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.

Categories
alpha males antifeminism beta males creepy evil women hypocrisy men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny nice guys oppressed men reactionary bullshit

A Nice Guy’s lament: “First, they came for the rapists … .”

You’ve all seen the famous quote attributed to German religious leader Martin Niemöller:

First they came for the communists,

and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,

and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews,

and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a Jew.

Then they came for me

and there was no one left to speak out for me.

Now one embittered “Nice Guy” on Tumblr who goes by the name joetomcollins has written his own version, with feminists as the Nazis, rapists as the communists, and, well, just read it yourself:

When the Feminists came for the Rapists,

I remained silent;

I was not a Rapist.

When they locked up the stalkers,

I remained silent;

I was not a stalker.

When they came for the Players,

I did not speak out;

I was not a Player.

When they came for the men who they got bored of,

I remained silent;

I wasn’t some one they were bored of yet.

When they came for me, the nice guy,

there was no one left to speak out.

So, yeah. Let’s think this through a little bit. When Niemöller made his now famous remarks, he was expressing his own sorrow for not standing up to Hitler when he started arresting Communists. So is joetomcollins suggesting that he – and we – should have stopped “the feminists” from going after rapists and stalkers?

Joetomcollins doesn’t say, but he does have a lot more to say on the evilness of feminists and stuck-up women in general:

[I]f I’m going to be the bad guy no matter what I do… might as well get it the fuck out the way right up front.

I might as well ENJOY being the villain.

The FemeNazi messsage is LOUD AND CLEAR!

I am an average normal guy. I am never going to be good enough.

Especially in NYC where you only personalities you get are native “rats” who have learned to survive to being ruthless, and Type “A” psychopaths who come here to conquer everything.

Dude, if you don’t like the people in New York, then maybe, just maybe, you should move out of New York. It’s a high-pressure place and, well, you don’t seem to respond well to pressure, let’s put it that way.

He continues on with a refrain that I suspect will sound awfully familiar to a lot of you:

Man hasn’t had the ability to choose his woman for at least the last 150 years. The woman chooses the man. ALWAYS.

Now even showing interest is offensive to the FemeNAZI.

We aren’t talking about DOING anything but telling someone you think they are attractive. If a guy YOU liked rejected you, he would be Satan incarnate, but when a woman rejects a guy…

“HE SHOULD HAVE KNOWN BETTER!!!”

“HOW DARE HE THINK HE WAS GOOD ENOUGH FOR ME!!!!!”

… and we’re supposed to nod sheepishly and apologize for bothering you as we leave with a smile.

When I read shit like this I have to wonder: who exactly are you approaching, and what exactly are you saying to them? I’ve made some awkward passes in my day, but I’ve never gotten this response from anyone.

Could it be that you’re a dick? Your post seems to suggest that you are — an angry, self-obsessed dick almost completely lacking in self-awareness and empathy.

I mean, seriously, comparing your inability to get laid to the fucking Holocaust? Your bad luck with women to the murder of millions? Douche move, my man.

If you embrace your dickhood, as you seem to want to do, and become much more straightforward about your sexual desires, instead of trying to hide behind a nice-guy facade, you might actually get laid more often than you’re getting now. But you’re not likely to get a lot of repeat customers. And for good reason: no woman wants (or deserves) to be saddled with all your bullshit.

So let’s assume, for the purpose of argument, that you’re not a full-blown dick; you’re just a horny young guy on a sexual losing streak lashing out at women for your own failures. Let’s assume you are willing to work on actually reducing your dickishness. (Readers: All I ask is a little temporary suspension of disbelief.)

Reading your account of your romantic failures, and bearing in mind that most straight men don’t get this sort of response from the women they approach, there are several possibilities:

  1. either you are exaggerating the alleged awfulness of the rejections you’ve gotten, or
  2. there is something desperately wrong with your approach — perhaps you’re cornering women in elevators at 4 AM, or otherwise transgressing their boundaries in inappropriate ways — or
  3. the women you are approaching are, you know, bitches.

