Category: antifeminism

Categories
$MONEY$ alpha males antifeminism bad boys evil women hypocrisy incel men who should not ever be with women ever MGTOW misogyny MRA nice guys oppressed men patriarchy reactionary bullshit the spearhead thug-lovers

Gödwindämmerung: Women who won’t date nerds are like Pol Pot

Note to angry dudes: Women not wanting to date you is not the equivalent of this.

There needs to be a Manboobz Addendum to Godwin’s Law to cover those who compare their lack of dating success to, you know, genocide. You may recall the charming Tumblr dude who equated dateless “nice guys” with persecuted Jews in Nazi Germany.

And now we have “white and nerdy,” the blogger behind Omega Virgin Revolt taking the datelessness=genocide thing a step or two further. As you might guess from the title of his blog, WAN doesn’t exactly have women beating a path to his door. Not even golddiggers, even though he is, he says, “a widly successful owner of my own business.” Women don’t even want to use him for his money? Why is that? Because he is not a — wait for it – “alpha” man.

Yep, it’s the same old dopey logic we’ve seen so, so many times before: Women won’t date me => therefore I’m not an alpha => therefore women won’t date anyone but alphas. WAN has added one more step to this illogical logic chaim: this makes them the equivalent of genocidal monstere:

The ideology that women act on is the ideology of Pol Pot, of the Killing Fields.  Women want non-alpha men purged and intelligence is considered by women to be a lack of alphaness in a man.  This is similar to the ideology that led to the killing fields.  Many of the millions who were murdered by the Khmer Rouge in the Killing Fields were murdered for showing signs of intelligence.  That included everything from education to the possesion of wristwatches and/or glasses.  If modern geeky hobbies had existed in Cambodia in the 70s, I’m sure that would have been included along with wristwatches and glasses as evidence of intelligence, and anyone interested in geeky hobbies would have been murdered too.

He’s making a could-not-possibly-be-more-strained reference to the whole Alyssa Bereznak/Jon Finkel kerfuffle. Bereznak, as most of you probably already know, wrote a sort of snarky, sort of stupid piece for Gizmodo about her date with Finkel, a champion Magic the Gathering player, and said some mean things about him and his geeky hobby. Pol Pot engineered the deaths of roughly 2 million people, many of them urban dwellers and intellectuals forced to relocate to collective farms in the countryside. Many died of starvation; others were shot – or beaten to death, in order to save on bullets.

So, yeah, Bereznak and Pol Pot are pretty much identical.

WAN continues:

[T] ideology of what women are doing now and what Pol Pot did are very similar.  The Killing Fields needed to be opposed for both moral and practical reasons and so must what women are doing now.  Rebel at The Spearhead said that women are engaged in a “holy crusade” against men. … The Khmer Rouge was also on a “holy crusade”.  As Rebel also said what is at stake is nothing less than civilization itself and your existence and freedom just as it was with the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia.

In an earlier post pretty much making the identical, er, “argument,” WAN takes aim at comedian Julie Klausner, who recently published a memoir called I Don’t Care About Your Band: What I Learned from Indie Rockers, Trust Funders, Pornographers, Faux Sensitive Hipsters, Felons and Others. In her book, and in some interviews about the book, Klausner made some unflattering comments about “beta males” and “immature” men. This sends WAN into a rage:

Hitler, Stalin, Mao, or Pol Pot would be proud of this cunt.  She all but calls for concentration camps for her “useless beta inferior men” who secretly run the world.  … 

Ah, classic weasel words: “All but calls for.” In other words, she doesn’t actually call for concentration camps, or even rock ‘n’ roll fantasy camps, for men in any way shape or form. Never mind. WAN continues:

Somehow these “straight angry nerds” who are “useless and inferior” took over the world when no one was looking and this cunt says “something needs to be done” about this “epidemic”.

