Category: manginas

Categories
alpha males creepy evil women I'm totally being sarcastic idiocy incel manginas men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny MRA oppressed men oppressed white men pussy cartel rape rapey sexual harassment threats

MRA: Who cares if #MenCallYouThings? It’s not like women have any real problems.

Fried rice. Frequently confused with "fried ice."

Oh, ladies, must you complain so much? I mean, who cares if every time you say something on the internet some random dude threatens to rape you? White and Nerdy, the dude behind the Omega Virgin Revolt blog, doesn’t care, and he wants you to know it:

#mencallmethings is just another example of how women (in first world countries) don’t have any actual problems.  Between the government and manginas doing everything for women, no woman has any true problems.  Any “problem” a woman has is because of one of these reasons:

1. A desire for the equivalent of fried ice.  IOW she wants something that is physically impossible.

2. Failed attempts at defrauding, stealing from, or otherwise attempting to enslave men.

That’s it.  When a woman has to go through 1% of what a typical non-alpha man has to go through then maybe she can talk about having actual problems.  Until that happens women should keep their mouths shut.

Exactly. We need to stop talking about men raping women to focus on the much more important issue of women not having sex with White and Nerdy.

But I am wondering about one thing. Is it possible that the women in question were asking for fried rice instead of fried ice? Because fried rice is totally a thing, and if you call up the proper restaurant someone will literally bring it to your door.

Now I’m hungry.

NOTE: This post may contain ….

Categories
antifeminism bullying creepy douchebaggery manginas men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny MRA PUA rape rapey sexual harassment threats violence against men/women

“Please Killl Yourselves”: MRAs respond to #mencallmethings

Well, that was … instructive. The Twitter hashtag extravaganza that is #mencallmethings is still going strong. But I think at this point it’s safe to say that it has basically served it’s purpose: to highlight the obnoxious, obscene, often threatening misogynist shit that women who express their opinions about almost anything on the internet get in their inboxes or in comments online on a regular basis. Women with feminist blogs who actually call out this kind of misogyny get this sort of abuse basically every day.

Sady Doyle of Tiger Beatdown, who started up this hashtag campaign, explained in an eloquent and angry blog post why she did it: to point out how absolutely routine this sort of shit is. When she started her blog, she really hadn’t anticipated the sheer volume of vicious shit she’d get:

I got targeted. With threats, with insults, with smear campaigns, with attempts to threaten my employment or credibility or just general ability to get through the day with a healthy attitude and a minimal amount of insult.

The intent of all this abuse is simple: to intimidate. When someone says to a woman online “I hope you get raped with a chainsaw,” the point is to get her to shut up. The person who posts this sort of violent shit, Doyle notes,

hopes that the next time you sit down to write, you’ll remember that yikesy chainsaw-rape thing and think, “you know? Maybe this isn’t such a great idea. Maybe I don’t need to say this. Maybe I’ll piss someone off, and maybe it will be more than I can handle, and you know, maybe my thoughts on this topic just ARE NOT IMPORTANT ENOUGH for me to risk the headache/fear/irritation/distress/panic attack I know I will get.”

 And then, when you say that aloud, they call you a whiny little girl who can’t handle the Internet. Because, of COURSE multiple chainsaw-rape comments aren’t a big deal! They’re just words! Sticks and stones! …

To you, my friends, I say: Fuck that noise. All of this matters. A hostile work environment matters. Being afraid of your own in-box matters. Deleting your blog because that’s the only way for you to have a normal, non-hate-filled life matters. “Accepting” that continual, virulent, hateful misogynist abuse is a pre-condition for being a lady who talks about thing, or for challenging sexism in any way, no matter who you are: That matters. And if you think we’re fragile, well. LET US COUNT THE WAYS we have hacked it, under conditions your pampered manly self just cannot imagine. LET US DEMONSTRATE FOR YOU the shit we wade through, every day, in order to talk about whether or not we liked that one “Community” episode or Lady GaGa album.

Naturally, critics of the whole hashtag campaign have done their best to minimize and dismiss this sort of routine harassment in exactly the ways that Doyle predicted they would.

