Categories
"noodlewhores" creepy cuckolding empathy deficit entitled babies incels men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny rape culture sexual exploitation

Incel says: Moving to Thailand for sex is a hassle. So seek out poor and/or vulnerable women closer to home!

Have you considered starting a cult?

By David Futrelle

Western incels often fantasize about solving their no-one-wants-to-have-sex-with-them problem by moving to Southeast Asia where, they assume, they’ll have their pick of attractive, extremely impoverished young women ripe for sexual exploitation.

Incels tend to put it a little less delicately. “It seems that, if you’re white,” one prolific Incels.co commenter called RegisterUserName wrote recently, “the only way you can ascend is through going to Asia and fucking some noodlewhore who’s desperate for a green card … .”

But carrying out this plan would involve moving to, or at the very least visiting, a country far from home, and competing with other Westerners who might be more handsome or at least less objectionable as a person than you, and so for most incels this fantasy remains just that.

But RegisterUserName has some up with some ideas as to how he and his incel colleagues can find similarly poor and/or vulnerable women out there without even leaving their hometowns.

“[W]hen you can’t get what you want with mainstream methods,” he wrote in a recent post, “you have to think outside the box to solutions that have a greater chance of working.”

His suggestions?

Join a 12-step group like “Alcoholics Anonymous or one of those circle meetings to find someone in a rough patch in life.”

Get yourself admitted to a mental hospital so you could “find some crazy bird.”

Start a cult. This might be a bit tricky, as RegisterUserName notes, because you’d “have to be able to be very charismatic and preferably not a turbomanlet.” But if you can pull it off, he continues, you could fill the cult with “girls [who] could be anywhere from 16 (depending on age of consent; obviously don’t break the law) to around 25 or so)” and find yourself your very own Squeaky Fromme.

Join a cult. If actually starting a cult would be too much work, you can always try

Cultmaxxing by leeching on someone else’s cult and finding [a] wife, but be careful that a fellow incel hasn’t made it into a sex cult where he fucks your wife

Exploit homeless girls. RegisterUserName has a somewhat elaborate fantasy of “saving” some homeless teenager, who can’t help but feel so grateful that she “repays” you, her savior, with sex

and then they fall in love with you or something … you gotta have your own house and stuff, preferably be able to fulfill a father like role because she probably had circumstances which led to her never having anyone to be a father … . I think I like this one the most because … you’re actually helping someone so it’s the most morally acceptable … .

Sexual exploitation isn’t “helping,” dude.

Only one of RegisterUserName’s suggestions doesn’t involve exploiting a desperately poor or otherwise vulnerable women. But it does require you commit a violent assault. Yes, we’re talking about the time-honored mating strategy of beating up some cute girl’s boyfriend.

Fight girls’ boyfriends and try to hit on them after. You see all those stories man you never know. (Works best if you’re young, tall, good fighting success. You can snag teenage girls depending on laws in your area so from around 16-25 where they might just get turned on by it and are drunk and are angry at their boyfriends, but it probably won’t be a long term thing ever because, I mean, come on, it’s the type of girl to leave her boyfriend for an ugly subhuman because he got beat up)

As it turns out, RegisterUderName isn’t the only one with fantasies of explaoiting vulnderable girls and women. One of the other commenters, apparently writing from Saudi Arabia, explained that he had

considered … hiring a live in maid and hope she will fuck me to keep her job but that’s nearly impossible to do in Saudi Arabia or dealing drugs and hope one of the tweakers will suck my dick for some drugs but I don’t know anyone to buy drugs from and selling drugs has death penalty here and I’m not ready to die yet.

You know, fellas, maybe if you weren’t the sort of guys who spend your days fantasizing about ruthlessly exploiting desperate women for sex you might be able to get a date with an actual willing woman.

Send tips to dfutrelle at gmail dot com.

We Hunted the Mammoth relies entirely on readers like you for its survival. If you appreciate our work, please send a few bucks our way! Thanks!