This type of thinking is widespread among women.  …

[I]t’s no surprise that a lot of men are saying they think they would be better off with the Taliban running things.  While I’m not sure that isn’t just trading one set of problems for another … I understand what these men are thinking.  Anything has got to be better than this.

So: Nerdy men are “oppressed” by women who won’t date them. The solution to this imaginary oppression: oppress women for real.

I couldn’t make this shit up.

Categories
antifeminism evil women idiocy manginas masculinity misogyny MRA patriarchy rape rapey reactionary bullshit

Alcuin in Wonderland

The Intellectual Renaissance of Western Patriarchy: One big sandwich joke.

At first glance, Alcuin’s blog would seem to be some sort of parody. The blog’s slogan – “Promoting the Intellectual Renaissance of Western Patriarchy” – seems so over-the-top pretentious that even the smuggest of would-be intellectuals wouldn’t be able to post it with a straight face.

But if Alcuin is a troll, he’s a dedicated one, and one (at least based on my less-than-exhaustive survey of his blog) who never seems to break character.  So I’m assuming he’s real. Which makes him a pompous ass with a lot of irritating ideas he’s somehow convinced himself are new and interesting. Take (please!) his recent post “Back Where They Belong.” And yes, “they” mean who you think, and “where they belong” means where you think.

Men should run the government, business, education, and religion. Women should stay at home. Young unmarried women can briefly work as kindergarten and elementary teachers, but there are no reasons why men can’t usually do this as well.

I’m not sure if Alcuin understands that women actually hold most of the jobs that currently exist, and that removing virtually all of them from the workplace would cause the economy to implode like, well, Alcuin, if you suddenly removed all of his idiocy. Also, how many kindergarten teachers do we really need?

As long as women run things, men will continue to be sidelined and slandered because feminism is a zero-sum movement.

Women … run things?

There can be no peace between the sexes until women are back where they belong. The sexes are meant to complement each other rather than compete and put one another down.

Yes, and the best way to show how the sexes “are meant to complement each other rather than … put one another down” is for one of the sexes to, er, put the other down by sending them back into the home.

Women have no business being lawyers, judges, educators, doctors, bureaucrats, writers, or religious leaders. Their attempted leadership in these areas, an illegitimate coup d’etat, is destroying our society.

I agree. Lady Pope is doing a terrible job of dealing with all those abuse cases!

Sadly, they prefer to enjoy their present situation, and let society rot, than go back where they belong and participate in building things again. Much like enjoying the concert on the sinking Titanic – though in this case, don’t expect chivalrous men to jump into the cold water so the ladies can have space on the lifeboats.

A little Titanic humor always enlivens a dull rant, eh?

Knock knock!

Who’s there!

An iceberg!

Damn, I guess we shouldn’t have kept going in zero visibility in a part of the ocean where icebergs had been recently sighted, in our ship that doesn’t have enough lifeboats for everyone!

I crack myself up sometimes. Back to Alcuin:

Feminism is a hate movement that brings out the worst in women.

Unlike the Men’s Rights movement, a hate movement that brings out the best in men!

It hates women because it hates femininity and motherhood, the chief characteristics of what it means to be a genuine woman. It brings out the worst in women by turning them into men, or trying to masculate them.

Damn you, feminism! Don’t go masculating those ladies! First they want to wear pants, and the next thing you know they’re growing ironic mustaches and using Axe Detailers instead of loofahs and subscribing to Bass Fishing Monthly.

It hates men because it blames everything on men, and regards masculinity in men to be evil. It emasculates men at the same time. Gays and, much more secondarily, manginas, are somewhat acceptable to the gynocracy, especially when the furniture needs moving or some bitch can’t pay her own bills.

Because when you need furniture moved, or some money, you call … the gays? Is this some new gay stereotype I’m not aware of? I mean, manginas, sure, manginas are furniture-movers and money-to-bitches conduits extraordinaire. That’s how they get access to pussy, after all.

