Men Going Their Own Way have a keen eye when it comes to spotting subtle injustices that the rest of us often miss.
Like, for example, the terrible injustice that is … fat chicks dating dudes who aren’t themselves fat.
One Reddit MGTOW recently reminded his comrades just how pervasive this terrible injustice has become in the contemporary world.
Preach it, brother!
Others in the MGTOW subreddit reported their own findings.
He THOUGHT he was happy. Just as the German citizens under Hitler THOUGHT they were free!
Little did he know that his life could have been snuffed out in a moment had his girlfriend — *shudder* — decided to sit on him. We have lost too many men, cut down in their prime by hambeast girlfriends who thought it might be “funny” to pretend that their boyfriends were chairs.
Another MGTOW Redditor applied some powerful STEM logic to the problem:
Can society long survive with the attractiveness ratio so far out of whack? What kind of world is it when dudes who are EIGHTS are saddled with level 5 plain janes? Or when men who are average joes find themselves trapped in completely voluntary relationships with level 2 hambeasts, some of whom are quite angry and/or stern.
It is the thoughtful ovendice — we’ve met him before — who brings real clarity and wisdom to this difficult issue.
I can’t argue with that! Mainly because I have no idea what he’s talking about. How does working hard prevent men from being pigs?
Here’s a song I don’t think MGTOWs are going to like very much.
NOTE: This post contains
@scildfreja – They are. They really, really are.
Aside to all: Does anyone remember which Amy Schumer skit a few posters were discussing the other day?
I wanted to check it out while attempting to make fondant (eldest wants a Tardis birthday cake, doing my best), but I’ve spent more time poking around trying to find it than it’ll probably take to watch it.
Did it reference 12 Angry Men?
YES! 12 Angry Men Inside Amy Schumer.
Thanks, pitshade!
From that Slate story:
Giant red flag that dude is a gamergater, yes?
Or an MRA. They had a hate crush on Valenti first.
The Central Criminal Court in London (‘The Old Bailey’) contains a large number of eating places. There’s a judges mess, a barristers mess, a solicitors canteen, a jury canteen, two police canteens (the Met Police and the City Police don’t get on), a public cafeteria and of course horrible microwaved stuff for the prisoners in the cells.
I wanted to do a play where all the discussions about a trial took place in these various eateries with the different perspectives from the characters.
I kicked myself that it took a friend to point out that I should call it “12 Hungry Men”
@POM, that is a pretty scary story. I mean, I imagine the guy just wrote the craigslist article to troll, but who knows? I tend to be overly optimistic about things. It could have got much, much worse.
What exactly drives people to do this sort of thing?
@Victorious Parasol,
Thank you 🙂 I am just aware that I’m filled to brim with stupid, ignorance, and anger, too, so I try to be understanding.
Then they get all tantrum’y and it makes me sad.
@Alan, I’d totally watch that.
@FrickleFrackle
I’ll tell you now that you shouldn’t read it, because it’s a piece of crap, as both literature and philosophy.
@Makroth
Expanding on what Scildfreja said, there is a school of thought which holds that Freyja ([The] Lady) is an epithet, rather than a name per se, and that the actual name of that particular diety is lost to the mists of time. Freyr likewise means [The] Man, although some indications survive that his name was Yngvi.
(Yngvi is a Louse!)
I’m guessing he put up the craigslist post in an attempt to gather dirt on feminists. He was probably also trying to prove that campus feminists really just want to go out to lunch with a rich guy (why else would the “mom” note the bit about nice restaurants?) and possibly trying to get dates in the process.
LEPOI Jenkins!
You… you did see that he gives his pronouns right there in his username, didn’t you? I know it’s a longer one than most, but it should be no trouble at all for somebody who thinks Atlas Shrugged is worth reading.
Scildfreja, your responses continue to be outstanding. Truly a pleasure to read.
Also, then, every Friday is your day (you definitely deserve a day) 🙂
@ scildfreja
I should have got off my arse and written it. My friend who came up with the title was a lot more proactive than me. He took another of our ideas (that barristers would be good at planning crimes for their clients) and sold it as a TV series. It was weird watching the first programme as the opening scenes were a verbatim reproduction of our original conversation.
Alan, what was the name of the TV series??????
@ opposable thumbs
“The Planman” (Something like that. It had Robbie Coltrane in it)
::nips off to look it up:: Sounds brilliant! Was it much like you’d imagined, or did they change things a lot?