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

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

204 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Shadowplay
2 years ago

Richard is boring and being dealt with quite handily, so can be ignored.

Regarding the idea of attending AA meetings to pick up rock bottom chicks (not the phrase used here, but one I have heard used) – I’d strongly advise any incels reading not to try. It does not end well. For them, anyways.

TheKND
TheKND
2 years ago

@Richard

I would like to se a return to the days when a man would have to work hard and develop himself in order to provide for his family rather than scattering his bastards across the nation. If sex outside of marriage could be prevented then women would no longer say ‘where have all the good men gone.’

You cannot return to a time, that never was. You might as well suggest we all throw off our clothes and go back to eden or crawl into the womb.

Try not breathing for a bit. In five minutes you will either discover that your instinct to breathe is stronger than your university professors would have you believe- or you will be unconscious.

How many other lies have they told you?

BREATHING IS NOT AN INSTINCT YOU UNEDUCATED GIT! It’s a vegetative function of the medulla oblongata just like body temperature and sweating.

How many other lies have they told you?

Way less than you or your Lobstergod. I mean, I use those “lies” to safe people’s lives.

Tripoli
Tripoli
2 years ago

You can’t even give them the advice to do something social because they’re going to turn it into this…

Richard
2 years ago

Thank you. This is a fantastic summery and far more right than wrong. I will do my very best to answer it in the same fair minded way!

A. Correct. Evolution did not end with civilisation and we still wish to survive and reproduce as much as we ever did. This BTW is why I accept the ways in which women select partners. I owe this strategy for my existence! Feminists often assume pointing out human behaviours is to condemn it. Not so! You will find the right is very accepting of human nature as it is.

It is objectively true that a man who cannot (or will not) protect and support his family is doing a bad job of fatherhood.

B. Yes. We should strive for truth and goodness.

C. We can see this played out on this blog. It is basically hunting for ‘losers’ who are not attractive to women and heaping shame upon their heads. Such men are assumed to be both sexually inadequate and bad in a fight. If a man expresses pain then he is assumed to be a danger to women. In fact he is a larger danger to himself.

D. The rules of romance are set by all women who wish to play the game. It is they who decide who is the Alpha and the Beta by the choices they make. They have the right to do this but should take responsibility for their choices.

E. Correct. A man who simply does not wish to make the effort is a MGTOW but there is much overlap between the groups. I am a MGTOW.

F. Not quite. Many male feminists would make fine human beings except that they have bought the lie that a weak man is a good man. They eliminate good masculine qualities and instead wage covert wars against anyone better than themselves. It is weak men, not strong men who hurt women.

G. The left approach everything from the standpoint of how people ‘should’ think and feel. We see it here very much. They think if everyone had the correct attitudes and opinions the world would be a better place. In fact they merely crush the human spirit.

H. Yes. AFBB- under a welfare state. Without it they would have to settle with Nigel from accounts who at least has a good wage.

I. Correct. When faced with a lifetime with one man the bad boy loses much of his appeal.

J. ‘Chadism’ Is indeed heritable. How could it not be?

Yes it is heteronormative as it concerns itself with families and childcare. Sex outside of reproduction is a hobby. Nothing more.

The nuclear family has been the building block of all pre existing civilisations. Maybe there is another way- but it is yet to be found.

I find socialisation arguments to be a cop out. It allows us to ignore the evidence before our eyes and to imagine a changed human being (new Soviet Man?) if only people were conditioned by some authoritarian but benign state authority. This has not worked out well in the past.

Richard
Richard
2 years ago

@uclaegont

It used to be possible for men to spend much of the day apart from women and thus drop pretence. We have yet to discover a way to have women in the workforce without imposing the same social restrictions on men there as exist elsewhere. Maybe segregation at work would be the answer. I have heard women say they are feel the same sort of thing and I support spaces for women as well.

The problem comes when women apply romantic strategies in a work environment. An undesirable man in a social environment (incel) will be excluded and made unwelcome. Eventually he will leave. At work he will find it impossible to do his job as he will be denied information or resources. The result is lost productivity as well as broken lives.