You really only have two choices here: you can spend the rest of your life wallowing in bitterness at women, or you can reconsider your approach. Find some woman you are friendly with – one you are not obsessed with fucking – and explain to her what’s going on, and ask her where you think you’re going wrong. If it’s your approach, learn to better respect people’s boundaries and read their body language; some women don’t want to be bugged by anyone when they are, you know, on the way to work. If it’s your selection of women, select different women.

And stop posting tirades on the internet about how women are a bunch of evil Nazis out to oppress you and your poor lonely penis. You know how, when you jump into cold water, your genitals shrink in horror from the cold? Something similar happens to the vaginas of most women when they read shit like you just wrote.

Categories
alpha males antifeminism beta males creepy evil women false accusations men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny MRA rape rapey reactionary bullshit sex sexual harassment sluts terrorism the spearhead woman's suffrage

Spearheaders on the SlutWalks. Again. It’s bad.

From the Dallas SlutWalk

Oh dear. The Spearheaders are talking about the Slutwalks again. The discussion may be the worst on the subject that I have run across so far. Some of the lowlights:

Keyster seems downright pissed that women actually have the right to say no:

They’re high functioning children with sexual power and they don’t want you to forget it. They’re outraged that just because a young woman dresses and acts in a sexually provocative manner, that she might receive unwanted attention from young men that don’t appeal to her.

She should be able to dress like a street whore and abuse alcohol to the point of delerium and they feel compelled to lecture us on how that doesn’t mean this is an advertisment to be sexually harrassed, sexually assaulted or heaven forbid raped. …

They want the “RIGHT” to dress as sexually provocative as they want to without being constantly annoyed by lowly beta males. They’d prefer you not “sexually victimize” them, unless you’re hot and they’re into you, then it’s totally OK. …

Remember this: She didn’t bother to get dressed up for the likes of YOU. Her hope was a worthy athelete or Hollywood star might notice her and talk to her; not some weak, pathetic loser …

 “We’ve got the sexual power, the power of consent, the gate keeper of the holy vaginal crevice. See our bouncing propped up cleavage, our long legs and glorious ass protruding from those heels? You want it don’t you?

    ….ha, ha, ha…you can’t have it because I SAY SO! Because I have THIS power over you, lowly little man. Bow down to me and beg me a little, I might even let the others see me talking to you, without calling the cops.” …

    This isn’t feminism, it’s flaunting female sexual power in the faces of men.

You’re seriously complaining that woman have the “power of consent!?” EVERYONE has the power of consent. No one male or female is obliged to have sex with anyone they don’t want to. That’s, you know, rape. It bothers you that women are the “the gate keeper[s] of the holy vaginal crevice?” Who the fuck else should be the gatekeeper of a person’s vagina other than the person whose vagina it is? The mind reels. But apparently the 50+ upvoters of this piece of abhorrent nonsense aren’t bothered by any of this.

Demirogue, meanwhile, suggests we need to better discipline our women:

While perusing FB last week I came across the newest deviation of this mentality which is going topless. …  And they want to cry about rape? They need to cry but only because people said enough is enough and started to belt them on their asses.

Women need to be controlled and on a very, very short leash. They’ve been given every right, every option, every opportunity to be something and what do they do with it? Abuse and manipulate it with reckless abandonment and incessant demands.

Geography Bee Finalist himself thinks the slutwalkers must be retarded:

I wouldn’t worry too much about these Slutwalk sows.

They have no redeeming features. None.

They cannot figure out that if you dress like a whore, you deserve to be treated in a disrespectful manner. Even conservatively dressed mentally retarded women can figure this out and conduct themselves with more propriety and intelligence than these Slutwalkers … .

Knuckledragger blames it on those damned suffragettes:

…we let ‘em drive, we let ‘em vote, and this is what we get.

Ridiculous to even offer attention to another excuse to dress like a whore, goof off in public, and not bring me a beer.

