So our dear old friend Scott Adams has responded to my recent post on him by declaring it “Pathetic Outragism” and me an “Outragist.” He also strongly suggested that I was a stupidhead. Which is a step up, I suppose, from calling me fat, which is the go-to response of many of those I’ve written about.
Adams’ fans, a tiny army of whom showed up here after Adams linked to it, haven’t been quite so polite, leaving behind some comments that I haven’t let out of moderation. But I thought I’d share a few of them with you all.
“You, sir, are an imbecile of the first order,” wrote one. “P Z Myers is a c**t,” wrote another, perhaps a little confused as to what blog he was on. (And no, the original comment didn’t contain asterisks.)
But it was a fellow calling himself John Doe (but using an email account with a woman’s name) that really took the terribleness cake. I’ve broken his huge wall of text up a bit.
CONTENT WARNING: Domestic abuse, gaslighting, genocide, you name it.
Adams is so great. Fuck all you dirty piece of shit feminists you should be FUCKING SHOT or sterilized. or sent to a rehabilitation facility.
Well, I’ll give him this: he gets right to the point.
You should lose your right to vote. Ignorance is dangeorus. and Feminism is evil ignorance. Feminism is not about equal rights and has not been for many decades. Maybe if this was the 1960s america you could say something to me, but now you can shove it up your fucking ass. Fuck american womena nd fuck feminism.
When I started this blog I really had no idea that there were still people around who think women shouldn’t have the right to vote. Turns out there are a lot of them.
Men will stop getting marreid more and more. THe spawn of the MGTOW groups are evidence of this.
I’m not sure that these guys leaving the dating pool is quite the catastrophe for women that MGTOWs think it is.
The government is getting what they want. People to stop breeding.
Uh, I’m pretty sure that the government, at least here in the US, is not terribly interested in stopping people from “breeding.” Hell, the IRS actually gives parents an assortment of tax breaks.
But it turns out that Mr. Doe doesn’t actually think it’s a bad idea to, er, reduce the population of planet earth. Specifically by shooting feminists.
I think every feminist should be sent to a labor camp or imprisoned or shot dead. I don’t care. You are scum and if you are not capable of changing you should lose your right to live. All humans are a burden to the earth, but Feminists are a burden to all humans and everything else, especially men.
This seems harsh.
Women are treated like children and coddled with kid gloves and in some ways you always have been.
[citation needed]
Even in 1890 there was a female bandit in the west that did crazy shit and got away with it for years. But there were men that did the same that were shot dead instantly.
An odd example, but I guess that’s as close to a citation as we’ll get. Presumably he means Belle Starr, who had a long career as a bandit in the “wild west” before being shot to death, possibly by her husband, possibly by a dude who was mad she wouldn’t dance with him. (No, really, those were two of the prime suspects.)
After this short digression, Doe returns to his main themes:
And men have always fought the wars. Women rarely in any society ever had to do so. You got to stay home. You got the easier job.
Women have been working, in the home and out of it, since the dawn of time. They have also been victims of war.
The rant then takes another dark turn:
The only way now for a normal guy to have a healthy relationship with a girl under 30 in the new generation is to scare the shit out of your woman and make her fear you and make her think you will end her life if she tries to screw you over. That is the only way to keep them in line from being destructive bitches. And even then you might have to sit them down and threaten them now and then.
This is abuse 101, though not terribly different from “dread game” as promoted by Heartiste and other pickup artists.
I had to, i’ve had to with the last girl i dated. all the time.
I can only hope he’s talking out of his ass here.
Look what happened when i didn’t. She told her friend i was a drug dealer simply because she was jealous she liked me. She publically slandered me. So i used her took her virginity which honestly id trade for her hotter friend at this point.
What a romantic!
Unless you are rich and powerful and good looking youre only real option to have a good time and enough control that you can relax is to scare the shit out of these girls, find some way to blackmail them or scare them and use it. That is the only way.
Today I Learned that “healthy” heterosexual relationships are only possible if the man is rich and/or abusive.
Even without me saying any of this it remains true and feminism has destroyed the country and everyone born from the 90s onward.
And once again an opponent of feminism demonstrates clearly why feminism is necessary.
Doe had some words for me as well:
David Futrelle is a piece of shit beta male and should lose his right to vote among other freedoms for supporting such a piece of shit ideology.
Apparently the only people Doe thinks should be allowed to vote are men who hate women.
