Categories
doggoes jordan "slappy" peterson misogyny PUA twitter

Worst. Pickup. Line. Ever. (Courtesy of Jordan Peterson)

Ewww

By David Futrelle

Well, this little joke went over well on Twitter so I thought I’d post it here too.

Here’s one that didn’t go over quite as well. But it might just come to haunt your dreams.

Some good-ass tweets by people who aren’t me:

https://twitter.com/BoringEnormous/status/1028321380213907458

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

363 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Buttercup Q. Skullpants
Buttercup Q. Skullpants
2 years ago

@Catalpa

So you see, for the good of society, we must force women into relationships with men who are predisposed towards killing people

I love all the handwringing over “the good of society” that fails to address the gigantic weapon-toting elephant in the room. As if society is more at risk from a woman having a STEM job, than a man stockpiling AK-47s and nursing a bitter grudge.

@WWTH

Widespread scientific surveying of the population was not a thing until fairly recently. There’s no way to make a claim that women were happier in the earlier 1800’s or whatever.

This is what bugs me most about evo psych. There’s literally no way to get inside the skulls of humans from 20,000 years ago to understand how they thought. So evo pysch adherents insert their own motivations, and the result is a tribe of nomadic savanna dwellers with the gender politics of “Mad Men”.

Red R. Lion (formerly Dawn)
Red R. Lion (formerly Dawn)
2 years ago

“Look at the cars and dogs. Who is coercing them?”

😂😂😂 Who says Freudian slips aren’t real?

Trollboy is prolly referencing the early 1900s as his heyday of “before feminism” since most right wing types do. Let me also point out that there was an epidemic of “happy” housewives using opiates (and later barbiturates) to treat their daily “hysteria” during these times.

I never much thought of “the Valley of the Dolls” as a how-to manual for society, although I suppose the women in the book were “happy”.

weirwoodtreehugger: chief manatee

Who said women only want children if they’re coerced? Forced to be a legally powerless housewife =/= being a mother. There are lots of different ways to be a mother. Lots of feminist women are mothers.

Red R. Lion (formerly Dawn)
Red R. Lion (formerly Dawn)
2 years ago

Ohhhh looks like I caught trollboy before he could edit his “typo”. David, why don’t I get an edit window if he does? *stomps feet petulantly*

Richard Ford
2 years ago

@weirwoodtreehugger

You are absolutely correct. Happiness is a subjective thing, obviously and objective measurement of it is difficult.

It may be that people ask themselves ‘compared to what’ when asked the question. In other words a woman asked 100 years ago if she was happy might be happy because quite limited expectations are met.

Her husband is kind, a good provider and so on. True, he is a bit ugly and he farts a lot but how much can one person expect?

Today we have advertising telling her all the things she does not own. She has woman’s magazines telling her she should be having 11 mind blowing orgasms a night and she has feminism telling her that her husband is defective because he is a man.

Her life is better but her experience of it is worse.

Buttercup Q. Skulllpants
Buttercup Q. Skulllpants
2 years ago

@London Pilgrim

Oh goody, the appeal to nature fallacy. I was wondering when that would show up.

You and the other lobster boys seem content to structure your entire lives around your animal instincts. The rest of us have learned to master them.

weirwoodtreehugger: chief manatee

Today we have advertising telling her all the things she does not own. She has woman’s magazines telling her she should be having 11 mind blowing orgasms a night

This is capitalism, not feminism. Feminists are highly critical of the advertising aimed at women. We always have been. We’re critical of women’s magazines. Always have been. That women are so often subjected to harmful advertising, marketing and media messages really undercuts your claim that feminism is the establishment.

and she has feminism telling her that her husband is defective because he is a man.

This doesn’t actually happen. Interesting how you opened with accusations of us putting words in Jordan Peterson’s mouth and now you’re making a claim that is completely unsupported by evidence.

Feminists say women don’t have to be married if they don’t want to. We say that abuse and marital rape are wrong. We don’t say men are defective. If anything, it’s anti-feminists who say that. You’re the ones always arguing that men are biologically hardwired to rape and be violent. You’re the ones arguing that men just can’t help going on murder sprees if nobody hands them a submissive housewife to abuse.