The charming Ferdinand Bardamu of In Mala Fide responded to #mencallmethings with a bunch of obnoxious comments that conveniently proved basically every point Sady Doyle was trying to make with the hashtag in the first place. He started off with this bit of rapier wit:

He followed this up with a clumsy fat joke:

He continued on in this vein for awhile, so proud of his insightful critiques that he made a blog post about it.

Encouraged by Bardamu’s example, blogger PMAFT (Pro-Male/Anti-Feminist Technology) announced a #MenCallMeThings Trolling Contest. The highlight of his own contributions to this contest:

Over on Reddit’s Men’s Rights subreddit, c0mputar offered slightly more coherent, if equally misguided, response.

The reality is that most of the “misogyny” they face is just criticism to their feminist viewpoints. I see this a lot when I confront feminists arguments, present my arguments, and get called a misogynist, amongst other things characterized by misandry. It happens on both sides …

Really now? Here are some actual examples of comments posted on #mencallmethings (taken from a comment from Shaenon in the discussion here).

here’s some to start: ‘I’ll rape your mum, faggot fuck’ “I’ll come to your house and kill you”

#mencallmethings, impersonate me on FB, & make disgusting sexual comments, post my name & # when I helped organize Slutwalk

cunt, whore, ugly, disgusting, cold, feminazi, shut the fuck up bitch, manipulative, crazy, playing the victim, sociopath

Bitch, whore, being sensitive, little girl, dumb, subject of jokes involving physical and sexual assault.

Any variation on fat and/or ugly at this point just makes me yawn.

I’ve had so many emails and messages telling me I deserve a beating, I don’t even keep track any longer.

“13? Judging by the size of your titties, I’d of thought you were 18.”

(censored version) If you keep talking the way you do, you deserved to get raped.

My #mencallmethings moment – receiving an email consisting of 1600 lines plus of the same insult over and over. My crime? Being fat.

I’ve had so many guys tell me how good I must be in bed because I’m fat and therefor will do anyone

I usually get ‘sweetheart’ just before they dismiss my argument as being ‘stupid’. No counter argument.

Will not repeat the violence that’s been directed at me but this one made me laugh “Blubbering self-important herd animal.”

apparently I’m a lesbian… I was unaware until #mencallmethings.

I’M ON ANTI-DEPRESSANTS AND I CANT EVEN JERK OFF CORRECTLY NOW & ITS BECAUSE OF WOMEN SO FUCK ALL YOU INFERIOR COWS

“You should have your tongue ripped out.”

I get sent one rape threat a month on average.

I was once told “get back in the kitchen you ugly bitch” for posting on a Linux board (can’t remember which one now)

Have you ever wanted someone to tell you that your genetalia should be stapled shut with bugs inside, start a blog

How about being choked to death during a forced blowjob? Start a feminist blog.

Not worth the effort to murder: the most recent example of what I had to delete off the blog when #mencallmethings

C0mputar, in his Reddit post, went on to offer another argument that seems to be a favorite of those trying to trivialize the abuse catalogued by the contributors to #mencallmethings:

In the end, veterans of the internet know there is no protected demographic. Everyone gets shit on, but if you make a point of belonging with a group, you get shit on even more, and more so the smaller you are. You know who gets shit on more than feminists? MRAs.

Really? Some MRA types on Twitter tried to get a rival hashtag going: #womencallmethings. Needless to say, they didn’t have much to work with.

One Man Boobz non-fan — whom I banned for his repeated comments about anal rape — tried to post a sarcastic little comment here last night dismissing #mencallmethings on similar grounds. Here’s a screenshot from my wordpress account, with his identifying data erased:

Let’s just, for contrast, take a look at the previous comment he tried to post here:

Another day, another “hope you get raped” comment.

Ironically, though I’m pretty thoroughly disliked across the manosphere, I actually get a lot less of this sort of abuse than most reasonably well-known feminist bloggers who happen to be non-dudes. Oh, sure, I get called a “traitor” and a “mangina,” and once in a while someone points out that I’m, you know, fat, but when it comes to the really nasty shit, the abusive commenters and emailers seem to much prefer going after women. This may be because they are misogynistic assholes. That’s just a theory, though.