The US and Canada and most 1st world countries are female dominated all the way up to the super rich who then are the men having power but everyone who is not rich is ruled and controlled by females if they want any kind of success. Period.
Yeah, that’s not actually how it works.
Unless you do as I was saying before, find a way to scare a girl and blackmail her into doing what you want. Because even if she likes you, even if you are perfect for her, she would rather run away and flirt with many other guys and fuck things up. So scare her into submission.
If you hate women so much that your notion of a “healthy” heterosexual relationship is one in which the man is so abusive that the woman literally fears for her life. here’s a thought: Don’t date women. Don’t come near them. Seek treatment for your fucked-up ideas.
Alpine, RN:
That sounds like work, and eats into valuable time which could be spent playing Call of Duty.
It seems unfair, somehow, that someone like Scott Adams, who shot through any credibility he had from Dilbert long ago, still has a legion of fans, and every time I start a blog the hits I get are in single digits.
It’s either the benefit of a regular update schedule, or that I don’t have much of value to say, or probably both.
Merus, do you want a legion of complete shits as followers? I’d have thought that’s something best avoided, myself.
freemage:
“I know it was a very minor point in that slew of awfulness…”
…but it seems to come up time and time again and it’s so ridiculous it ought to be put to bed for good. Even without challenging the ‘facts’ as presented, the argument boils down to this: “Women should shut up and know their place, because without men, there would be no-one to protect them from men”. I actually saw a post where the guy doubled down on the irony by actually talking about how men “protect women’s honour”.
My favourite example of a woman war hero is Noor Inayat-Kahn, aka Nora Baker, a British spy during World War II. Not only was she a woman, but also an Indian, a Muslim and a princess, thus confounding several stereotypes in one go:
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-20240693
@ Richard
Nora Baker was murdered in Dachau along with three other women from the SOE. “Carve her name with pride” indeed (hopefully people will get that reference)
FWIW, I would have gone with poopoohead.
…or the fact that Adams was famous through syndication (and internationally famous at that) before the World Wide Web was even so much as a twinkle in Tim Berners-Lee’s eye. Which of course is why his recent pronouncements are so horrific, as he’s very much in the public eye.
Shaenon
Hmm, but don’t really really rich people pay people to do the grocery shopping? Grocery shopping is a chore. I bet he thinks women are the real home owners because they get to do all the cleaning…
There have been systems where slaves got paid. I would argue that the defining thing about slavery is that it is forced labor, not that it is unpaid labor.
@ Orion
Been thinking about the definition, it’s quite hard to come up with one. Can’t just be forced labour as that would then include things like community service as a punishment or even conscription.
Anyone got a suggestion?
Orion + Alan,
Well, I think the real defining factor is ownership. Even if the owned person is paid, the money still actually belongs to the owner. It’s one commodity using another commodity. Like livestock eating food.
I think if I were to give a pithy review oneliner for John Doe’s comment it would be, “Breathtakingly oafish, yet ultraviolent.”
Also, I would ask why he couldn’t come up with a better screen name, but it’s obvious: women have ruined male creativity by having opinions and booooo hoohoohooooooo.
@orion
Better definition for slavery:
Forced labor that is mandated without having caused offense or transgressed a law.
In other words, community service for public intoxication isn’t slavery because:
A. There is an end in sight
B. It is punitive
C. It is a law agreed upon by society
D. It is NOT based on intrinsic qualities of a person (race, creed, phenotypic gender, etc) but is applied solely based on legal status
And e. It can be repealed or revised.
Alan,
You will of course never achieve a definition which is both complete and consistent. You’ll craft a definition of slavery that emphasizes what you want to emphasize. There are two easy way to exclude conscripts and prisoners, if you wish.
First, slaves frequently have “owners.” Slaveholding societies use language that implies that slaves are property, and may well have a legal system that considers slaves property. Slaves aren’t necessarily *chattel* property, and they may actually have some rights, but they are often still described as a property of some sort. Second, slaves typically labor for the benefit of private individuals or corporations, rather than the state. States that have abolished private forced labor have tended to assert that conscription or work-as-penalty does not constitute slavery.
well more of us ladies would have fought in the wars if you’d have let us stop having babies for like 5 minutes.
promisedlandlabor
Doesn’t really work. Slavery was a judicial punishment in Greece and Rome, and many societies had what amounted to taxes to be paid in labor. Also, having an ethnic basis is the exception far more than the rule; the most common source historically was prisoners of war and people descended from slaves of any ethnicity.