Buttercup Q. Skulllpants
Buttercup Q. Skulllpants
2 years ago

@London Pilgrim

Oh goody, the appeal to nature fallacy. I was wondering when that would show up.

You and the other lobsterboys might be content to base your whole lives around your animal instincts. The rest of us have learned to master them. It’s called free will.

@Richard Ford

Are you suggesting that because people are becoming more aware of inequality, their dissatisfaction means we should go backward to the way things were before people were noticing how rotten the system is? That’s like putting duct tape over your car’s “CHECK ENGINE” light and saying “There! Solved!”

Dissatisfaction is the engine that moves us forward to a better future. Most of human progress has come about because people saw a problem and wanted to solve it. Happiness isn’t the only yardstick by which to measure the overall health of a society. Autonomy is another important yardstick.

London Pilgrim
2 years ago

@mish

Congratulations. You have either read some JP or seen a video. I can respect someone who is sufficiently open to ‘the other side’ to have curiosity.

I force myself to watch some mainstream media on Mondays. I do not enjoy it but it makes me a better man.

Violet the Vile, Moonbat Screech Junky
Violet the Vile, Moonbat Screech Junky
2 years ago

@Richard Ford

What’s wrong with expecting mind-blowing orgasms?

Violet the Vile, Moonbat Screech Junky
Violet the Vile, Moonbat Screech Junky
2 years ago

@London Pilgrim

I force myself to watch some mainstream media on Mondays. I do not enjoy it but it makes me a better man.

I force myself to watch some mainstream media on Mondays. I do not enjoy it but it makes me a very pretentious man

FIFY

Richard Ford
2 years ago

@weirwoodtreehugger

Amazing. You can tell me my views on rape by ‘psychic osmosis’ and even project the ‘all men are rapists’ feminist trope upon the equal rights movement!

Do you work for Channel 4 by any chance?

London Pilgrim
2 years ago

@violet

If I were a feminist and you were a man I would call you a rapist for asking that question.

Gaebolga
Gaebolga
2 years ago

Richard Ford/London Pilgrim wrote:

In other words a woman asked 100 years ago if she was happy might be happy because quite limited expectations are met.

You keep talking about how women said they were happier 100 years ago. Where are you getting your data about women’s happiness back then? What were the demographics of their study population, and what was its size? Were any groups underrepresented or excluded?

And what about the modern data you’re comparing this historical data to? What are the differences in population selection criteria and size? How are you accounting for such differences?

Surely you’re not just pulling this shit out of your ass and then making up stories about why some imaginary shit is the way you imagine it is….

Violet the Vile, Moonbat Screech Junky
Violet the Vile, Moonbat Screech Junky
2 years ago

@London Pilgrim

No, you wouldn’t.

kupo
kupo
2 years ago

@Richard Ford/London Pilgrim
Are you not arguing that the “solution” to incels reaping and murdering us because they’re “disenfranchised” is to return to some past ideal of enforced monogamy? What do you think that implies about the nature of men?

London Pilfrim
2 years ago

@weirwoodtreehugger.

Some feminists have children, but too few to prevent you dieing out.

And no… this is not what I wish upon you. I hope you will embrace something more life affirming.

Gaebolga
Gaebolga
2 years ago

London Pilgrim/Richard Ford wrote:

I do not enjoy it but it makes me a better man.

[Emphasis mine]

Citation desperately needed that you are a better man.

And if you truly are better, I really don’t want to know how appalling you were before…

London Pilgrim
2 years ago

@kupo

There are a growing number of men who care not if the world burns down. It worries me.

Valentin - Emigrantski Ragamuffin
Valentin - Emigrantski Ragamuffin
2 years ago

There are a growing number of men who care not if the world burns down. It worries me.

🤔this is not answering her question.

please derail more – it really helps your argument!

second, good you are worried about this! feminists are also worried about this – and have plenty of ideas and solutions which are much better than barbaric “enforced monogamy”. probably because feminists treat women like human, not just possessions like JP and his fans🙃

Gaebolga
Gaebolga
2 years ago

London Pilgrim/Richard Ford wrote:

There are a growing number of men who care not if the world burns down.