Catalpa
Catalpa
2 years ago

Being a good man would pay once again. I cannot see why any woman would object to this.

How about all the women who aren’t straight?

Richard
Richard
2 years ago

@catalpa

Why would a lesbian want to marry a man at all?

Ariblester
Ariblester
2 years ago

Well, that’s refreshing; someone who actually owns their biases.

It is basically hunting for ‘losers’ who are not attractive to women and heaping shame upon their heads. Such men are assumed to be both sexually inadequate and bad in a fight. If a man expresses pain then he is assumed to be a danger to women. In fact he is a larger danger to himself.

Not quite. The blog’s mockery is not of the sexual prowess of incels (that would be ableist) not of their physical strength (also ableist).

It is mocking the mindset that these men have that women are objects to be gamed, possessed or destroyed, because they will not provide access to sex. It is mocking the mindset that all men and all women “should” behave in a single manner.

It is not mocking pain; it is bringing to light the fact that this pain is self-inflicted, by a sense of entitlement that is unleavened by even the barest shred of introspection.

And they are dangerous, to themselves and to others. The only difference is that they can choose to stop hurting themselves; others cannot choose to not be hurt by them.

The left approach everything from the standpoint of how people ‘should’ think and feel. We see it here very much. They think if everyone had the correct attitudes and opinions the world would be a better place. In fact they merely crush the human spirit.

The only thing we ask is that every person be treated as a person. Is that soul-crushing? Why? When you dehumanize a group, when you point to some imagined distinction as a reason to treat them as less than equal, when you continue to uphold social structures that only serve to keep people down, we will have words.

Sex outside of reproduction is a hobby. Nothing more.

That’s a very, very dim view to take of sex.

The nuclear family has been the building block of all pre existing civilisations. Maybe there is another way- but it is yet to be found.

Absolutely not! There are plenty of examples of matriarchal or matrilineal societies in antiquity. The Spartans raised their children communally, as did the kibbutzim in Israel.

Catalpa
Catalpa
2 years ago

@Richard

A lesbian would not want to marry a man, and the system which you are proposing would force/coerce women into marriage with men.

You propose removing women from the workforce, thereby depriving them of their ability to support themselves, and for lesbian partners to support one another.

You propose outlawing sex outside of marriage, and you state that sex is only useful in the procreative fashion, therefore it follows that this system would not allow for same-sex marriage, as same sex marriage would not be ‘useful’ to society. Ergo, homosexual sex will be outlawed.

Therefore, you are proposing that lesbian and asexual women be coerced/forced into marriage with men. So romantic! Can’t see why anyone would object to that.

Cyborgette
Cyborgette
2 years ago

@Richard

Belated, but I’m angry.

Most women judge men by their capacity for violence (I want a man to protect me). We should not judge them for this as it is a rational desire that is hard wired. What I judge is women who set their boyfriends on innocent men just to see a little blood.

a) No, I don’t want a man to protect me. I’m forced to rely on the protection of men because you fuckers control most of my society. It’s less like having a big protective mastiff than like being someone’s Pomeranian, and you can damn well bet I resent it.

b) Humans have five basic responses to threats, not three: fight, flight, freeze, faint, and fawn. Many abuse survivors are intimately familiar with that fifth one, and almost all women are abuse survivors on some level. Have you considered that some women might accommodate male bullies because they’re fucking terrified for themselves, and are frantically trying to deescalate their abuser’s behavior?

And mind, I’m not going to downplay the white female purity/white male protectionism dynamic, and how dangerous that can be for people who aren’t white and/or don’t fit in that gender binary. But absolutely fuck you for thinking that women are hardwired to want to be treated like precious little pets. We want our own agency, and it is not our fault that society and men like you work to systematically deny it.