I’d say it’s mostly typified by indefinite duration and the master holding absolute power. Even in societies where they were treated well on average, they rarely had legal protection against things like their master arbitrarily murdering them.
Re: slavery
Wouldn’t freedom (to self determination) — or more precisely lack of it — be the determining factor?
@Alan:
Ta-Nehisi Coates argued that the essential defining factor of slavery, at least in America, was the ability of the owner to inflict violence (up to and often including death) upon the slave without fearing any legal check or sanction.
That said, remember that Coates’ definition is very much de facto and your question sounds closer to de jure, so they may not precisely align.
Also, trying to draw a line between conscription and slavery can be very murky indeed. Most historians would define Janissaries as slaves; but other lifetime warrior levies existed and would be harder to define in that way. What about non-military conscription, such as in the Congo Free State or amongst Japanese “comfort women”? The definition of the words becomes unclear.
I posted this comment in another thread and I’m sorry if I’m breaking the rules or ToS about off topic stuff.
Has anyone watched Jessica Jones?
I wouldn’t be surprised if UltimateNiceGuy(tm) Kilgrave was the hero trying to save the poor deluded Jessica who is silly enough to think that she can make her own choices from having a relationship with /le gasp A BIG BLACK MAN!!! in the MRA interpretation of that series.
The posts where MRAs vomited up their pathetic whiny outrage and where they think of human beings as objects to be disposed of for disagreeing with them, well, it made me think of that series.
This series is just amazing and that character is like the living avatar of the manosphere.
“Even in 1890 there was a female bandit in the west that did crazy shit and got away with it for years. But there were men that did the same that were shot dead instantly.”
This could be the strangest MRA thing to be upset about since “Penguins are whores”.
Anon, the Purple Man/Kilgrave is the narcisistic abuser these guys wish they could be. The character uses gaslighting etc to mess with Jessica’s mind to the point the show is extremely triggering to some survivors. I can’t wait for him to get his comeuppance.
The series blew my mind.
I love the way that it covered dark themes in a way that didn’t seem like it was just there just for shock value/fridging and how they treated characters like the drug addict and “the weird neighbor” as humans with feelings that matter rather than walking jokes or disposable people.
I know a few liberals that were just like that asshole bike rider who would go from liberal to raging breitbarter at the drop of a hat.
I know that I probably shouldn’t gush about the series here but holy amazeballs.
Re: Slavery
I thought the de jure definition would hinge on ownership, i.e. a person is owned by another and this ownership is defined by certain laws, customary or written.
Even that, however, historically includes a lot of different forms. For example, slavery existed in many pre-colonial African states, a fact which was used at the time to facilitate and legitimise the slave trade, as a reason for the “civilizing mission” that European states used as legitimisation for colonial military and political occupation, and which is still sometimes brought up by racists to minimise the catastrophic impact of the Atlantic slave trade on the African continent. But, for example, in precolonial Congo kingdom slaves (usually prisoners of war, sometimes people who had chosen to place themselves in a state of dependence for various reasons) were actually integrated into the kanda (extended matrilineal family) as servants and could become full-fledged members of the kanda and move upward though society. In any case, their labour wasn’t exploited in the same way as in the plantations. The early “Arabic” slave trade in the Indian ocean and through the Sahara, before plantations were also established in Zanzibar, usually made people into servants or soldiers or bodyguards, but here also (especially in the military) they could rise through the ranks. One famous example is that of Malik Ambar, a brilliant military strategist and ruler of Ahmednagar in the early 17th Century, who came to India as a slave from Ethiopia.
It is the Atlantic slave trade which used slaves only for forced labour in the plantations.
The Congo Free State example is complicated, because (after initial establishment with conscripts and recruits from elsewhere) the conscripts to the Force Publique were mostly children orphaned as a result of the FP’s raids, brought to other regions of the Free State and put in “camps of military instructions”. One Congolese historian has compared it to the army of Laurent-Désiré Kabila, who used child soldiers in the modern sense.
Whenever I see anything written by members of the manosphere, I can’t help but wonder how exhausting it must be to live in a constant state of anger and hatred. As much as they love the stereotype of feminists as angry, irrational, hysterical women who overreact to the smallest things, they’re the ones that are constantly outraged every time a woman/feminist/reasonable person says anything that doesn’t fit within their narrative.
Becoming a feminist has made me a more accepting and tolerant person, and I find I don’t get angry when i just let other people make choices for themselves without judgement.