Where are you getting your data about the increasing number of nihilistic men? What historical data set are you using, and what modern data set are you comparing it to? Are you just looking at data from a specific location, or are you making claims about the global population?

You keep trying to speak with an authority you’ve done nothing to earn.

You keep failing.

Violet the Vile, Moonbat Screech Junky
Violet the Vile, Moonbat Screech Junky
2 years ago

@London Pilgrim

If I were a feminist and you were a man I would call you a rapist for asking that question.

I’m very concerned that you don’t understand the difference between “an orgasm” and “rape”.

Re: an orgasm – if two people are having sex, it is not unreasonable to expect that each partner will do their best to ensure the other one has an orgasm. I certainly expect an attempt to make me orgasm when I have sex. If someone had their own orgasm and then just rolled over and went to sleep without making any attempt to please me, I’d have something to say about it, and also I wouldn’t have sex with them ever again. That is just rude.

Re: rape – you shouldn’t be raping people at all.

Buttercup Q. Skullpants
Buttercup Q. Skullpants
2 years ago

Argh, WHTM keeps eating my comments for some reason. Trying this for the third time.

@London Pilgrim

Look at the cats and dogs. Who is coercing them?

Nice “appeal to nature” fallacy. You and the other lobsterboys might be content to base your whole lives around your animal instincts. The rest of us have mastered them and moved on. (And no, that doesn’t mean feminists reject motherhood…it means women aren’t defined solely by their uteri.)

@Richard Ford

Her life is better but her experience of it is worse.

Just because people are starting to wake up to how rotten the system is, that doesn’t mean we should go backwards to the days when people weren’t allowed to criticize the system. That’s like putting a piece of duct tape over the “CHECK ENGINE” light on your car and saying “There, solved it!” Dragging gender relations back to the 1800s wouldn’t even work. We live in the 21st century, where people socialize and work and think differently.

If people are unhappy about something, that’s not a bad thing. It’s an opportunity to ask why . Dissatisfaction is the engine that moves society forward. Much of human progress is the result of people seeing a problem and coming up with an innovative solution to fix it.

Anyway, happiness isn’t the only yardstick that matters when measuring the well-being of a society. Equality and autonomy are other important indexes. Maybe more important.

Scildfreja Unnyðnes
Scildfreja Unnyðnes
2 years ago

cracks knuckles

Gaebolga
Gaebolga
2 years ago

@ Scildfreja

Oh, this should be good!

kupo
kupo
2 years ago

comment image

comment image

Lukas Xavier
Lukas Xavier
2 years ago

Richard Ford:

…and even project the ‘all men are rapists’ feminist trope upon the equal rights movement!

MRAs et al are the ones who insist that men are inherently rapey. Feminists say that they don’t have to be; that it’s a choice, not nature.

I think you turned the projector backwards on this.

Alaniel (aka LittleLurker)
Alaniel (aka LittleLurker)
2 years ago

@Troll

So, we should go back to the way things were in the past because then we would have so much less violence? How cute. You want some actual historical data, hmm?

Middle of the 17th century, small town somewhere in west-central Germany. The documents of the local court have been analysed (because that’s what actual historians do, you know) and on average in a town of about 1000 people there were 56 people a month bringing cases to the court based on: violence due to drunkeness, domestic violence, fornication (in one case involving three people at once – never let it be said that our ancestors didn’t know how to have a good time 😉 and adultery. And all that in that nice “enforced monogamy” environment that you keep waxing on about, friend.

By the way, when and where exactly was that? With all the time I spend working as a historian I can never quite figure out what periods/places all go into your nice little fantasy land mix. Must be because I work with actual facts and not wishful thinking.

In short, shut up about “the past”, trolls. I have yet to meet one of you who had any idea what you were talking about. That past you talk about? It never existed. Go check some sources that aren’t your misogynistic internet friends’ imaginations, you’ll see what I mean.

weirwoodtreehugger: chief manatee

Amazing. You can tell me my views on rape by ‘psychic osmosis’ and even project the ‘all men are rapists’ feminist trope upon the equal rights movement!