Ariblester
Ariblester
2 years ago

Richard wrote on
August 16, 2019 at 5:34 am:

@uclaegont

It used to be possible for men to spend much of the day apart from women and thus drop pretence. We have yet to discover a way to have women in the workforce without imposing the same social restrictions on men there as exist elsewhere. Maybe segregation at work would be the answer. I have heard women say they are feel the same sort of thing and I support spaces for women as well.

The problem comes when women apply romantic strategies in a work environment. An undesirable man in a social environment (incel) will be excluded and made unwelcome. Eventually he will leave. At work he will find it impossible to do his job as he will be denied information or resources. The result is lost productivity as well as broken lives.

This is what I am talking about when I speak of people treating women as objects to be gamed!

Why on earth would you assume that women are applying romantic strategies to work?

Is there really no other interactional template that you could apply to these situations other than “women are looking for the Alpha, and I choose not to engage in their games, therefore I am equivalent to an incel”?

Social interactions go both ways; if you present yourself as wanting to be anywhere else but in front of a woman that you’re working with, guess what, they’re not going to want to prolong that interaction.

Ariblester
Ariblester
2 years ago

Catalpa wrote on
August 16, 2019 at 5:55 am:

@Richard

A lesbian would not want to marry a man, and the system which you are proposing would force/coerce women into marriage with men.

You propose removing women from the workforce, thereby depriving them of their ability to support themselves, and for lesbian partners to support one another.

You propose outlawing sex outside of marriage, and you state that sex is only useful in the procreative fashion, therefore it follows that this system would not allow for same-sex marriage, as same sex marriage would not be ‘useful’ to society. Ergo, homosexual sex will be outlawed.

Therefore, you are proposing that lesbian and asexual women be coerced/forced into marriage with men. So romantic! Can’t see why anyone would object to that.

There’s a tiny bit of wiggle room in his argument; women would technically be allowed to work in separate but equal work environments; he didn’t think that (procreative?) sex outside of marriage should be criminalized, only made very socially undesirable by the removal of the welfare state and thereby benefits for unwed mothers; and members of the LGBT community, rather than being forced into heteronormative marriages, would be allowed to live solitary sexless existences, just like MGTOW (though that would actually make a large portion of LGBT individuals literally involuntarily celibate).

Not that it’s much different in practice from what you outlined 😒

Pie
Pie
2 years ago

@Lainy

I learned in college that humans have only two instincts (that is, a behavior that we’re born with): (1) an ability to suckle, and (2) a fear of falling.

Why do we have the second one do you know? I mean falling hurts yes, but why such a fear of it?

It is a useful thing for an infant to be fearful of, if they are expected to spend their early days clinging to their mother who is clinging to the upper branches of a tree. Probably related to some other primitive human reflexes like the Moro reflex (“startled baby”) and grasping reflex, which also are more common in furry and tree-climbing species that carry their young, than bald or ground-dwelling ones.

Naglfar
Naglfar
2 years ago

@Richard
Let’s go through your responses one by one:
A. No feminist I know believes that all human behaviors are wrong. We condemn actions like rape and murder because these behaviors are harmful to individuals and society. Regarding the right being tolerant of human nature, the right doesn’t seem very tolerant to anyone whose nature differs from what they expect (i.e. LGBTQIPAN+ people). Where the tolerance of their nature?
B. As others have pointed out already, we seem to have very different definitions of a good man. I think a good man is a man who respects others and is capable of empathy. These are the kinds of men that I want to be friends with, that I want to date. I am not interested in a breadwinner, but in a man or woman with good character.
C. We don’t mock incels because of their lack of sex. Plenty of people don’t have sex for a variety of reasons. We mock them because of the aggrieved entitlement and misogyny that they have, and the bullshit theories they come up with.
D. What rules of romance? I don’t think there’s an official set. If you mean that women can decide who they want to have relationships with, that’s true but so can men.
E. You’re an MGTOW? That explains a lot. Why do you care so much, though, if you’re going your own way?
F. You have created a binary of weak vs strong, with no clear way of telling what’s what. Most of the male feminists I know are fully respectable and normal people. Not weak. In fact, I knew one who was an amateur heavyweight boxer, and he was definitely not weak.
G. How exactly has the left crushed the spirit? I’ve been a Democrat my whole life and somehow I’m not crushed yet.
H. If alpha fucks and beta bucks, how come paternity fraud occurs in less than 1% of cases?
I. As far as I can tell, most women aren’t fans of the bad boy idea in the first place. So it does not have appeal for a lifetime.
J. You seem to think there is just one gene for your so-called Chadism, but it is well-established that there would be many. So it would be heritable, but isn’t really one unified heritable trait and is much more complicated than that. Plus, what about women carrying chad genes? Or recessive chad genes?