Categories
anti-Semitism antifeminism evil women manginas men who should not ever be with women ever misandry misogyny MRA oppressed men patriarchy rape reactionary bullshit the spearhead violence against men/women

Violence against women? Blame it on feminism, says W. F. Price

This slogan is apparently what CAUSES violence against women.

Another day, another apologia for male violence from the Men’s Rights crowd. This time the apologist is W. F. Price at The Spearhead, who uses several recent news stories involving violent men as an excuse to attack feminism.

Repeated provocations against men, systematic discrimination against men, and state-sanctioned debt slavery are starting to have the inevitable effect. In a triumph for the feminist movement, men are lashing out violently against women, fulfilling the feminist fantasy of a gender war.

In the old days, everything was (presumably) peachy keen between the sexes. Then along came the feminists, and all hell broke loose. Those “take back the night” marches feminists love so much? They’re just red flags to the bulls – that is, our society’s ample stock of “mentally unstable and out-of-luck men.” You don’t want to make these guys mad!

[W]omen were encouraged to be militant against all males, which can only have unfortunate results, given the hands-down male superiority in combat. …

In other words, the fact that there are violent men out there is why women shouldn’t complain about violent men. Presumably the only marches women should be organizing would be “No, Go Ahead, You Keep the Night” marches. Don’t want to offend those rapists –that’ll just make them even rapier than usual!

According to Price, though, feminists actually like violence against women — because it keeps them in business.

For feminism to exist as a valid movement, there must be violent conflict, so many of the efforts of feminists have sought to provoke just that. … You see, for a feminist to justify her job there must be some degree of brutality against women. … So, if you are a feminist, the hapless women murdered or assaulted by the damaged men feminists have created are necessary sacrifices for advancing the feminist agenda.

So not only do the feminists provoke these “damaged men” – they created them in the first place, by being so feministy.

Wouldn’t this whole provoke-the-men strategy make life more dangerous for feminist women as well? No, because feminists are all rich ladies, and everyone knows that rich ladies are never beaten or raped or murdered:

[W]e all know that feminism has never been about the typical woman who lives a humble life, but rather the ambitious elite who want to have access to the big boys and big money on Capitol Hill and Wall Street. … Disadvantaged women are truly the cannon fodder of feminists.

So what “proof” does Price offer for his claim that men are “lashing out” at women because of feminism? He cites three news stories: one dealing with a woman-hating trucker who’s accused of killing several prostitutes; another involving a man who went on a shooting rampage at a church, killing his wife and wounding two others; and finally, the case of James Ray Palmer, the Arkansas man who shot up the offices of the judge who’d handled his divorce and custody case more than a decade earlier. (I wrote about his case here.)

How do these cases relate to feminism? You’ll have to ask Price, because none of the news stories suggest any connection, and Price doesn’t explain why he thinks there is one. True, the trucker is said to be a misogynist, but misogyny is far more ancient than feminism.  Meanwhile, we have no evidence that the church shooter was angry at any women other than his wife.

In the case of Palmer, there may be an indirect connection, if it turns out that he was influenced by the angry, violent rhetoric of the Men’s Rights movement. As I pointed out in my post on Palmer, many in the MRM have made a martyr out of Thomas Ball, who committed suicide on the steps of a courthouse, leaving behind an manifesto that urged men to literally burn down police stations — and courthouses. It is certainly conceivable that Palmer’s courthouse rampage was inspired by this sort of rhetoric.

But to blame feminism for any of this is ass-backwards. Feminism is a response to misogyny, not its cause. To blame feminism for violence against women is a bit like blaming Jews for provoking the Holocaust. (Forgive me, Godwin; it was the clearest analogy.)

Price ends his piece by urging women to, in effect, shut up and fix him a sandwich:

Women’s best bet for security is not in denouncing and fighting men, as feminists would have it, but in cooperating with them and taking on their proper role.