Nope. I’m responding to your own words.

He simply observed what is obvious to all honest minded persons- that having angry disenfrancised men is not a recipe for peace.

You are the one saying that it’s obvious that when men are dissatisfied with the way things are, they hurt people.

You said it. Not me. Having angry disenfranchised men is not a recipe for peace.

Why is it that disenfranchised men disrupt the peace but disenfranchised women become docile and happy? The implication is right there. That men are inherently violent. The contemporary feminist position tends to be that male violence is largely cultural. The science hasn’t fully settled whether or not men have a greater biological proclivity for violence than women. But even if there is a biological component, that can be largely overcome with a culture that discourages men from responding with violence when they don’t get their own way.

In fact, violent crime has not been rising. It’s been going down. It has actually never been safer to be alive. Now I’m not claiming feminism is solely responsible for this. There are tons of factors and it’s not 100% settled why this is. But it does rule out your claim that feminism has made men violent because they’re disenfranchised by having to only be with women who actually want to be with them.

London Pilgrim
2 years ago

@little

Very odd when you think I want to ‘go back’ to anything. These things are cyclical as you should know, claiming to be a historian and all.

Things were pretty ‘progressive’ around the fall of Rome. Then they got all reactionary as Europe left the dark ages. Sophisticated thinkers such as yourself no doubt think it a coincidence…

Feminists simply want to recreate Nero’s Rome. Not an ambition I share.

weirwoodtreehugger: chief manatee

By the way, when and where exactly was that? With all the time I spend working as a historian I can never quite figure out what periods/places all go into your nice little fantasy land mix. Must be because I work with actual facts and not wishful thinking.

Me neither. I think anti-feminists believe life was a Leave it to Beaver episode until 2nd wave feminism came along.

I know that a few weeks ago I looked up marriage in Elizabethan England and apparently even though the stated rule was that the church only recognized marriages with a virgin bride, something like 40% of brides were already pregnant by the time couples got around to getting their union officially sanctioned. It was extremely common for couples to cohabitate before making it official.

Valentin - Emigrantski Ragamuffin
Valentin - Emigrantski Ragamuffin
2 years ago

Neros rome was not part of the fall of rome

London Pilgrim
2 years ago

@weirwoodtreehugger

How to argue like a treehugger.

1. Project feminist ideas about the evil nature of men upon a non feminist.

2. Demonstrate the absurdity of these feminist ideas.

3. Claim the fact that men do not in fact behave in the evil ways patriarchy theory would expect…. as a feminist victory!

OK… right.

London Pilgrim
2 years ago

@Valentin

Point taken, but no paradise despite the cross dressing and the persecuting of the Christians.

Makroth - cowboy Jacobin from Hell
Makroth - cowboy Jacobin from Hell
2 years ago

@London Pilgrim

She didn’t, but let’s try something else.

We as a society need to take steps in order to have less angry, disenfranchised women. Having so many is not a recipe for peace.

Agree or disagree?

London Pilgrim
2 years ago

@treehugger

There is a logical problem with your position.

For some bizarre reason you have decided to oppose the notion that large groups of disenfranchised men with no stake in the current system is a bad thing. You admit that it actually makes feminist points in a strange way. Feminists like to pretend ALL men are savages while I contend that many men are capable of becoming one.

Surely you should welcome this! I am half way to being a male feminist!!

BUT.. you have to oppose the notion.. because what is happening to men is hurting men- and this is what matters. Hurting men.

You do not want to help women. You just want to hurt men- and do not mind if women get hurt in the process.

Valentin - Emigrantski Ragamuffin
Valentin - Emigrantski Ragamuffin
2 years ago

People who use the fall of rome to describe today do not understand history or time at all. you know how long was the fall of rome? you talking about 100 years ago, but the fall of rome is longer than all of “modern” history. you can’t compare them! and don’t even start to talk about “reasons” for rome falling. historians still argue about this today and it is hard to say what is true because it is so long ago, they must work hard with archaeologists and study to find evidence. (something wich Jordan Peterson and his followers don’t have – evidence🙃)

but we have living memory of 100 years before now, we have footage and photographs. we have truth to easily show that Jordan Peterson is lying and hypocrite.