Also, if non-procreative sex is a hobby to you, you’ll probably be surprised to learn it’s an ancient and proud one, seeing as most animals seem to do this, as do humans in literally every society.

Cat Mara
Cat Mara
2 years ago

@Richard:

You will find the right is very accepting of human nature as it is.

😂

Sure, it is… so long as one accepts “human nature” as being one with your fuck-you-got-mine/ devil-take-the-hindmost philosophy. Open a window on your way out, the stench of Mordor you’ve brought in with you is sickening.

weirwoodtreehugger: chief manatee

I see Richard once again is basing his ideas of science and now history completely on his own feelings.

Richard,

If the the behaviors you want are “hard wired” then we’d all just do them. There wouldn’t have to be laws, norms, pearl clutching think pieces etc. designed to enforce monogamy.

Also, the past did not work like you think it did. Genes do not work like you think they do.

Richard
Richard
2 years ago

@ariblester

Actually gay people would have a great time (as they do at the moment if they were honest). There is no need to regulate their sexuality as no children result. The purpose of ‘patriarchy’ is to ensure that all children have parents to love them. It is not that homosexuals are prohibited, it is that they are not regulated at all.

Iain Lovejoy
Iain Lovejoy
2 years ago

@Richard

The problem comes when women apply romantic strategies in a work environment. An undesirable man in a social environment (incel) will be excluded and made unwelcome. Eventually he will leave. At work he will find it impossible to do his job as he will be denied information or resources. The result is lost productivity as well as broken lives.

It’s nothing to do with “romantic strategies”. If by “undesirable man in a social environment” you mean “unpleasant a***hole towards women” (which basically seems to be the predominant reason why Incels can’t get laid) it is not entirely surprising that women won’t want to work with him.
If you can’t interact socially with someone in a normal, sensible fashion they will neither sleep with you, nor work with you nor want to associate with you at all. Don’t delude yourself that it’s because you are not a “chad” or “alpha” or any BS like that: it’s because you make it pretty obvious you’re a total d*ck.

Richard
Richard
2 years ago

@TheKND

I understand your desire to be independent. Presumably this also involves childlessness?

The point of all this is not to force women into dependency- it is to ensure children are supported and women are not abandoned. We live in such an upside down world that some very bad people have convinced us that this is a bad thing.

Naglfar
Naglfar
2 years ago

@Richard
I can’t tell what you understand less: patriarchy or gay people. All the supporters of patriarchy that I can think of are virulently homophobic, and the majority of gay people I know do not support patriarchy. So if the right is so great for gay people in your opinion, why does the Republican Party continue to oppose LGBTQIPAN+ rights? Why is it that red states have more anti-LGBTQIPAN+ hate crimes?

The purpose of ‘patriarchy’ is to ensure that all children have parents to love them.

I don’t think that is what patriarchy does, or was intended to do. Patriarchy exists to suppress women and keep white cishet men in power.

It is not that homosexuals are prohibited, it is that they are not regulated at all.

Take that up with your fellow conservatives. The political position that claims to not like regulation seems to feel very strongly about regulating LGBTQIPAN+ people.

Naglfar
Naglfar
2 years ago

@Richard

We live in such an upside down world that some very bad people have convinced us that this is a bad thing.

Who are these very bad people? I’m curious now.