Any man worth his salt should fire any skank who was “sick” from work to attend this nonsense.

SingleDad seems to think that all accusations of rape are made up:

Rape is now the extra tax women charge men if some how their unsatisfied with whatever arrangement was made before or after any encounter in or outside of marriage.

Other lowlights:

Poiuyt agreeing with Anders Breivik’s  “observations surrounding this femaleist pandemic,” while adding  that he  “is to be rebuked for taking the wrong cureative actions to solve it.”

Demirogue (in a second comment) complaining that “overvalued pussy is all [women today] have to offer and only to certain men.”

Anonymous age 69 explaining that “rape laws were intended to protect women of good character, from being sexually violated,” not “to protect promiscuous sluts .”

And more, much, much more. Many of the worst (including most of those quoted here) have many dozens of upvotes.  Go read the thread yourself, if you think you can stomach it.

There are no arguments to rebut here; I can only repeat the basic message that the slutwalks are trying to convey: no one deserves to be raped, no matter what they are wearing or how much consensual sex they engage in. Even if they show some cleavage or prefer athletes and/or rocks stars to so-called beta males.

Categories
creepy evil women men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny oppressed men statutory rape apologists

Don’t thank heaven for little girls

Girls = Evil

Try to guess what the blogger at The Truth Shall Set You Free, a blog that describes itself as “an examination of all issues related to comparative religion and the attempt to find truth in the world today” is talking about here. (Hint: It’s not drugs.)

“We are going to let drug dealers set up stands on every street corner, with glitzy advertising, and they will be allowed to offer their illegal drugs, for free, to anyone who walks by. But if anyone takes them up on their offer of free drugs, we will arrest the receiver and send them to prison. Even if the seller advertised a legal drug, but the receiver took an illegal one unknowingly.”

Well, I probably gave it away with the title and the illustration, but yes, he’s talking about age of consent laws. We’re back on that subject again, thanks to the inability of manosphere douchebags to stop talking about it in extremely icky ways. The “dealer” here is, of course, the underage girl. The drug in question … is also the underage girl. The unwary buyer? The poor, helpless, and outrageously oppressed male of the species. I’ll let our high-minded Christian blogger explain:

Criminalizing consensual sex with willing 16 year olds is absurd. Consent is consent.

The bias of the law is revealed by considering this: If both parties consented to breaking the law, why aren’t both parties punished? …

Uh, because the law is designed to protect underage girls and boys from older predators? Because we as a society recognize that consent is really not consent when one of the “consenting” partners is underage and the other is much older?

But no, our thoughtful student of comparative religion  seems convinced that the purpose of the law is, well, I’m not sure what he thinks the purpose is other than to harsh the buzz of older men in thrall to evil, devious, conniving teenage girls.

In his mind, teen girls are the equivalent of drug dealers and older men are hapless, helpless addicts:

-The dealers (young women) are allowed to advertise (through clothes, makeup, body-language) an extremely valuable and addictive commodity (sex), and in fact, they can give it away totally free, without fear of any penalty…

–but if a customer (man) takes that heavily-advertised and freely-given valuable commodity, he is committing a felony.

And that’s the case, he complains, even if the girl lies about her age!

–even if he had no knowledge that her drug was illegal (underage), even [if] she misrepresented the commodity as legal, he is solely at fault.

–The consumer (man) is sent to prison, and forced to register as a sex offender FOR LIFE

–The dealer (young woman) is allowed to walk free to continue to entrap other potential customers of her illegal commodity.

A clearer example of the infamous “pussy pass” couldn’t not be conceived. What these laws are really doing is punishing men for girls being sluts and/or liars.

And so the oppression of men by evil women and girls continues apace. But there is, our blogger insists, a simple solution to this terrible injustice:

Punish the girls who are providing!

Clearly it is unfair to expect men to be able to resist the lures of these conniving Lolitas. We must do something to protect innocent men from underage sluts slutting it up in public!

