Ladies! The jig is up. Your deepest, darkest secrets have been revealed to the world at last, by one of your own. And they are more sordid than any of us dudes would have ever imagined.
Several years back, you see, there was this super-hot early-thirties hottie, and she was dying of cancer. But before she succumbed she decided to let her best male friend know the dirty secrets about women that the sisterhood tries so hard to keep men from learning,
It just so happened that this best male friend was a dude named, uh, let’s say “Bob Smith,” who now writes for the prestigious online publication Return of Kings, and he’s decided to reveal the shocking “inside information … regarding what women were really all about” to the men of the world.
Amazingly, the dark and dirty secrets the late hot chick revealed to Bob just happened to line up exactly with what misogynistic douchebags believe about women anyway.
Apparently women are all a bunch of overgrown children who are
looking for our true daddies, basically – the idealized daddies that we never had – somebody who can … call us out on our bullshit and put us in our place.
Also, they’re totally a bunch of big fake phonies:
Our faces are fake (makeup), our hair is fake (dyed), our boobs are fake (some of us), everything about us is fake. Most especially when it comes to what is inside of us.
And the revelations keep coming: Women are liars and cheaters and schemers who hate other women, whom they see mostly as competition, and themselves, because they know better than anyone else how terrible they are. And because they are basically masochists, the only men who truly light their fires are those who use them sexually,
then discard us like used toilet paper, and f**k our female friends afterwards, just because [they] can. (Just like we would do with his male friends.)
Remember, this is all SUPER TRUE because it was told by an ACTUAL HOT CHICK to someone who calls himself Bob Smith, and later published in the most reputable publication in the world.
Which means the dog stuff must be true, too.
But before we get to that we also need to deal with the REAL TRUE TRUTH about the female sex drive, which is that women are like a billion times hornier than men. In the words of the dead hot chick herself, which I have slightly censored,
Women are receptacles for [deleted], that’s how we have been biologically designed. Nothing feels better to us than being [deleted] [deleted] with multiple [deleted], than being the [deleted] of [deleted] [deleted], than being the [deleted] of unbridled [deleted] [deleted].
Ok, I might have gone a little bit overboard with the censorship there and made that very dirty passage seem even dirtier than it really was. I have to admit that some of the words I deleted, or possibly most of them, weren’t actually naughty at all. But trust me. It was pretty bad.
And we haven’t even gotten to the dogs yet.
Brace yourself.
Dead cancer hottie’s most disconcerting revelation is that women like dogs. As in, really like dogs, nudge nudge wink wink.
That is,
many women – many, many women – have sex with dogs on a routine basis. …
I can see why you might not believe it, to which I say, look really hard at all of the women you know who have dogs. Look at women who have dogs whenever you see them out on the street, in the act of walking those dogs. Or at the park. You will notice that most of them have male dogs – the vast majority, in fact. This isn’t a coincidence.
Fellas, I know you’re probably as shocked as I am. But remember: this was in Return of Kings, a publication renowned around the world for its rigorous fact-checking procedures, and
Oh, wait, I was thinking of The New Yorker.
This was on Return of Kings.
Which means “Bob Smith” was almost certainly just making it all up, dog stuff included. What a relief! Hot cancer girl probably never even existed!
Hell, I’m beginning to suspect that “Bob Smith” isn’t even his real name.
NOTE: In all seriousness, “Smith’s” post is so ludicrous I wonder if someone is pranking Return of Kings. But the commenters on RoK are eating it up and offering their own thoughts on women and dogs.
There are too many gems in this thread. Though I have to say, man’s-best-friendzoned … just as well I’d put down the coffee only moments before getting to that line. Saved by a whisker.
Isn’t it kinda typical of women that they have their own best friend, diamonds, but they also need to steal man’s best friend.
Also, I never knew when manospherians talk about ‘hypergamy’ they mean that women marry up and up and up and up and eventually they snatch a dog.
@IP
Is that where the phrase “top dog” comes from?
bluecat:
Maybe there were actually two dying hotties: one who always lies, and one who always tells the truth. That would enable Bob to figure out the dog thing.
@Moggie
The one who always lied would then be lying about the makeup and wig thing, so she would not actually have makeup and a wig on? And the one who always tells the truth would be telling the truth about the makeup and wig, but she would not be wearing any makeup and wig because that would be lying, so… FUCK this is confusing.