But what’s the incentive for the gays?  They don’t need pussy; they’d, presumably, prefer to spend their money on tiny dogs and gym memberships than on some bitch’s bills; and while gays may have strong opinions about where the furniture should go, are they really interested in carrying it there themselves?

Women generally use men, and feminism continues this grand tradition. A man’s value is defined according to his use to women. Deeper than that, feminism regards men in the same way that the Nazis regarded Jews – men are Untermensch and cannot be granted the same rights and privileges that women are.

And … now we’ve got Nazis.

Feminism aims to bring men down, as it is a zero-sum movement. It doesn’t simply aim to improve the lot of women through, for instance, education, but seeks to exclude men from education.

It does? Last I heard, colleges were actually lowering their standards in order to enroll more guys.

Thus the current propaganda about campus rape, and the attempt to make it easier to accuse a university male of rape in the USA. Thanks, government. You are, once again, the handmaiden of misandry.

And handmaidens are bad. Not like Shieldmaidens.

Feminist hate will never be satisfied, so men can’t keep avoiding the issue. We must avoid feminism as much as we can, and educate each other about it and about alternatives.

Generally it is advisable to actually know something about something before trying to “educating” other people about it.

This intellectual Renaissance of Western Patriarchy business is a lot trickier than you might think.

Categories
antifeminism evil women man boobz fun time videos misogyny MRA reactionary bullshit self-promotion we hunted the mammoth

And the We Hunted the Mammoth Award goes to …

Ow! Guys, quit it!

 I didn’t bother to watch the VMAs last night, but something in the air has led me to want to give out some awards of my own. So: the coveted Man Boobz “We Hunted the Mammoth” Award this month goes to some comments from MRA oddball Uncle Elmer on women in the workplace that were recently highlighted on the Pro-Male/Anti-Feminist Technology blog. They are, of course, magnificently stupid.

Without further ado, here are some of the choicer bits of Elmer’s rant.

Women are competing for jobs but are not creating them. Other than providing a mass market for their vanity products, they are not forging new industries or technologies. …

Though men shank me and insult me, only men provide me with opportunity. … Only men, and only a small fraction of them, take the risks that create industry and opportunity. Women can only serve as mere functionaries in man-created structures. When an organization becomes feminized, priority shifts from efficient and profitable production of goods and services to development of labarynthine rules for the comfort and security of women. …

No woman can or will provide me or any man employment, yet all western women feel entitled to help and opportunities from men, even as they drive men out of the workplace.

[W]orkplace women are your enemy. They cannot help you but can and will hurt you. Do not look at them, do not talk to them.

And now the “we hunted the mammoth” moment:

Females want to inhabit man-created business structures as if those structures existed before man appeared on the veldt. … When you have pushed the last man out of the corporation it will collapse under its own dead weight.

And while I’m handing out awards, I’d like to give the Man Boobz Whaaaa?! Award for the strangest, dumbest and least true thing said about me in the past week to Wytchfinde (presumably the same guy who used to comment here as Wytchfinde555), who posted this strange and not-altogether-grammatical comment on my latest YouTube video (which you should all go watch if you haven’t already).

David Futrelle is an opportunist that pretends to worship white women (which is true to a certain extent) helps just fuel more fire for hating men.

Whaaaa?!

Categories
antifeminism evil women I'm totally being sarcastic idiocy men who should not ever be with women ever MGTOW misogyny MRA oppressed men

BREAKING: Irene coverage pre-empts Glenn Beck radio show, MarkyMark annoyed

Think of the real victims!

It seems the evil feminist-controlled media is ignoring a critical aspect of the Hurricane Irene story: the monster hurricane’s effect on the intrepid Man Going His Own Way who calls himself MarkyMark. More specifically, the effect it had on his radio listening pleasure.

MarkyMark, who lives somewhere on the East Coast away from the areas most impacted by Irene, was settling down yesterday to listen to a rebroadcast of Glenn Beck’s radio show. But alas, his favorite radio station chose instead to simulcast the local news station’s coverage of that pesky hurricane instead. Even worse, there were actual women involved!