Categories
antifeminism beta males creepy misogyny MRA oppressed men PUA rapey reactionary bullshit sex sluts statutory rape apologists the spearhead video

“Even if the teen showed you a fake ID, you are still a criminal,” and other grave injustices.

Here’s a little video that takes a look at some PUAs and MRAs who share a great love for underage girls … and a hatred of the word “pedophile.” If some of the quotes in the video look familiar, that’s because they’re from a creepy mini-manifesto called “Age of Consent is Misandry,” which we examined here not too long ago. The rest are from a thread on Roissy’s Citizen Renegade blog that really has to be read to be believed.  You’ll notice one, er, interesting comment from a guy calling himself “Welmer.” That’s our good friend W.F. Price from The Spearhead.

Enjoy?

Categories
alpha males antifeminism bad boys creepy douchebaggery I'm totally being sarcastic mad libs manginas nice guys sex thug-lovers vaginas

Man Boobz Mad Libs #1: Love is a battlefield

Chicago New Wave pioneers Phil 'n' the Blanks (pictured above) want you to FILL IN the blanks.

Last night, 540-or-so comments into the Atheist Elevator thread, Ion took a moment to school us all in the cold, hard realities of love in our time.  Offering his own formerly flailing but now highly successful sexual career as evidence of this theories, he explained why it’s better to be called creepy than courteous. And apparently, acting like a five-year old will score you heaps of hot poon. Who knew?

As much as I learned from Ion’s  autobiographic account, I feel as though there is much more wisdom to be gained from reading the stories of other commenters here. So, using Ion’s tale as a template, I would like to offer the first in what I hope will be a long and successful series of Man Boobz Mad Libs. Simply fill in the blanks in the text below to tell your own tale of heartbreak and triumph, and post your results in the comments below. We will all be the wiser for it.

You know what’s funny? You try to come off as [    ] and [     ], but in fact, I actually used to think like you when I was younger and [          ]. I bought into all the “men are [     ], men are natural [        ]” crap spouted by feminist [      ] and their neutered mangina [       ]. I was concerned about not coming off as [      ] or creepy. I was courteous and [     ] and [       ], I respected women, but I forgot to respect [      ]. And while the [    ] boys, playa gangstas, and abusive [     ]bags were [    ]ing around town with an “I take what I want” attitude and a new [     ] on their [        ] every week, I was hearing “Wow, you’re a great [     ], but I like you as a [        ]. Well, see you later, gotta go have [    ] with the [      ] boyfriend I’ve been complaining to [      ] about!”

So you’re right about the [       ]-puffing part, but not so much about the being [      ]. I’m less [      ] now than I ever was. I put myself [     ]. I don’t apologize for being a [      ]. It took me a while to [      ] up, but I did. And let me tell you, things are better than [     ]. I got my first [         ]  after acting ‘inappropriate’ and going for a [    ] the night we first met. A day later, she was the one would wouldn’t [      ] me [        ]. So much for “[      ]  give in because of [       ] pressures”, I guess. Second [     ], in college, I [      ] like a five-year old [       ]. Totally out of character, even I was ashamed of my [        ]. Afterwards, she was [       ]  me to hang out. Sometime later, I met [         ] I really [      ]. Like an [     ], I decided to play it cool, be [    ], be [    ], take [    ] slowly. Guess what? Zero interest. Learned my lesson then and haven’t [      ] back. As for “friends who will [      ] me”… I don’t know what the [      ] are like where you live, but the [      ] I know just don’t fit your [        ] [        ]. Also, currently half my friends are [        ]. Weird, huh. But uh, keep telling yourself you’re so much better for being a neutered [       ]. I’ll be busy having [    ] in the [     ] world meanwhile.

