A Voice for Men: Hillary is pretty much as bad as the KKK because she liked The Toast!

ONE HAS ESCAPED. END HIM

Teehee! ?

Misandry is mainstream and running for President.

In all fairness that would be a great tag line for a movie.

Yep, a silly website is exactly identical to terrorizing and murdering physical people with a disfavored skin color. I’m so glad AVFM is here to make these things clear for me.

The Toast once asked What would I do for Klondike Bar.

And that’s why I now hate all men.

Admittedly, Misandry flavored Klondike Bars are goddamn delicious.

@David:
your hatred for dogs disgusts me.

Where’s Mallory Ortberg landed since The Toast shut down?

So wait…the KKK are bad now? I thought the menzes were all in favor of old-fashioned bigotry of every kind.

@brian

your hatred for dogs disgusts me

My Gaea is like ‘hold me back, bro. Hold me back!’ ?

I totally get why The Toast is no more, but damn, I miss it. My favourite was always the two monks.

Michael P:

Mallory is now the etiquette columnist at Slate.

I was a big fan of The Toast and was really sad to see it go dead. Mallory Ortberg and her friends did a great job needling MRA’s and demonstrated time and again that the MRA ego is so fragile, it goes into a complete meltdown at even the mildest humor. (Once again begging the question: who is it that can’t take a joke?)

Anyway, I believe what provoked a particularly intense ire of the manosphere were these two things:

1. Jess Zimmerman’s Where’s My Cut? On Unpaid Emotional Labor

It’s an amazing read from beginning to end, so go read it now. You don’t have to agree with the author’s argument, which she expresses half-jokingly, anyway (but only half-jokingly), to see her fundamental point about how much women have to put up with simply because it’s a womanly obligation. You can imagine the fits of rage this inspired in the manosphere.

2. A link to an essay about “80 books no woman should read” , which was itself a comment on a list published in Esquire of the books every man should supposedly read. Yup. Men who would rather gnaw their limbs off than read anything written by a woman, because it’s written by a woman, were very disappointed in women for suggesting some male authors aren’t worth our time despite being very, very male.

Re. that second item, I agree with everything Mallory Ortberg and Rebecca Solnit said about male writers’ shitty treatment of women (up to and including homicide) being something that actually sells books and propels them to the height of literary recognition (they are “edgy” and complicated, you see; for a man to be flawed is to be interesting; for a woman to be flawed is to be dismissed as a “psycho” with nothing worthwhile to say, at best). I would just point out one more dimension in this (as a former lit major): the older I got, the more puzzling I found this Serious Literature principle that there is some sort of deep meaning in resentful male promiscuity and emotional distance. Hence the endless, cliche’d, boring, pointless sagas of someone’s restless penis traveling from woman to woman to woman, and scholars interpreting them as either tales of heroism or existential self-discovery. Way I see it, it’s the macho version of the romance novel. I don’t have any problem with anyone enjoying this stuff on a personal level. What I do have a problem with is the belief that there is some philosophical, universal, humanitarian dimension to this self-serving fantasy of sexual and emotional squalor. Sex isn’t rocket science; the protagonist in “The Unbearable Lightness of Being” isn’t inventing the cure for cancer by compulsively cheating on his wife (while expecting her to stay faithful because of reasons — which she totally understands, because like I said, this is a world of macho fantasies). It’s not these books’ existence that irritates — it’s the double standard. Anne Rice’s novels are considered trash; Jack Kerouac’s a masterpiece — even though, quite frankly, why a fan of neither, I’d much rather read Anne Rice. Women are expected to express an appreciation or literary approaches to human experience made from an unapologetically male point of view; that point of view is presumed to be objective and universal; but anything written from a female point of view (to say nothing of issues important to women) is either niche literature, or, more likely still, automatically dismissed as both stupid and hostile to men.

Anyway, I’m done with my rant, happy Friday.

Mallory is already an awesome Prudie.