It’s obvious that some anchor babe is overseeing all the coverage, coordinating field reports, etc.  Man, those bitches are ANNOYING!  They have shrill voices.  They have an arrogant, know-it-all attitude, not to mention filled with their own self importance.  …

I was like, enough already!  I wanted to serve these news bitches a big, steaming cup of STFU.  I’m serious!  I have my radio off …  now, because I just don’t want to LISTEN to these obnoxious wenches.  I may put on the sports station, or I’ll tune in a station from the Midwest; that way, I don’t have to listen to INCESSANT Irene coverage. …  I’m like ENOUGH ALREADY!  Leave it to women to create drama where there is little or none.

Women! I hear ya, Mark! Hearing them talk about weather is even worse than hearing them talk about shoes! Al day long today today it’s been bla bla, storm surge, bla bla, flash floods in Vermont, bla bla, four million without power, bla bla, 19 deaths. Enough! What drama queens!

And all MarkyMark wanted to do was to listen to Glenn Beck, a man who is not at all a drama queen in any way whatsoever, nope!

I’ve been reminded why I no longer own a TV-these OBNOXIOUS, arrogant, know-it-all, self-important anchor babes.  If they had some basis for the arrogance, that’d be one thing; if they actually KNEW WTF they were talking about, I could understand it.  What I cannot tolerate is arrogance with no basis.  I guess these chickes believed all their feminazi programming in college-silly girls…

Damn chickles and their fancy-pants college educations. You might as well try to train a chimp to wash cats!

Oh wait, they did that. Bad example, Never mind.

On a more serious note, I hope all Man Boobzers in the affected areas (and everyone else, for that matter) made it through Irene ok.

Categories
antifeminism antifeminst women bullying evil women oppressed men rape rapey reactionary bullshit sluts

Slutwalkers and Saints

Saint ... or sinner?

The SlutWalks have not just driven many MRAs to distraction; they’ve also driven one of the bloggers at the Gates of Vienna to set aside her usual Islam-bashing for a few moments to take on the awful bullies marching in the SlutWalks. Yes, bullies, for how else can we describe young women who go out of their way to highlight their foul sexiness whilst denying their bodies to the helpless males who happen to catch sight of them?

According to the blogger who calls herself Dymphna:

Women who walk around in slutty clothing in order to “voice” their opinion about male sexual aggression are indeed acting out a hugely immature power trip. … Call it for what it is. Strutting your stuff and daring anyone to stop you isn’t real freedom. It’s a sneaking, sadistic bully-girl game.

So evil is the behavior of these slutbullies that if any man decides, upon catching sight of one of them, to grope or otherwise assault her, well, she’s at least as much to blame as the dude who lays his hands on her.

If the act of strutting your stuff results in an equal reaction, a girl must take at least half the responsibility for whatever transpires as a result.

Dymphna seems to mean this quite literally, suggesting that a slut who gets assaulted should be charged

as an accessory before the fact — i.e., if some dolt grabs her, then at the very least she is his partner in crime. And the offense in which they both participate is a serious transgression against civil order. Sadistic provocation is a breach of the peace.

Ironically, Dymphna the blogger has apparently named herself after Saint Dymphna, a 7th century Irishwoman who, legend has it, was murdered by her father after she refused to marry him.

In the light of Dymphna the blogger’s airtight logic, we have to wonder if Saint Dymphna was wearing something really, really slutty. I mean, what else could have inspired her father’s foul desires?

 

Categories
$MONEY$ alpha males antifeminism idiocy marriage strike men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny MRA sex the spearhead vaginas

Barbershop handjobs and women as chattel: Some Spearhead Gems

Actual barbershop in Poland

You’ve got to give the Spearhead men credit for one thing: vivid imagination. Browsing through the comments on a recent W.F. Price post on marriage in Asia, I ran across a whole host of little gems, all of them eagerly upvoted by the assembled mob.