London Pilgrim
2 years ago

@makroth

Agree obviously. The problem is that telling women there is a Patriarchy is a very good excuse to give up on life.

Alan Robertshaw
Alan Robertshaw
2 years ago

@ WWTH

You might find this amusing/interesting.

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x335ow3

(The woman in this wrote and starred in a horror film called ‘Prevenge’ that you also might enjoy)

weirwoodtreehugger: chief manatee

For some bizarre reason you have decided to oppose the notion that large groups of disenfranchised men with no stake in the current system is a bad thing.

You haven’t actually backed up your claim that men are disenfranchised.
You haven’t backed up your claim that there more angry violent men now than there was in the past. The whole premise of your argument is faulty.
That’s before we even get to your conclusions. Which are also faulty. The burden of proof is on you to back up your claims. How I do or don’t feel about disenfranchised is irrelevant.

You admit that it actually makes feminist points in a strange way. Feminists like to pretend ALL men are savages while I contend that many men are capable of becoming one.

Point to where anyone here has stated that all men are savages. You can’t used “feminists think all men are savages” to refute anything any of argue until you can demonstrate that we do think all men are savages.

Be clear and concise.

Are men increasingly angry and disenfranchised? Yes or no. Provide evidence backing up the claim.

If yes, what is your solution? What specifically do you want to happen to make men less angry. What government policies should be put in place? What other specific changes in education or media need to be made.

London Pilgrim
2 years ago

@valentin

There are certain common factors within empires that fall. One is sexual indulgence and gender confusion. Greece Rome Egypt and possible all others.

Debt and welfare seem to be in the mix too. It certainly was with the British empire.

Of course we cannot say with certainty these were the causes- but so far the coincidence seems to be 100%.

Slightly higher than chance.

Valentin - Emigrantski Ragamuffin
Valentin - Emigrantski Ragamuffin
2 years ago

There are certain common factors within empires that fall.

USA maybe has imperialist policy but it isn’t a empire. It’s a capitalist state and lots of problems you said are problems with capitalism and greed. The USA is also a very young country compared with many other counties and it is so so young compared with rome! you are talking nonsense to try and seem educated. 🤷

Violet the Vile, Moonbat Screech Junky
Violet the Vile, Moonbat Screech Junky
2 years ago

Pfft, this troll is crap.

Makroth - cowboy Jacobin from Hell
Makroth - cowboy Jacobin from Hell
2 years ago

@London Pilgrim

So you want them to be lied to? Specifically, lied by omission? And how many actually do give up on life. Do you have any studies to show us?

Somebody here said it best when they said that you IMPLICITLY want women to be sacrificial lambs for violent men. You leave out men’s obligations out of this “new order” of yours so there will be assumptions to fill in the gaps. In many ways, you resemble Jordan Peterson. Vagueness is one of them.

I think the best course of action is to make incels stop entitled, sadistic, radioactive turds.

But if you have a better solution, learn from the faults of JBP, and be precise in your words when presenting it.

Gaebolga
Gaebolga
2 years ago

London Pilgrim/Richard Ford wrote:

@treehugger

There is a logical problem with your position.

Do tell.

For some bizarre reason you have decided to oppose the notion that large groups of disenfranchised men with no stake in the current system is a bad thing.

Please point to the portion of her text where she says that.

You admit that it actually makes feminist points in a strange way.

Please point to the portion of her text where she says that.

Feminists like to pretend ALL men are savages….

Please provide evidence to support this claim.

I am half way to being a male feminist!!

Uh huh.

As this is your opinion, it isn’t objectively verifiable, but its argumentative value is exactly equal to that of my opinion that this statement is a steaming pile of bullshit.

BUT.. you have to oppose the notion…

Why?

…because what is happening to men is hurting men- and this is what matters. Hurting men.