Richard
Richard
2 years ago

@weirwood

Our ego tells us that we stand above nature and our own nature like a colossus. Reality says otherwise. Look at this blog, which on the one hand claims to oppose traditional gender roles but in fact enforces them. Men who express pain (yes we do feel it too) are mocked and told they hate women- yet it is true of both genders that much of the pain that comes into our lives is from those we love most. Women can vent here and other places- but men must remain stoic.

We cannot escape our nature. All we can do is recognise it and add in kindness when we can.

weirwoodtreehugger: chief manatee

Whenever conservatives talk about women needing men to protect us, they neglect to mention that it’s protecting us from other men

Whether or not an individual woman looks for protectiveness in a partner, and that varies because – gasp! – women aren’t a monolith, it’s not an argument that women should be restricted for our own good. It’s an argument that men should be restricted. Kept indoors after dark. Discouraged from drinking. Not allowed to run governments or businesses. If it’s men’s nature to be violent against both women, and other men, then patriarchy is the least workable type of social structure.

Of course, being the evil spirit crushing lefty that I am, I don’t think men are inherently violent and can be better than Richard thinks they can.

weirwoodtreehugger: chief manatee

Richard,

If we can not escape our nature, and our nature is to organize society like a 1950s sitcom, then we wouldn’t be escaping.

If a behavior isn’t the norm across all different cultures and times – and the one woman + one man + 2.5 children family never was – then it isn’t hard wired. It isn’t instinctual. ” Human nature” as the right sees it, is merely a wish list. Invented by institutions and people who want to shape the world in a way that benefits them.

Richard
Richard
2 years ago

@ naglifar

If I said feminists think all human nature is wrong then I did not intend to. Obviously they are OK with eating, drinking or breathing and so on. What they think is wrong is femininity and masculinity. We cannot act our natures without apology. They are also suspicious of individualism. We should desire nothing more than to be obedient to the state and to receive the minimum dole in return. In fact we were not born to be factory chickens. As factory chickens our souls die.

They call this equality. I call it death.

Of course there are no official rules of romance- this is because such a thing does not need to be written down. The universality of the rules mean that nobody questions or notices them. If they were peculiar to a single culture or point of history then there would be such a list.

You also assume I am anti gay (on no evidence) because this is a common slur the left use.

This is a trap. The left tell you who to dislike. They tell you what to think and say. This seems a liberation at first because it saves so much hard thinking but actually it is slavery! I hope you find some freedom for yourself.

Yes I am MGTOW. I know that this site has created a mythology about us but many of us love women deeply- so much so that we get burned and used every time we get too close. I continue to love- but from a safe distance.

The trouble with the left- the soul crushing aspect- is that to the left neither of us exist as human beings. This is why you can assume personality attributes on the basis of my being MGTOW and you assume I want to oppress people because I am male.

Human beings are more interesting than that.

Richard
Richard
2 years ago

@weirwood

Hitler tried to change human nature.

Stalin tried to change human nature.

Mao tried to change human nature.

All three are gone. Only human nature remains.

C.A.Collins
C.A.Collins
2 years ago

I give this guy 8/10, good grammar, punctuation etc. The arguments about patriarchy=good are totally divorced from my lived reality as a lesbian, but more creative than “Dave’s fat!”

Seraph4377
Seraph4377
2 years ago

I see others have got the “What makes Incels think they can actually pull these ideas off”, “No seriously, this wouldn’t work out for you the way you think it would”, and “Richard is a horrible, horrible person who attributes his horrible beliefs to SCIENCE!” issues covered.

So I just have to ask:

“the only way you can ascend

“Ascend”? Like fucking a woman you think of as a “noodlewhore” is Reaching Enlightenment or something? WTF?

Seraph4377
Seraph4377
2 years ago

@ Cyborgette: “Faint” is a legit basic human threat response? I always thought it was an attempt to carry out one of the other responses that was foiled by a corset making it impossible to breathe as deeply as an adrenaline rush demanded.

