#Gamergaters applaud hiring of fake gamer as Breitbart Tech editor

Did you see this article in there tech section?

http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2015/10/28/aposematism-may-explain-why-so-many-angry-women-have-blue-hair/

I saw it mentioned on PZ’s blog, and it is really unbelievable. It’s just an attack on women and feminists, wrapped in a laughable attempt to make it sound scientific. What the hell does women dying their hair blue have to do with tech?
One of the articles titled “Meet The She-E-Os: Why Do So Many Female Tech CEOs Turn Out To Be Dissapointments Or Frauds?” is clearly just an excuse to bash women, but they were at least able to connect their misogynistic bullshit to the tech field in some way.

@Falconer

Oh, no, you posted the cartoon first I think.

Man, those guys really hate dyed hair. What the heck is up with that?

The most hilarious irony of that toon is how it portrays Milo as a white knight. I thought these guys hated white knights, because manginas.

But Bina, he’s their white knight, saving them from the distress.

Over on a pro gamer gate incel site they discuss how “Libertarianism is becoming another form of gynosocialism”. Some funny comments;

There is no such thing as a political system that can prevent gynosocialism. Women and manginas will just wear it down until even political positions like Libertarianism become the opposite of what they are supposed to be. The problem here isn’t the what but the who. What needs to be done is keep both women and manginas out of government. Thus something like taking away the vote from women is not enough. Anyone who wants to take away the vote from women has a scheme they want to use such as only married men get to vote. This is guaranteeing that only manginas will be in government with women controlling the government by proxy.

Social change could solve the problem, but it won’t happen. The problem is too connected to biological impulses for large scale social change. It’s the same problem the Pak Protectors have. Only a small percentage of them were able to rise above their biology, and many of them who recognized their biology as a problem failed in their attempt to rise above it. Thus the only solution is what the Pak Protectors who could rise above their biology tried which is setting up colonies in space far away from their homeworld. We need to do the same and leave the women and manginas behind.
About these ads
Share this:

EmailPrintTwitter2GoogleLinkedInFacebookRedditTumblrPinterest

Related

The Christian Dating Advice IndustryIn “Christian dating advice scams”

The Most Dangerous Idea In The World: Women Have AgencyIn “Fighting Back”

The War On MGTOW Is Out In The Open NowIn “Conspiracy Theory Insanity”
This entry was posted in Dangers To Virgin Men (And Other Men), Manginas. Bookmark the permalink.
Post navigation
The Manuresphere’s Demon Obsession
LIHOP And MIHOP Incel Virgin Domestic Terrorist Organization Conspiracy Theories
63 responses to “Libertarianism Is Becoming Another Form Of Gynosocialism”

Spawny Get says:
October 22, 2015 at 1:14 am

Women and Manginas would be on the ‘B’ Ark.
http://hitchhikers.wikia.com/wiki/Golgafrincham

…The story was that they would build three Ark ships. Into the A ship would go all the leaders, scientists and other high achievers. The C ship would contain all the people who made things and did things, and the B ark would hold everyone else, such as hairdressers and telephone sanitizers. They sent the B ship off first, but of course the other two-thirds of the population stayed on the planet and lived full, rich and happy lives…

Reply
Tarnished says:
October 22, 2015 at 4:22 am

Ah, the undying wit of Douglas Adams. 😉
Reply
Tarnished says:
October 22, 2015 at 4:12 am

Regardless of whatever the pluses or minuses of Libertarianism may be, the fact is most of government exists to benefit women. Take any government social program and the beneficiaries are either mostly or all women.
Which is why I support actual Libertarianism, which would not have this problem in its purest form.

Anyone who wants to take away the vote from women has a scheme they want to use such as only married men get to vote.
Always thought as much. Either that, or they’ll be white supremacists intent on first taking the vote from all women…then all non-whites…then all mixed “race” people. I can easily see the right to vote devolving into a Pay to Vote program, where only the wealthy elite can afford to make decisions for the rest of us.

Thus the only solution is what the Pak Protectors who could rise above their biology tried which is setting up colonies in space far away from their homeworld.
In such an instance, are you counting on the successful creation of artificial wombs or advances in cloning technology? Or is the longevity of the all-male colony not a main concern and simply a way to live out one’s days in peace?

With Libertarians making excuses for female support for big government, Libertarianism is becoming another form of gynosocialism.
Then it will effectively cease to be true Libertarianism.

It’s one thing to say that domestic violence shelters for men shouldn’t be funded by the government. It’s another to say that they should never exist, and that is not Libertarian.
And also a frickin weird-ass stance for anyone involved in even the smallest amount of Men’s Rights to take.
Reply
thegreatshebang says:
October 22, 2015 at 5:38 am

“Then it will effectively cease to be true Libertarianism.”

You’re dangerously close to the No True Scotsman Fallacy here.

Political Science, Politics, Rhetoric, the Law, etc. are examples of areas of human inquiry that are concerned with the practical. As in, what do we do right now. Your case for true Libertarianism is irrelevant because nobody practices it.