 

Categories
creepy feminism hypocrisy misogyny oppressed men patriarchy rape reactionary bullshit sexual harassment threats

Two atheists get in an elevator

So here’s a hilarious atheist joke for you all:

Two atheists at a conference get into an elevator at 4 AM. The dude atheist, apropos of nothing, invites the chick atheist to go to his room with him. The chick atheist, who’s never even spoken to the dude before, is creeped out by this. (She says no.) She mentions the incident in a YouTube video. A shitstorm erupts in the atheist-o-sphere because, like, how could she possibly call an atheist dude a creep and aren’t women treated worse in Islamist Theocracies?

Then Richard Dawkins says,

Dear Muslima

Stop whining, will you. Yes, yes, I know you had your genitals mutilated with a razor blade, and . . . yawn . . . don’t tell me yet again, I know you aren’t allowed to drive a car, and you can’t leave the house without a male relative, and your husband is allowed to beat you, and you’ll be stoned to death if you commit adultery. But stop whining, will you. Think of the suffering your poor American sisters have to put up with.

Only this week I heard of one, she calls herself Skep”chick”, and do you know what happened to her? A man in a hotel elevator invited her back to his room for coffee. I am not exaggerating. He really did. He invited her back to his room for coffee. Of course she said no, and of course he didn’t lay a finger on her, but even so . . .

And you, Muslima, think you have misogyny to complain about! For goodness sake grow up, or at least grow a thicker skin.

Richard

In a followup comment, Dawkins tops that bit of hilarity with this:

Rebecca’s feeling that the man’s proposition was ‘creepy’ was her own interpretation of his behaviour, presumably not his. She was probably offended to about the same extent as I am offended if a man gets into an elevator with me chewing gum. But he does me no physical damage and I simply grin and bear it until either I or he gets out of the elevator. It would be different if he physically attacked me.

Damn. That joke didn’t turn out to be really very hilarious at all. Maybe I told it wrong?

In any case, as you might already know (or have gathered), this whole thing actually happened over the past weekend. The atheist chick in question is Rebecca Watson, a popular blogger who calls herself Skepchick. The conference in question was the Center for Inquiry’s Student Leadership Conference. The part of Richard Dawkins was played by, well, Richard Dawkins. (You can find both of his comments quoted here.)

The incident has been hashed and rehashed endlessly in the atheist-o-sphere (and even out of it), but I think it deserves a tiny bit more re-rehashing.  Mainly because it illustrates that some really creepy, backwards attitudes can lurk deep in the hearts of dudes who think of themselves as enlightened, rational dudes fighting the evils of superstition and, yes, religious misogyny.

The strangest thing about the whole incident is how supremely mild Watson’s comments on the creepy elevator dude were.  Here is literally all she said about him, in passing, in her video (transcribed here):

So I walk to the elevator, and a man got on the elevator with me and said, ‘Don’t take this the wrong way, but I find you very interesting, and I would like to talk more. Would you like to come to my hotel room for coffee?’

Um, just a word to wise here, guys, uh, don’t do that. You know, I don’t really know how else to explain how this makes me incredibly uncomfortable, but I’ll just sort of lay it out that I was a single woman, you know, in a foreign country, at 4:00 am, in a hotel elevator, with you, just you, and–don’t invite me back to your hotel room right after I finish talking about how it creeps me out and makes me uncomfortable when men sexualize me in that manner.

That’s it. That’s the whole thing. You would think that most guys would be well aware that accosting a woman you’ve never met before in an elevator at 4 AM is, you know, kind of a no-no. But, no, Watson’s comments suddenly became an attack on male sexuality and men in general. One critic put up a video lambasting Watson, ending it with the question:

What effect do you think it has on men to be constantly told how sexist and destructive they are?

Never mind that she didn’t, you know, actually do that at all. Nor did she even remotely suggest, despite Dawkins’ weird screed, that creepy dudes on elevators were somehow equivalent to genital mutilation or the general denial of women’s rights in Islamist theocracies.  She merely suggested that guys might want to think twice before hitting on women who are alone with them in an elevator at four in the morning.  Pointing out the creepy behavior of one particular dude is not the same as calling all men creepy.