What situations would that be useful in?

weirwoodtreehugger: chief manatee

Richard,

Interesting you should bring up Hitler. His idea of what roles men and women should have in society was actually the same as yours. He was all about the heteronormativity. If we go by your worldview, Hitler was trying to preserve human nature, but the left got in his way.

Not that name dropping a few authoritarians is much of a counter argument. I guess I should assume you’re conceding that you don’t know anything about biology, anthropology or history? I mean, I can’t help but notice that in your time at WHTM, you’ve shared your assumptions as though they were facts, but never presented even a shred of evidence.

kupo
kupo
2 years ago

Whatever makes you conflate love with oppression? Even under feminism women read romance novels and will do so until they are classed as hate speech. I am only half joking.

More “proof” I’m not actually a woman. 🤔

Richard
2 years ago

@CAcollins

Absolutely! Lesbians and MRA,s should be allies. Why does a lesbian need laws to bind heterosexual men to her anyway.

The real purpose for the savage divorce laws we have in the U.K. is to make it difficult for men to divorce. If he does then he will lose his children and so on.

Lesbians are the only group of women who do not profit from this.

Shadowplay
2 years ago

@Seraph

It’s also called the shutdown response – but that don’t begin with F. 😛 Sort of the common freeze response taken to the maximum possible.

It’s not very useful at all in any situation I can think of, but some people (as well as the famous goats) do just overload and shut down completely at times. Unlike the with the goats, it is neither invariable nor predictable.
Not too common – I’ve seen it happen maybe three times in my life. One were a prisoner, one during a bombing (This one’s the maybe – guy was untouched, well outside the blast zone and just totally out cold), and the funniest from a jump scare in a damned movie. He did NOT live that down.

Naglfar
Naglfar
2 years ago

@Richard
I thought MGTOWs didn’t believe lesbians existed. So now you want to be allies? I get the feeling this will be like that time incels wanted to ally with trans women. By which I mean: no lesbian would want to ally with MRAs.

Dalillama
Dalillama
2 years ago

Richard

The real purpose for the savage divorce laws we have in the U.K. is to make it difficult for men to divorce

Dude, you do realize that until fairly recently, getting a divorce in the UK required an Act of Parliament specifically on your behalf?

Viscaria
Viscaria
2 years ago

Men who express pain (yes we do feel it too) are mocked and told they hate women

Dear Richard is sadly confused. Let’s see if I can help clear things up.

“I am a man and I am in pain because someone I love is gone.” <—- Worthy of sympathy, not mockery.

"I am a man and I am in pain because someone I love is gone. Women shouldn't be allowed to leave men! We should make them financially dependent on us so that they have no choice but to stay in relationships with men, regardless of how those men treat them." <—- Oops, looks like this is a misogynistic asshole.

"I am sad because our system of capitalism means it is nearly impossible for me to support myself and my dependants." <—- A sad reality for many, many people, absolutely deserving of sympathy and concern.

"I am sad because I'm not sure I can support my dependants. FYI, women need to be 'regulated.'" <—- Bit different.

"I feel really awful all the time, and I can't pin my finger on why." <—- Been there. It sucks. Nothing but sympathy.

"I feel really awful all the time. I'm pretty sure it's because women are disgusting sluts." <—- HMMMMM

Naglfar
Naglfar
2 years ago

@Dalillama

Dude, you do realize that until fairly recently, getting a divorce in the UK required an Act of Parliament specifically on your behalf?

And before that, it required splitting from the Catholic Church and inventing a brand new church. At least, that’s what Henry VIII did.

Gaebolga
Gaebolga
2 years ago

Richard wrote:

Try not breathing for a bit. In five minutes you will either discover that your instinct to breathe is stronger than your university professors would have you believe- or you will be unconscious.

Breathing isn’t an instinct; it’s a reflex.

You really don’t know what the hell you’re talking about, like, at all>/I>.

epitome of incomprehensibility

I, for one, am not into mocking men who express pain.