Gem #1: Uncle Elmer, a forward-thinking sort, fantasized about the impending arrival of

Asian style whoring here in the U.S., which is inevitable anyway as the world “flattens out” and we become more third-world as China becomes more first-world.

In the not too distant future when a fella goes to the “barber shop” he will be greeted by Heather, Madison, and Chloe, who will be eager to attend his needs in support of paying off their student loans.

Did he think that Idiocracy was a documentary?

A fellow named Will chimed in to ditto Elmer’s contribution, and to offer a most unusual conspiracy theory:

You’re right Elmer, every female student is a potential prostitute in the making, once the economy takes a nosedive and they can’t pay their loans.

Makes you wonder if the primarily Female university attendees aren’t intentionally being sold a “bill of goods” regarding the value of their university “education”.

So young women are being convinced to go to college, even though college education for women is useless (because, you know, they’re women), so that in a bad economy they’ll all start giving handjobs in barber shops to pay off their student loans?

Who exactly is doing this convincing? The American Association of University Women? The Illuminati? Uncle Elmer?

Gem #2: The always charming Oddsock, meanwhile, offered a skeptical take on the value of women’s conversational skills:

Lets be blunt here for a mo. How many men do you think would even bother talking to todays women if she did not have tits and a pussy ? How many women do you know that you could spend many hours or days with engaged in interesting conversation or leisure persuits?

Spearheaders, sparkling converstationalists all.  A regular Algonquin Round Table, with the part of Dorothy Parker played by some random internet misogynist who can’t spell the word “pursuits.”

Gem #3: Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c), offers up some reflections on his life as an Australian expat alpha dog in Germany. And some thoughts about, um, agriculture?

Because I am alpha with a great track record of being a “father and husband” and I have the ability to earn money I have women lining up to have a chance of marrying me. It is good to be at the top of the tree for a change. Shame the tree is about to fall but I am ok with that too. Those below me will cushion my fall.

As my new business venture fleshes out over the next few years I see the following happening. Men will band together to corner the income generation for many areas and they will insist on the “women as chattel property” marriage contract if any marriage at all…..men will exert their dominance in all things that are useful and productive in a competitive environment where they operate outside “guvment control” and the assets they corner will provide women galore.

I am with Angry Harry on this one “men farm cattle and sheep, why not women?” Women have always been “attracted” to the one they think will pay for them. Since we were living in caves. Women are no different today than they were 10,000 years ago. It’s just that we had a highly dystorionate PR system telling us “sugar and spice and everything nice” for a few generations.

And no, “dystorionate” is not a real word, at least in any language I or anyone else on planet Earth is familiar with. Google it, and see.

 

Categories
$MONEY$ antifeminism evil women gloating misogyny MRA oppressed men patriarchy reddit

Dudes’ Republic of China

The inhabitants of Reddit’s Men’s Rights subreddit seem to have developed a sudden crush on the authoritarian Chinese government. Why? Well, it seems that the lovable tyrants have decided to crack down on evil golddigger bitches. According to an article in The Telegraph, linked to in the subreddit,

In a bid to temper the rising expectations of Chinese women, China’s Supreme Court has now ruled that from now on, the person who buys the family home, or the parents who advance them the money, will get to keep it after divorce.

“Hopefully this will help educate younger people, especially younger women, to be more independent, and to think of marriage in the right way rather than worshipping money so much,” said Hu Jiachu, a lawyer in Hunan province.

The ruling should also help relieve some of the burden on young Chinese men, many of whom fret about the difficulty of buying even a small apartment.

Never mind that the lopsided demographics in China today — where young men greatly outnumber young women, making it harder for young men to find wives  — are not the result of excess feminism, but the result of a toxic mixture of cultural misogyny and the authoritarian regime’s “one child” program. As William Saletan explains the logic in Slate:

Girls are culturally and economically devalued; the government uses powerful financial levers to prevent you from having another child; therefore, to make sure you can have a boy, you abort the girl you’re carrying.