Matters to whom?

If you’re implying that that’s what matters to weirwoodtreehugger, then please point to the portion of her text where she says that.

If you’re implying that that’s what matters to feminists in general, then please provide evidence to support this claim.

You do not want to help women.

Even if all of your claims about what weirwoodtreehugger was saying were true, this is not a logical conclusion. It might be true, but there are many other possible motives – most of which are far more plausible – that could generate the same rhetoric from her.

But until you can provide any evidence to support your claims about what you claim weirwoodtreehugger said, it’s not even wrong. It’s just stupid.

You just want to hurt men- and do not mind if women get hurt in the process.

…and even if your claim about weirwoodtreehugger not caring about women were true, once again, this would not be a logical conclusion.

You really just don’t know what the fuck you’re doing about anything, do you? That’s pretty pathetic.

London Pilgrim
2 years ago

@valentin

The Soviet Union was even younger. Had plenty of debt, was relatively sexually conservative in theory at least. The fact that it did not call itself an empire did not help.

Loads of divorce. Loads of abortion.

At least the USA has a saviour in Trump.

History never exactly repeats.

Alan Robertshaw
Alan Robertshaw
2 years ago

@ London Pilgrim

There are certain common factors within empires that fall.

Contemporary Roman conservatives blamed the adoption of trousers. It was probably more complex than that; but I’ve never seen any reputable historian (or any historian come to that) even mention ‘gender confusion’

It certainly was with the British empire.

Well another view is that we’d armed tens of millions of people who’d just had a five year course in how to defeat colonialists. That certainly what swung it with Jinna’s India. But again, not a mention of gender confusion.

Alaniel (aka LittleLurker)
Alaniel (aka LittleLurker)
2 years ago

@Troll

There are certain common factors within empires that fall. One is sexual indulgence and gender confusion. Greece Rome Egypt and possible all others.

Debt and welfare seem to be in the mix too. It certainly was with the British empire.

Of course we cannot say with certainty these were the causes- but so far the coincidence seems to be 100%.

Ahahahahahahahaha…. Sorry.

And yes, we do have some pretty good theories about why those fell and…that is not one of them. Not since historians have moved beyond the sheltered Victorian gentleman who enjoyed being shocked by all those delightfully scandalous tales in some of the sources. Propaganda? Invective? Tropes? Perish the thought.

And Greece? The “Empire” of “Greece”?
What the fuck are you even talking about? Antiquity? Someone should go back in time and tell all those poleis they are actually all part of the “Empire” of “Greece”… not, you know, different entities that are competing with each other all the damned time. But why am I even trying? I’ll just go back to laughing.

London Pilgrim
2 years ago

@makroth

Thank you. You are the first person not to put words into my mouth. I feel you are an honest person.

You believe I implicitly believe things I do not because you are in a bubble that believes bad things about men and bad things about right wingers.

My solution is a society that does not devide men into Alpha and Beta in such a savage and perminant way.

I would like it to be possible for a man who is unlucky in love to be respected for the good he does in the world even if he remains a virgin till the day he dies.

Is virginity such a crime? Does it really make a man a useless loser or a creep or does he remain a human being?

I think most incels could be reconciled to their status if only they were respected as people. To tell lies about them- based on nothing but bigotry drives them to the margins and this is dangerous.

Valentin - Emigrantski Ragamuffin
Valentin - Emigrantski Ragamuffin
2 years ago

The Soviet Union was even younger.

What is your point? I’m not comparing modern day to the fall of rome – that’s you! Of course the reasons for collapse of СССР are different from the fall of the Roman empire – I’m not saying that at all. The reasons for collapse of empires and political structures are not all the same and not all clear. Why anyone will argue this at all? Unless they don’t know anything about history, or they are lying to support their ideology (I can guess which reason for you lobster🙄)

You don’t feel tired moving the goal posts so much!? take rest my friend.

Divorce and single mothers were supported in Soviet times to make sure children were born, to discourage abortion and increase population. And abortion was popular only because other birth control is not available for most people, especially if they don’t live in the city and they are not part of nomenklatura or academic groups.