Now, I might mildly tease men who use pompous language for questionable ends:

In fact we were not born to be factory chickens. As factory chickens our souls die.

They call this equality. I call it death.

In the words (almost) of James Joyce: I will strive to type in the “Leave a Reply” box of my soul the uncreated conscience of my fellow MGTOWs!

Ariblester
Ariblester
2 years ago

Richard wrote on
August 16, 2019 at 7:58 am:

@weirwood

Look at this blog, which on the one hand claims to oppose traditional gender roles but in fact enforces them. Men who express pain (yes we do feel it too) are mocked and told they hate women- yet it is true of both genders that much of the pain that comes into our lives is from those we love most.

Have you actually read some of the things David has unearthed? That isn’t pain; that’s bile and hatred, directed exclusively at women. All women. I see no love behind those words. Do you consider these people your kindred? That’s a toxic environment.

And there are plenty of spaces for men to “vent” without being pulled into the bucket of crabs that is the “manosphere”. r/MensLib on Reddit is one I have frequented (it leans left, but do not let that dissuade you). r/AskMen on Reddit is generally politically-agnostic, at least from the posts I see on the front page. r/relationship_advice and r/AmITheAsshole are good for seeing what not to do in a relationship.

Richard
Richard
2 years ago

@ariblester

No I do not consider these people my kindered. My reaction is a shudder and ‘there but for the grace of god go I’.

Fortunately I had the gift of introspection. I realised my problem was not women but the notion that the value of a man is exclusively defined through women. It is quite possible for a man to have value without being in a relationship.

This, unfortunately is not recognised by this blog. It is easy to mock such men as they have no defences against it. They hate themselves far more than you could ever hate them! I have even been able to help a couple of them move on and cannot see a downside to it.

Richard
Richard
2 years ago

@gaybolga

G. All penguins are blue!

R. No. I just saw a black and white one.

G. You did not, you ignorant fool! Penguins are defined as blue flightless birds.

Gaebolga
Gaebolga
2 years ago

@Richard

See, there you go again, just like you did with the study about plastic bags: you can’t refute what someone actually says, so you make shit up to pretend like you have a point.

As I said, you really don’t know what the hell you’re talking about.

At all.

Richard
Richard
2 years ago

@dalilama

So I should be grateful for the little I have?

Richard
Richard
2 years ago

@viscaria

The trouble is that many on this blog reserve the right to decide what a man ‘really’ means- even when contrary to his words.

Richard
Richard
2 years ago

@weirwood

Hitler was basically a ‘race feminist’. Replace men and women with Jews and Arians and you could not tell the difference.

As I say. A reforming of human nature. All came to nothing.

Naglfar
Naglfar
2 years ago

@Richard

The trouble is that many on this blog reserve the right to decide what a man ‘really’ means- even when contrary to his words.

If by that you mean we are allowed to express our opinions and interpretations of someone’s statements, then yes, we do that. David has provided full sources and context, and we have interpreted what is being said and given our opinions. That’s kind of the point of free speech. What here is contradictory to the OP’s words?
Also, WTF is “race feminism”? Hitler was extremely antifeminist, much like most modern day neofascists. I’m pretty sure you can the difference between feminists and Nazis, mainly because feminists are not trying to kill millions of men in gas chambers.

Gaebolga
Gaebolga
2 years ago

@Naglfar

That’s a funny little quote from Richard, and – given his most recent set of postings – further proof that when dealing with right-wing shitweasels, they almost always accuse their opponents of the crap they’re most guilty of themselves.

Pathetic and deeply limited.

Richard
Richard
2 years ago

@naglfar

If someone is wrong. Say so, and say why.

Do not fabricate quotes or pretend not to understand.

NB You do this least of all those on the blog.

Gaebolga
Gaebolga
2 years ago

Richard wrote:

Do not fabricate quotes or pretend not to understand.

Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

Wow…

Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah!

…well, you’re a hell of a lot funnier than Sack, I’ll give you that.