The result? 16 million “missing girls” in China. Ironically, the skewed ratio of men to women gives young women considerable leverage in chosing whom to marry – and that’s what the Men’s Rightser’s seem to see as the real injustice here.

As Evil Pundit wrote, evidently speaking for many (given the numerous upvotes he got):

Wow. I’ve always disliked the authoritarian Chinese government, but for once, it’s done something good.

I may need to reconsider my attitude.

IncrediblyFatMan added:

China wants to become the next superpower and world leader. They aren’t going to do it by allowing the kinds of social decay that rot away at the competing nations.

Revorob joked:

If they brought that in over here, most women in Australia would be living on the street.

“Or,” Fondueguy quipped in response, “they could learn to work.”

At the moment, all the comments in the thread praising the Chinese government for this move (and there are many more)  have net upvotes; the only comment in the negative? One suggesting that the Telegraph isn’t exactly a reliable source.

Speaking of which, here’s a more balanced look at the issue on China.org.cn that examines some of the consequences of the new ruling for Chinese women.

Let’s look at some of those. According to one Beijing lawyer quoted in the piece:

“[H]ousewives, especially those in the rural areas who have no job and are responsible for taking care of their families, will be affected most by this new change,” she said. “If their husbands want a divorce, they are likely to be kicked out of the house with nothing.”

Luo Huilan, a professor of women’s studies at China Women’s University in Beijing, agreed.

In rural areas, she said, men have the final say in family matters. All essential family assets, such as home, car and bank deposits, are registered in the men’s names, and women fill the roles of only wife, mother and farmworker.

“Their labor, though substantial, hardly gets recognition. Without a good education, they have to rely heavily on their husbands,” Luo said. “In case of divorce, a woman is driven out of her husband’s life, home and family, and finds herself an alien even in her parents’ home. No wonder the new interpretation of the Marriage Law has aroused concern among women.”

And no wonder it’s drawn cheers on the Men’s Rights subreddit.

Categories
antifeminism creepy evil women homophobia idiocy men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny MRA rape rapey sluts

For the love of God, ladies, take off those pants!

It's sinful when dogs wear them, too.

We’re taking a brief trip outside the manosphere today to take a look at a little posting I found on Jesus-is-savior.com – which, as far as I can tell, is not a joke site — on the evils of women wearing pants.

No need to dilly dally around with jokes; let’s just get right into it:

One of the most controversial subjects in America’s churches today is pants on women; but there is NO controversy if you believe the Bible.  1st Timothy 2:9 clearly instructs women to dress MODESTLY, i.e., of good behavior.  A woman’s clothing says MUCH about her character.  I guarantee you that women who approve of abortion (i.e., murder) also see no problem with women wearing pants. 

Except, one presumes, while they are getting these abortions.

At this point the author, one David J. Stewart, quotes disapprovingly from a song by rapper Chingy, also on the subject of pants, specifically jeans. I won’t bother to quote all of the lyrics; you can get the gist of Chingy’s thesis from this brief excerpt:

Damn Girl

How’d you get all that in

Dem Jeans

Dem Jeans

Here’s the video, if you wish to double-check this transcription.

Stewart continues:

Only a rebellious woman, who deliberately disobeys the Word of God, would wear pants. …   Pants on women are adulterous in nature, and cause men to lust and sin.  Jesus made this clear in Matthew 5:28, “But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.”  Women who wear pants deliberately cause men to lust, and commit the sin of adultery.  …

The average person today scoffs at the idea that Rock-n-Roll, Satanism, and immoral sex go hand-in-hand, but they certainly do.  When Rock-n-Roll came to America, so did pants on women become mainstream.  Naturally, feminism, witchcraft, abortion, and homosexuality came as well.  Rock-n-Roll is straight from the pits of Hell.  ALL rock-n-roll women wear pants. 