Then he ends with a weird coda suggesting that feminists should be locked up for having the temerity to speak up in the first place:

The United States will once again be a righteous society only when feminists are jailed for interfering with families, and their academic apologists are removed by security from their jobs in taxpayer-funded educational institutions. This would be the most humane course of action to take. Far more humane, in fact, than provoking men and women to physically attack one another, as feminists would have it today so that they can unleash state agents on confused and demoralized families.

I didn’t have the stomach to read all of the comments responding to Price’s argument, such as it is. But here are some highlights – lowlights, really – of the highly upvoted comments I did read.

The ironically named Anti Idiocy seconds Price’s basic argument:

Anger against feminism has been building for years. As the men’s rights movement has gained momentum, feminists and their lackeys have doubled down and become more virulent in their anti-male hatred and propaganda. Women today are becoming more and more nasty on an interpersonal basis, and they are doing so more frequently. A breakpoint will come. It will probably take a catalyst; another severe economic downturn might do it. But it will come. Feminists and their pet femboys will push things until it does.

Wait. If the Men’s Rights movement is, in effect, provoking feminists to get more feministy, then wouldn’t (by Price’s logic) the allegedly increased violence be the fault of the MRAs?

Rod worries that in the case of a real gender war, men might actually lose – all because of those darned “white knights” and their reluctance to beat up the ladies:

I’m afraid that if it ever came down to a real physical war between the sexes, men would unfortunately lose. There are too many men who can’t stand the sight of men harming women, and would immediately step in to save them. Perhaps nature instilled in us a visceral reaction to women’s suffering, making us want to step in and help, and at one time in the history of our species, that reaction was no doubt a salutary thing. Now it just works against us.

Antiphon, meanwhile, blames it all on the Jews. Or, more specifically, the Jewesses, who apparently control the feminist movement in the same way that their husbands control the banks.

Needless to say, this being The Spearhead, Antiphon’s comment has three times as many upvotes as downvotes. Apparently, the only thing worse than a feminist is a Jewish feminist.

I guess my Nazi analogy earlier in this post wasn’t so out of place after all.

 

Categories
antifeminism evil women kitties manginas men who should not ever be with women ever MGTOW misogyny MRA vaginas

Christian J wins the gold in the Incoherence Olympics

This cat writes more coherently than Christian J

My favorite incoherent MRA blogger at the moment is our dear friend Christian J from the blog What Men Are Saying About Women. In recent days, Dr. J – famed inventor of the MRA two-dot ellipsis – has delivered up some truly inspired prose. I’d like to share some of the highlights (by which I mean lowlights) from a few of his recent posts.

Here he is, attempting to explain the “hookup culture” of the youth of today:

Women dish it up on a platter in line with their feminist education (free love/free sex mentality) to the alphas as they turn them on, the most, in the hope of either pretending to be carefree and casual about it all or they just have a high sex drive that requires servicing on a regular basis. It’s not that difficult..

No, no, not difficult at all.

Here he is talking about, er, pussy power, and somehow stumbling on to the subject of international finance:

The girls ofcourse have been trained to think that they can get away with just about anything as they possess the magic “V” which has a very high trading component as well as a social exchange rate, not unlike the Euro or an open ocean oil exploration license, but the magic “V”is more mobile and comes with it’s own carrier and operator, batteries not included though. Perfect really, when you think about it.

Here’s the opening sentence of a post of his about chivalry, and how feminists all secretly love it:

As feminism gets messier and even more morose, one does have to wonder what efforts those masterminds of insanity will do to cover their obvious and blatant erroneous experiments on human biology.

I don’t know if it’s even possible for me to get messier or more morose.

Here he is waxing poetic about the dreaded mangina:

[N]o one really considers them to be anything but a waste product, whose relevance is yet to be determined. A pretend girlie-man if you like, who wavers between reality and the dream state of their female masters. A neutered sycophant living on a different plain where reality and fantasy mix to form their delusional, ethereal world..