Libertarianism for many years has been driven by men’s need to be a direct provider to get attention from women instead of funding the government to be a proxy provider. If women had to get their provision directly from an individual man, that that would appeal to the traditionalists in the Libertarian movement. It is no surprise that the Libertarian movement has been predominantly single males and married couples.

An example is Stephan Molyneux. His bad argument is that the actual Libertarian movement isn’t pure enough, but that a pure anarcho-capitalist movement would include men being rational and working really hard and getting married. He’s just way off base because he has an irrational gynocentric view while claiming to be rational and still claims to critique Libertarianism.

There’s nowhere to go here except “your own way.”
Reply
Tarnished says:
October 22, 2015 at 7:11 am

There’s nowhere to go here except “your own way.”
This is very true. And likely the solution that many more will come to before the year is over, much less the next election.
Reply
tamerlame says:
October 22, 2015 at 2:13 pm

The no true Scotsman fallacy is what makes political debates so fucking annoying. People see political positions as an tribal identity to defend at all costs.
Reply
The Black Pill says:
October 23, 2015 at 8:50 am

In such an instance, are you counting on the successful creation of artificial wombs or advances in cloning technology? Or is the longevity of the all-male colony not a main concern and simply a way to live out one’s days in peace?

All the above and more such as mind uploading (and downloading), becoming cyborgs, creating AIs, genetic engineering, creating hive minds out of copies of ourselves, and more. I have no particular desire to remain a baseline human, and I imagine that most who are willing to leave for another planet won’t either. That opens up a lot of options for “reproduction”.
Reply
Tarnished says:
October 23, 2015 at 9:08 am

So, transhumanity, huh?
That’s cool. I enjoy doing research our growing AI attempts, robotic ethics, and the potential for brainmapping into non/semi-organic bodies. It’s still the future, but we’re on so much of a J-curve that it could absolutely happen in our generation.
Reply
advancedatheist says:
October 26, 2015 at 8:05 am

I wrote what I consider one of my better trolls about feminists who think they will belong in a transhumanist future, in the form of a book review:

http://www.amazon.com/Feminist-Cryonics-Nancy-Quinn-Collins/dp/1329587332
Tarnished says:
October 22, 2015 at 4:17 am

The Libertarian platform, for those who’ve not read it before:
https://www.lp.org/platform
Reply
tamerlame says:
October 22, 2015 at 2:14 pm

Don’t pay attention to what a political movement says, pay attention to what it does.
Reply
.-.-.-.-.-.-. says:
October 22, 2015 at 4:45 am

All levers of power, law, politics, media, economy, religion and education have been used as weapons against men for quite some time now. So even being a “true” or an “actual” Libertarian and thinking that government should simply go out of the way now, and that trying to use government to rectify some of these imbalances would be tyrannical, is anti-male.

For instance, why should a man who has lost everything because of a divorce rape or false accusations and who is homeless right now (while his former wife is well off) support Libertarianism?

Some wounds are bleeding and so deep that you need a doctor to heal them and that simply stopping to flog is not enough anymore.
Reply
stonerwithaboner says:
October 22, 2015 at 8:36 am

yeah, my personal politics are much closer to anarchist than libertarian…

State violence is a men’s issue–just think, “collateral damage”-civilians murdered by soldiers-well I bet that is 90+% men in Iraqistan… Of course Killary continues with the old lie dulce et decorum, er, womyn are the primary vyctyms of war…

Okay, here’s one for you, nutters like Andy Brewik, er Brevik and the Aurora Shooter were brought in without a pewcious hair hurt on their heads…

Ergeniz says:
October 26, 2015 at 10:42 pm

“In other words, the novel Rand published nearly 60 years ago anticipates the world of female hypergamy and the widespread sexual exclusion of men that we live in today. I can see why “Atlas Shrugged” appeals to so many nerdy guys today”.

Perhaps I’m missing something.

I don’t see anything appealing about that.
Reply
advancedatheist says:
October 27, 2015 at 8:17 am

“Appealing” in the sense that today’s men can recognize their sexually frustrated and absurd situation in it. John Galt acts as a kind of male virgin fantasy character who finally gets to bang the hot woman of his dreams, unfortunately only in their 30’s, and after two other men broke her in, starting with his college buddy who got to bang Dagny first, well before she hit the Wall, because he had money and natural game.

By contrast, Heinlein’s novel “Stranger in a Strange Land,” published about three years later, doesn’t really work now with its depiction of a sexual utopia for both men and women because men in the early 21st Century can see that women in the real world have more sexual freedom now than they do – and women have basically blacklisted more and more men from ever having sexual relationships with them in favor of the guys analogous to the hot “Martian” character in Heinlein’s novel.
The Black Pill says:
October 27, 2015 at 8:30 am

So Galt’s Gulch is The Reserves? That’s horrific, but it makes so much sense.
advancedatheist says:
October 26, 2015 at 7:55 pm

“Atlas Shrugged” shows several female characters in a bad light, notably Lillian Rearden. Rand apparently had this weird blind spot about women’s natural function, because the allegedly good characters don’t have children or show interest in starting families. If I could rewrite the novel, I would have Dagny express her desperate longing to find and marry a man of good character and bear his children, but she felt that she couldn’t do either in the corrupt society she lived in. The end of my revised version of the novel would show her married to John Galt and happily pregnant with his child.
Reply
Ergeniz says:
October 26, 2015 at 11:28 pm

Really?