Ah, but it turns out we haven’t really wandered too far from the manosphere after all – and not just because of the mention of feminism. No, what strikes me about Stewart’s argument – aside from the fact that it is completely batshit – is that it is not really very different than the arguments advanced by the critics of the Slutwalks: that the “immodest” dress of women causes men to “lust and sin.”

One of the most common complaints I’ve seen in the writings of the antifeminist slutwalk critics is that women want to “do what they want to, and dress how they want to, without facing any consequences,” as if women who dress in ways these men find arousing have in fact committed some sort of sin that requires punishment from, if not God himself, then from the rapists of the world.

The slutwalk critics invariably insist they’re simply passing along useful advice to women – don’t dress slutty or you’ll get raped – but the talk of “consequences” (and the choice of that word) shows pretty clearly that the real impetus behind the strangely vehement attacks on the slutwalks is the desire to punish women for dressing, and more importantly, doing “what they want.”

Say what you will about the folks behind Jesus-is-Savior.com, but at least their position on the evils of pants is consistent with their overall fundamentalist ideology. The slutwalk critics don’t really have an excuse.

EDITED TO ADD: And, conveniently enough, here’s some douchebag on Reddit making this exact slut-shaming “argument.” Pro-tip: I don’t think “responsibility” means quite what you think it means, dude.

Ah, Reddit, always reliable.

 

Thanls, ShitRedditSAys, for pointing me to this. And to MFingPterodactyl for the sensible response.

Categories
$MONEY$ alpha males antifeminism beta males evil women hypergamy men who should not ever be with women ever MGTOW MGTOW paradox misogyny oppressed men vaginas

Maybe she’s just not that into you, because women are incapable of love

Maybe the MGTOWers just need a hug from this strange bald man with no pants. Or toes.

Sometimes the fellows on MGTOWforums.com get all philosophical on us. At the moment they are discussing a question of great import:  Are women incapable of love to the degree men love?

I suspect you can guess their unanimous answer – women are incapable of love — which is pretty much what you’d expect men who hate women to say about women and love. Some highlights:

Fairi5fair thinks women are monsters; he just can’t figure out which kind:

Women are just incapable of love period. The thrill of being able to use her pussy to get free shit is what women mistake for “love”. …

They are cold, grasping, selfish, and heartless parasites. They have no souls. They are all vampires. Undead zombies lurching from meal to meal.

Wait, so are they vampires or are they zombies? I think I can handle either one by itself, but if they are both at the same time we’re doomed!

Goldenfetus seems to be smoking something powerful:

Yes, they are less capable of love than men, or totally incapable.

One possibility I’ve considered is that in a natural … environment male ‘love’ (platonic) would be reserved only for other men, while women would be viewed as property or objects of reproduction whose value was derived from fertility and subservience without any basis in ‘love’ reciprocation. If so, I would identify feminism as the factor that misled men into extending this love, disastrously, to females – tricking them into believing that females have souls and are like males.

Loving a woman is like trying to pet a toilet, water a sandwich, or plow a parking lot and then wondering why you aren’t getting results. The defect (of understanding) lies with the man loving an object incompatible with love, rather than in the female whose nature precludes reciprocity.

Arctic thinks it’s all about the Benjamins:

Love to a woman is a man who is their servant 24/7 365 a day. …

The idea of love involving sacrifice to a female is as foreign as periods are to men. Why should she care about a relationship involving sacrifice on her part, when she is taught all her life to exploit men for her own uses? Sacrifice herself for a mere man? WHY? Why, when beta males are selling their souls to sniff her crotch? …

[I]ts safe to say the idea of women being in love begins and ends at the ATM of her committed male asset.

The Accomplice agrees:

Women do not seek love or companionship. Their main objective is to find a man of the highest status possible (Richest men, the toughest guys, most popular guy etc) who will protect them, provide for them and satisfy their selfish desires. … [T]he majority of women are too weak physically and mentally to do these things on their own, hence why they always chase after men …

A women’s idea of love is all hypergamy, nothing more.