Now, the atheist movement tends to be a bit of a sausagefest, pervaded by some fairly backwards notions about women. (Prominent atheist  pontificator Christopher Hitchens, you may recall, seems to sincerely believe that women just aren’t funny. Not that he’s exactly a barrel of monkeys himself.) But some of the most vociferous critics of Watson have been other atheist women – including the one I quoted above.

Watson responded to this in the first of several posts she wrote about the whole weird controversy:

I hear a lot of misogyny from skeptics and atheists, but when ancient anti-woman rhetoric like the above is repeated verbatim by a young woman online, it validates that misogyny in a way that goes above and beyond the validation those men get from one another. It also negatively affects the women who are nervous about being in similar situations. Some of them have been raped or otherwise sexually assaulted, and some just don’t want to be put in that position. And they read these posts and watch these videos and they think, “If something were to happen to me and these women won’t stand up for me, who will?”

In a followup post, she noted:

When I started this site, I didn’t call myself a feminist. I had a hazy idea that feminism was a good thing, but it was something that other people worried about, not me. I was living in a time and culture that had transcended the need for feminism, because in my world we were all rational atheists who had thrown off our religious indoctrination so that I could freely make rape jokes without fear of hurting someone who had been raped.

And then I would make a comment about how there could really be more women in the community, and the responses from my fellow skeptics and atheists ranged from “No, they’re not logical like us,” to “Yes, so we can fuck them!” That seemed weird.

Watson began hearing from other women in the skeptic/atheist community who’d met far too many of that second sort of male atheist.

They told me about how they were hit on constantly and it drove them away. I didn’t fully get it at the time, because I didn’t mind getting hit on. But I acknowledged their right to feel that way and I started suggesting to the men that maybe they relax a little and not try to get in the pants of every woman who walks through the door.

And then, as her blog garnered more attention, she faced a virtual invasion of creepy dudes being creepy:

I’ve had more and more messages from men who tell me what they’d like to do to me, sexually. More and more men touching me without permission at conferences. More and more threats of rape from those who don’t agree with me, even from those who consider themselves skeptics and atheists. More and more people telling me to shut up and go back to talking about Bigfoot and other topics that really matter.

She didn’t shut up.

So here we are today. I am a feminist, because skeptics and atheists made me one. Every time I mention, however delicately, a possible issue of misogyny or objectification in our community, the response I get shows me that the problem is much worse than I thought, and so I grow angrier. I knew that eventually I would reach a sort of feminist singularity where I would explode and in my place would rise some kind of Captain Planet-type superhero but for feminists. I believe that day has nearly arrived.

Go read the rest of her post. Despite the creepy dudes and the misogyny and Richard Fucking Dawkins’ patronizing little screed – which led Watson to a moment of despair much like that of virtually every movie hero(ine) at the end of act two in the story arc — Watson ends it fairly hopeful. It’s kind of inspiring, really.

Categories
creepy douchebaggery I'm totally being sarcastic men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny PUA

Sunny side up

Sexy!

Good news, horny straight dudes! I can now report that the best, most efficient, most SCIENTIFIC way to score with the ladies is to figure out when they’re ovulating – and then act like a dick towards them!

Don’t take my word for it. Take the word of KRAUSER PUA, a guy so suave and superior his whole name is in ALL CAPS. As he explains in a recent blog post:

One of the things I’ve been meaning to do for months is to start tracking my targets with more scientific precision. …

It’s pretty clear that girls in peak ovulation are the best bets for first-time sex. It’s also clear they respond well to douchebag / aloof asshole game.

So here’s what I’m doing. I’ve just set up a spreadsheet to track all my active / still alive targets. Each one has a four rows representing each week of their cycle. Whenever I get any evidence to suggest they are in one particular week I’ll input it alongside the date. …  Examples of evidence:

Week 1 – Bleeding: tells me she’s on the rag, allows sexual touching but stops me at her panties, wears trousers, smells funny

Week 2 – Normal: no unusual behavior

Week 3 – Ovulation: dresses sexy, talks and flirts, initiates touching, responds well to everything, allows escalation, gives back in sex chats, wisfully seeks excitement, goes clubbing

Week 4 – PMS: frumpy, lack of makeup, confused, bad moods, rejects all alpha / gamey banter, lack of interest in returning texts and calls

Seems like a foolproof strategy to me!