In my revised version Dagny would end up alone, bitter and consuming cat food.

John Galt would have learned to accept himself rather than revolving his thoughts around a woman who probably didn’t even know his name.
__________________________________________________________________________

LOL!!!!!

They also say the NSA was created to track and spy on virgin incel men

@Orion

While the trend of macho posturing for “gamer cred” or “hardcore” status, and the policing of the “geek” identity is stupid and toxic, I don’t really think the challenge to Yiannopoulos qualifies.

I don’t think anyone would disagree :). Two related but different conversations, one about Yiannopoulos and one about identity policing, are occurring separately here.

I do think the rapid-fire quiz “answer these questions immediately!” style of questioning was kind of funny and reflected some of the uglier attitudes that tech geeks sometimes have, but yeah, that’s knowledge he should have before editing a tech page.

@funkula:
It was already destroyed by the Gaytriarchy pyramid. That’s how far things got before Milo saved the day.

@redsilkphoenix

Right, and the people from the ‘B’ ark became our ancestors, iirc.

For some reason looking at that SJW Hydra picture, what comes to mind is “Don’t they realize that a sword of falsehood would also say ‘truth’?”

I wrote what I consider one of my better trolls about feminists who think they will belong in a transhumanist future, in the form of a book review:

http://www.amazon.com/Feminist-Cryonics-Nancy-Quinn-Collins/dp/1329587332

I read the “review”. To sum it up: “Hurr. Hurr. Feminists will go extinct because they don’t breed while proper women, like that Duggar woman, do. And how DARE feminist awakened from cryostasis by a future patriarchal society think they have a right to change things? They should accept the ‘reasonable restrictions’ put on female behavior and live a life of grateful servitude to teh menz who woke them up to be their slaves!”

So, basically, “lolz, women should be servants to men and be happy about it” – i.e. pretty much what one could expect.

As for the rest of what ‘Virtually Out Of Touch’ brought from that misogynist cesspool: Why do these types think feminist women won’t embrace transhumanism and make it work for them? Stronger bodies. Digital telepathic networks. Reproduction without men (for those who want that). Etc. Etc. Plenty of cool stuff, there.

I can answer all but one of those and I don’t claim to be a gamer. Well, I do but not a video-gamer. I’m more of an analog tabletop game kind of a guy.

PC Specs:
Surface Pro 2: Core i5, 8 GB RAM, 256 GB SSD – I’m considering replacing it with a Pro 4 with an i7 and twice the RAM
MacBook Air: i5 1.7 GHz, 4 GB RAM, 128 GB SSD

Phone is a Motorola Nexus 6 with 64 GB storage. What makes it good is that its a Nexus running stock Android so it’ll dependably get every update to Android as they’re released.
My tablet is an iPad Mini which is a piece of shit.

I’ve no idea about the “big truck” thing.

Linus Torvalds is the creator of Linux.

60 fps is better for gaming because 24 fps may look weird and choppy when you pan. Actually, you sometimes get a bit of this effect in action movies as well, when the camera pans, so arguably 24 fps isn’t necessarily fine for movies either. The HFR certainly helped make the Hobbit movies look great. (And the singing and barrel-based action made them entertaining as well).

Something else to note about FPS is that different people have different tolerances. I am extremely sensitive to any sort of flickering or abrupt changes in light to the point that fluorescent lights give me headaches. My GF can play games down to 20 FPS without problem, I actually start feeling anxious and like something isn’t right whenever the frame-rate drops below somewhere around 40 FPS.

Does my need for higher frame-rate graphics make me a more “real” gamer than her? Hell no. It means I had to shell out $500 for a graphics card that would let me play games without feeling like I was losing control of my life, and that consoles will forever be off-limits for me. (Not like I wanted to play splatoon, super mario galaxy, MGS, or tons of other games, noooooooo…)

FPS matters, but having high FPS doesn’t make you a better gamer, just like having a $500 bust of Magneto doesn’t make you a better reader of sequential art.

The whole 60fps being best is a myth perpetuated by the GPU industry, The fact of the matter is that 60fps is actually damaging to your eyes and brain because your brain wasn’t mean to process fps’es at that speed. It’s a well known fact that real life only moves at at max 47fps (sometimes dropping as low as 28fps depending on the amount of people and nature that must be rendered.

My Evo psych major buddy says this is most likely due to the fact that living on the plains of Africa in small tribes, there weren’t many trees, and we lived in smaller tribes, so our brains were made to settle at the max 47fps of reality. If we had evolved in cities or big forests, or big forested cities, our minds woulda probably only worked best with 30 fps…

@Eschen:
Good point.

@Tessa:
I read that and my coworkers are now wondering why I laughed aloud.