Superion goes all Evo-Psych on us:

Women are incapapble of love is the great, horrible secret that society has tried to hide from men since the dawn of time.

Women are physically and mentally weaker than men.

In order to survive and pass on their genes they need the resources of the strongest and best providing male available.

To do this, women rely on beauty and guile to trick a male into being her slave.

Women do not love.

For men, love is a self-delusion.

We trick ourselves into wasting our resources on one particular female.

This makes no sense so we tell ourselves we’re in love to justify it.

Such an unromantic bunch! Maybe this will cheer them up.

Actually, screw them. Maybe it will cheer me up:

 

 

And if that didn’t do the trick, how about this?

 

 

Categories
antifeminism creepy douchebaggery evil women misogyny MRA penises reactionary bullshit that's not funny! the spearhead

David K. Meller on women getting cancer: “HA HA HA HA HA…LOL!”

Not reallly the appropriate response to someone else getting cancer.

Those of you who aren’t regular readers of the comments here may not appreciate the true genius of David K. Meller, an excitable and exclamation-point-loving MRA I’ve mentioned once or twice in my posts, but who shows up in the comments here with some regularity – ending each comment with his trademark “PEACE AND FREEDOM!!”

Mr. Meller is a great lover (not physically) of men:

Men, by and large, are a wonderful sex! We are more intelligent than women, more creative, at least in the areas outside the home. We are, also, as a rule, physically stronger as well …

He claims to love women, too – though not feminists, whom he seems to consider something other than human:

Women ARE people, and often wonderful people at that! Feminists, on the other hand, AREN’T! …

Women are people, and properly raised, educated, and loved,, are beautiful, charming, and lovely!

Despite his alleged love of women – at least the non-feminist ones – he often says utterly horrible things about them. The examples are too numerous to catalogue. But let me draw your attention to one rather telling comment of his I found recently on The Spearhead.

In the midst of a discussion of Sharon Osbourne’s now notorious comments about a woman who cut off her husband’s penis, Meller offered the following musings on the subject of women and cancer. I am having trouble finding much love of women in them:

It is .. possible that the breast cancers (not to mention ovarian and vaginal cancers) have a psychosomatic aspect to their development. … The feelings of vicious sadism, brutality, and callous indifference to another’s pain in such harpies must inexorably work on the molecular, genetic, and cellular level to generate consequences! I hope that you girls find these consequences as hilarious as I do when you annoy me with your next women’s health campaign against cancer!

Maybe women don’t strictly speaking, DESERVE cancer, but it will be hard for me to stop laughing at them …

Isn’t the thought of cancer-ridden women going under the knife amusing? Isn’t thought of women losing part, or all, of a sexual organ that is precious to them FUNNY? The pain women experience when recovering from surgery (and radiation or chemo, which is almost as bad) is still less than the agony which that poor man underwent when he underwent castration at the hands of a deranged, sadistic, and vicious she-weasel (my apologies to weasels)!

[F]or every man who is abused and tortured by his woman, it almost warms my heart that the same hatred and spite characteristic of the female human(?) sets THEM up for a similar fate down the road, as that bitterness, vicious sadism, and bloodthirstiness so characteristic of those who would LAUGH AT the suffering caused by a “woman” committing such a vicious crime predisposes them toward cancer, and (I hope) a similar fate!

Karma is always there, girls, and it is a bitch!! HA HA HA HA HA…LOL!

PEACE AND FREEDOM!!

David K. Meller

That “PEACE AND FREEDOM!!!” always gets me.

This being The Spearhead, Meller’s comments garnered more than a few upvotes. Not as many as he usually gets, admittedly, but some.

At some point I will do a Best of David K. Meller post, highlighting some of his “best” comments here. He is one for the ages.