet the idea that they might get more dates if they didn’t HATE women so hard and so obviously does not ever occur to these tossers…
Obsessions with makeup are weird. I mean, if you date a person you’re going to see them naked. You’re going to see them in the morning afterwards. You’re going to see them after a shower, or in the wind and rain whilst hiking. You’re going to see them in the swimming pool and the gym. How are they going to wear makeup during these times?
More importantly, whether or not a person wears makeup is immaterial to whether they play a good game of Dominion or whether they’re an asshole who builds Chapel-Witch decks. Makeup doesn’t hide the true ugliness that lurks in the heart.
Sooo…
Men’s Rights = I should be able to be utterly repulsive inside and out, and still have women touch my boner on demand. If she expects even basic adult behaviour from me, she’s an uppity b*tch. All women should be naturally flawless or they will not meet the standard my boner deserves and will not sufficiently please my boner. Any use of make-up is a deliberate attempt to cheat me out of my hot feeemale boner-pleaser, and false advertising.
Hollywood is the same as real life, and look at how all those gorgeous movie stars get all the good stuff. Misandry!!
PUA = Superficial grooming and material status symbols should totally cover my other, bone-deep repulsive qualities.
I will lift weights, pretend to have a high-status job and leave decoy cosmetics in my bathroom to imply that other women have slept with me, and this will lure the women to me like high-quality fish bait. The gullible fools.
But I will be appalled if a woman I date isn’t a real-life Stepford Wife. if women can only attain my exacting beauty standards (based on Photoshopped models) by meticulously-applied make-up, then they ain’t shit.
MGTOW = Men’s Rights above, except we don’t want those stinky women touching our boners anyway. Those women wouldn’t touch my boner on demand, so I am forsaking them. So there! All women turn out to be disappointing because they sometimes, en masse, may or may not wear makeup without reference to my specific individual preference, as if they have never met me and all have free will or some shit. Hohoho, enjoy loneliness without me!!
Dark Enlightenment = Hey you guyzzz.. . I haz discovered TROOF about teh wimminz so get ready for TRUEF BOMB – they not haz pretty face- some iz tryn to tricks you wiv teh MAKE-UPS. All wimminz HOOERZ rilly. MWahahahaha they be sorry wen we blowz up Erf.
MGTOW again = by the way, women suck, and here’s a 500-word essay on why, ok Later, b*tches!
Am I making the correct distinctions between all the groups? I wouldn’t want to be accused of not correctly alligning the cigarette paper between them all.
If you draw 5/2, it’s hard to turn that opportunity down. A decent house rule is to insist that everyone opens 4/3 when Witch is in the supply.
@ Micharion
I like the fact that when I saw “Mostly Cretaceous Park”* when the goat got eaten the kids cried and when the lawyer got eaten the kids laughed. We’re clearly bringing them up with a decent set of values; and I’m a lawyer.
[* Yup, I’m that much of a dino nerd]
Bullshit ARGH DILOPHOSAURS DIDN’T SPIT VENOM OR HAVE STUPID FRILLS YOU HOLLYWOOD SHITCAKES IF YOU WANT A KAIJU MOVIE JUST REMAKE GODZILLA AGAIN Park.
… *coughs*