I think the only thing I would change is the wording. “Ovulation” has such a clinical, unsexy sound to it. I much prefer the slag term I just invented, “gettin’ eggy.”

It also makes the whole strategy much easier to remember. Just repeat the following “success mantra” every morning while you brush your teeth:

When she’s gettin’ eggy

It’s time to neggy

If all else fails, guys, you can always make a soft-boiled egg and fuck that.

Categories
creepy funny masculinity misandry misogyny vaginas video

Will Ferrell, Conscious Man

Do you remember the Conscious Men and “Dear Woman,” their little video manifesto/apology to women? If not, please go read my post on them and/or watch at least a minute or two of their creepy, cringeworthy video – you may not be able to take much more. Then watch this: Will Ferrell’s spot-on parody of their video.

[funnyordie id=55c51f0c23 width=512 height=328]

Here’s the original “Dear Woman” video:

Categories
alpha males antifeminism beta males creepy internal debate misandry misogyny MRA PUA rapey

Men’s Rights Classix: The Age of Consent is Misandry

If it weren't for this guy, there would be no pedophiles.

Today, a trip down memory lane to revisit an until-recently lost classic of modern misogyny: Jay Hammers’ “The Age of Consent is Misandry.” The piece, originally published on Jay Hammers’Men’s Rights blog, inspired some heated discussions amongst MRAs online, with some harshly criticizing the piece as an apologia for pedophilia and others hailing it as a “politically incorrect” masterpiece. Stung by the criticism, Hammers ultimately took his blog down. But the piece has since been resurrected on the Human-Stupidity blog – another blog that seems rather unhealthily obsessed with the supposed injustice of men not being allowed to fuck underage girls.

Here are some of its highlights (that is, lowlights); the headlines are mine.

ALL ABOUT THE MENZ

The arbitrary age of consent is not about protecting women/girls. It is about valuing females and their virtue over males and their freedom. The intent of the laws is to stop older men from having sex with younger women and that is how it is enforced. It was never intended to stop younger men from having sex with older women.

MORE BETA BLUES

Age of consent laws are designed to punish beta males. A beta male in his 20s, unsuccessful with women his own age who are infused with a sense of feminist entitlement and deride all but the top alpha males who take interest in them, who seeks companionship with a younger, sexually mature female who desires him, should not go to prison for acting on that which is normal male sexuality.

FEMINISTS WHO SUPPORT AGE OF CONSENT LAWS ARE TREATING WOMEN LIKE CHILDREN

If we are to treat women as children then we should be consistent. Young women who have sex with older men are as much victims as women who have sex with a pick-up artist after meeting at a club. In both cases, feminists are angry because the woman has been “fooled” into having sex with a less than ideal mate in terms of value. …

This is what makes feminists angry and this is why age of consent exists still today, because it is assumed women are not mentally mature enough to give consent AND because older women want to limit men’s options to increase their own value in the sexual marketplace.

BUT WOMEN ARE CHILDREN, BASICALLY

Older women …  are generally not of a much higher intelligence level than teenage girls. The big difference between the two is that older women are less attractive and that is what makes them so damn angry. …

Females generally do not significantly mature mentally past puberty so it should always be illegal for any woman to have sex or it should never be illegal for any woman to have sex. There is no arbitrary age where females suddenly become self-aware, realizing the consequences of their actions, and stop seeking out alpha males. Thus there must not be an arbitrary age of consent for sex.

A MODEST PROPOSAL

If anything, it should be illegal for women to have sex with men until men have been educated on the truths of women, Marriage 2.0, Game, feminism, and men’s rights.

Discuss?