@Alan
You’re on to something.
Imaginary Petal, the trick is to ask one of the totally real dying hotties: “If I were to ask the other dying hottie whether women do the sexytimes with dogs, would she say no?”
Then I think Monty Hall asks you whether you want to change your answer, but I’m not sure why he’s there.
@Moggie
But what about the wigs?!?!?!
@ Moggie
The Monty Hall Problem is one of those things that I can completely understand intellectualy but my brain still refuses to accept; like 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 being as likely on a lottery as any other combination or 0.99′ = 1
“I know it’s right; but it can’t be!!!”
@Alan
The Monty Hall thing seemed very counter-intuitive when I first heard about it, but now that I understand the solution I feel stupid for not seeing it right away. Maybe there’s a specific way of thinking of it that makes it easier to grasp, but now I can’t really figure out why people feel weird about it even when they know the answer.
http://catsofcowley.tumblr.com/post/138481124414/humans-are-always-enquiring-whether-i-am-as-they
@ IP
Are you good at maths and numbers generally? I’m just wondering if maybe it’s a brain wiring thing. To me though, even though I understand the logic, it might as well be magic or one of the weirder quantum effects (although they’re probably also magic). Luckily though, I’d be equally as happy to receive a goat as a car, so it doesn’t matter that I can’t believe it.
Even maths profs have been known to get the wrong answer to the Monty Hall problem, and to stubbornly stick to it. Which makes me feel less bad about my initial reaction to it.
Alan, it would be a used goat. It wouldn’t have that new goat smell.
Alan:
That problem might be more intuitive if you think about it with larger sets. Consider trying to pick the Three of Clubs from a regular deck:
The Contestant chooses a card at random, but doesn’t get to see it.
The Presenter reveals 50 other cards that weren’t the 3ofC.
The Contestant may now stick to their original choice, or switch to the one remaining card.
In this case, it should be more obvious that switching is the right thing to do. The choices are much more skewed, but it demonstrates that the two “unknown” options can have different probabilities.
@Alan
I am very bad at math and numbers generally. More specifically, I’m pretty good at doing basic arithmetics in my head (if someone says, quick, add all these numbers up for me, I can probably do it), but anything more advanced than that is impossible.
The Monty Hall problem is, in my view, as simple as this:
First, you have a 1/3 chance of picking the right option. Then, you can either switch to the only remaining option, or you can stick with your original 1/3 chance. Since there are, in reality, only 2 options at this point, and one of them has a 1/3 chance of being correct, that means the other one has a 2/3 chance of being correct. I know you can confuse yourself if you discuss this for too long, but that’s how I always think about it. :p
I also did this experiment a few hundred times with my mom just to make sure it works out in reality.
Newt’s way of thinking is probably a lot easier, though. 🙂
@ Newt & IP
Interestingly the card example is instantly graspable. I’ve had the multiple doors explanation and, although I understood it at the time, it wouldn’t stay with me. With the cards though it’s like “Ah, I can see how knowing which individual card it is makes a difference”
Cheers
@ Moggie
There are now people looking at me wondering why I’m trying not to laugh.
All this probability and maths talk reminds me of when I was trying to demonstrate to a friend why the Martingale strategy doesn’t work at roulette and then rather annoyingly he won loads of money.
Newt’s way of approaching it is a nice, intuitive way of doing it.
I still dislike the Monty Hall problem. It doesn’t feel right. I know the math, I’ve taken statistics and calculus, but you’ll never convince my intuition.
What about if the three doors were in a jumbo jet on a treadmill?
Generally I satisfy the feeling of wrongness I get from the Monty Hall problem by realizing he is giving you more information in opening a goat door. Switching is right because you are now making a decision with more complete knowledge of the situation. (3 doors, one has a car vs 2 doors, one has a car)
@pie:
Then each one would contain one-third of a goat.
(Unless the jumbo jet were moving at speeds over 0.01c, in which case each one would contain 1/(3*sqrt(1-v^2/c^2)) of a goat.)
@ pie & EJ
Until you open them and the wave function collapses the doors both have goat and don’t have a goat.
@Alan:
A goat can observe itself, so it collapses the superposition.
(Vegetarians defeat Schrodinger’s cat paradox. It’s a well-known fact.)