@ opposable thumbs
I actually only watched the first episode. The bit about the frustration with our clients was spot on. That’s how we came to have the discussion in the first place. They basically took the original idea and then assigned a proper writer to flesh it out, so there was a bit of dramatic padding (affairs and stuff) that was entirely fictional. The planning of the crimes bit though was pretty accurate (we’d been speculating about the mistakes our clients make and how it would be so much better if they were forensically aware). Like I say, some of that was word for word.
ETA: Oh, and they set it in Scotland for some reason.
I am not “LEaving” or whoever this person is. Your sleuthing skills are terrible, and I would think that you would need some evidence before you could establish that link; your hunches don’t count, I’m afraid.
@Scildfreja
Yes, I did read the bible – all of it – and even read exegetical works about it and read books about its history; I was an atheist before doing so, but given that many people claim to be devotees of this text, I’d say it deserves its fair shake, and if you’re going to argue against its devotees, you need to have actually read it. Arguments against the bible and Christianity are much more convincing when you’ve read about them in depth – shows that you’ve done your homework, and that the bible isn’t so perfect that the holy spirit or whatever grips you the moment you’ve read it.
I’ve also read the Apostolic fathers, St. Augustine, Aquinas, Karl Barth, and some other things about Christianity and its theology.
I also find it obnoxious that feminists are always complaining that people aren’t actually reading their books and are just arguing against them based on the actions of some of their cohorts; based on your logic, I don’t even need to read any of your books either.
A funny, snappy deconstruction of Atlas Shrugged, if any are interested and have 11:25 to spend. Horrendous book, terrible writer, and even giving her the ‘written in 1957, born in 1905’ pass, her characters are gross, ‘cos she’s gross, and our whole world is grosser for this novel’s existence
No, we don’t complain that anti-feminists haven’t read all the books. We point out that they don’t know what feminists actually say or believe and argue against the straw feminists in their heads instead. You don’t even need to read a bunch of books to have a basic grasp of what feminism is and what the terms we use mean. Anti-feminists, rather than Googling for example “rape culture meaning” come to the conclusion that when we say “rape culture” we are saying “all men are rapists” when we are saying nothing of the sort.
I’ve rarely seen feminists say that one needs to read several books on feminism before they can discuss the subject. Just that you should engage with what we’re actually saying rather than what anti-feminists are saying we’re saying.
@ Scildfreja- try the Viking Answer Lady’s site for detailed Norse etymology. 🙂
As to Ayn Rand, PLEASE go read “The Toast”s series of “Ayn Rand rewrites”- they’re hilarious…and read about the time she literally cursed an ex-lover with impotence.
Also, there has been plenty written about Ayn Rand and what her books are saying. I wouldn’t even try to get into an in depth discussion about say, Atlas Shrugged because I haven’t read. But I have read about what objectivism is and know I disagree with it. I can still disagree with the message of the book without having read it. The same goes for Turner Diaries or Fifty Shades of Grey. Why waste time reading something that I know will be objectionable?
@a POIsonous snack
When we start making up strawman arguments about what we dislike about Atlas Shrugged, then you have room to complain.
Yeah, it’s quite possible to dismiss an argument from a book without having read the entire book. You just need to have heard and understood the specific argument. All the rest is irrelevant.
Well, here’s the thing. It’s reasonable to ask people to read the specific texts they’re criticizing, or be familiar with the general topic.
If I say “Ayn Rand is a terrible writer and I disagree with most of her political principles, so I’m not going to read Atlas Shrugged,” there’s nothing unreasonable about that. I am quite familiar with Objectivism and with Ayn Rand’s life and other works, and I feel pretty confident making that judgment call. OTOH, I’m not qualified to dissect the character of John Galt and the meaning of his agonizingly long speech toward the end of the book, since I only know it by reputation.
Similarly, if you’ve read The Feminine Mystique and The Second Sex, but not The Female Eunuch, and you want to discuss second-wave feminism intelligently, it would be bullshit for me to say “come back after you read Germaine Greer, you ignorant troglodyte.” Because you’ve read *something* on the topic. Maybe not that specific book, but you’re not coming from a place of total ignorance.
So when I hear a men’s rights/red pill/”Dark Enlightenment” guy start complaining about feminism, it’s fair to ask if he has read anything written by any feminist who isn’t Jessica Valenti or Anita Sarkeesian. Because, again, you need to read *something* about the background of what you’re discussing if you don’t want to sound like an idiot.
We do, however, say that anti-feminists should actually engage with the media that they’re, oh, making a movie about.