And let’s finish up with this muddled attempt to call feminists a bunch of lying liars:

We have on numerous occasions, demonstrated the continual lying and misinformation that the feminist hegemony consistently wallows in without what they believe is, in any fear of contradiction.

I have no idea if the second half of that sentence is the result of some sort of grievous editing error, or if he actually thought it made some sort of sense. With Christian J, it’s impossible to tell.

Categories
alpha males bad boys beta males bullying manginas masculinity men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny MRA PUA racism thug-lovers violence against men/women

Lady, killer; killer, lady.

What do women want? Freud never found a definitive answer to his famous question, but the blogger who calls himself Delusion Damage thinks he’s got it figured out: women want men who can kill people with their bare hands.

DD is a sort of compound MRA-PUA who argues for “Men’s Liberation Through ‘Game,’” as he put it in a Spearhead post some months ago.  Apparently, if dudes learn how to get the hot babes to give them strings-free sexy times, through the magic of “game,” this will help to “reduce the unilateral enslavement of men through marriage.”

And what attracts the ladies more than the ability to kill? Not much, apparently. If you’ve got that magic killing touch, everyone around you will sense your manly power:

You are a man. A man is a survivor, a hunter, a protector of loved ones. The essence of manliness is controlled power. … That is what women love and what other men respect. Women, most of them anyway, are unable to use force and must rely on men where force is required. … If you lack the ability to kill other people with your bare hands, you will be perceived as if something is missing from your manliness. …

If you can kill, the ladies will pick up on this instantly:

[H]aving the ability substantially raises the value she instinctively perceives you to have. Which, as we know, leads to all manner of good things.

I believe he’s referring to blowjobs.

Oh, and other dudes will be impressed, too:

The respect of other men is also greatly influenced by your killing ability. Up until graduation from high school, the male social hierarchy has a great deal to do with “who can beat up whom”, and although the hierarchy among adult men is more dependent on social and professional status signals, men never stop instinctively evaluating you by what they perceive your killing ability to be, and respecting or disrespecting you accordingly.

And this will set you apart from all the wimpy emo hipsters of the world, who couldn’t even fight a girl:

If there is a “defining” degree of killing ability that makes you “manly”, it is defined by comparison with the female of the species. …

In these dismal times, men who fall short of this line are not terribly rare. Many of the emaciated hipsters and cubicle-dwellers of our generation would have trouble against a Juanita from a rougher neighborhood. These men, due to their lack of killing ability, are seen as unmanly by both men and women. 

Meanwhile, your ability to kill will make others sit up and take notice:

The ability to kill makes your feelings relevant. If you lose your temper, someone dies.

This of course implies good things about you – the fact that you aren’t in jail right now means that you are a man in control of his emotions. A man who never loses his temper. Everyone around you subconsciously understands this and respects you for it. It lets people know they can trust you.

Yeah, nothing screams “trustworthy” more than a guy going on and on about how he could kill you with his bare hands.

Also, the ability to kill can help to prevent the ladies from blabbing endlessly about their stupid lady crap to you:

A woman who knows, without a shadow of a doubt, that she will have less than three seconds to live from the second she makes you lose your temper is not going to set out to intentionally poke and prod you past your breaking point.

Aw, yeah, it’s good to be a potential bare-hands killer:

[Y]ou will be afforded a completely unprecedented kind of respect. …

When you are The Man, everyone around takes note. It is a form of celebrity. Women gravitate to you, pulled by the invisible streams of attention, respect and deference which we all subconsciously sense in any social situation.

Given the sort of adoring attention DD must get from the ladies, it’s sort of amazing that he finds time to even keep up a blog at all.

Categories
armageddon atlas shrugged cock blockade crackpottery creepy evil women I'm totally being sarcastic manginas men who should not ever be with women ever MGTOW misogyny oppressed men patriarchy sexy robot ladies the spearhead we hunted the mammoth

Will the coming apocalypse put bitchy ladies in their place?

Men: We all know how to wrestle bears.

Angry manosphere dudes sure do love them some apocalyptic fantasies! Which totally makes sense, since they all seem to imagine the apocalypse as little more than an opportunity to deliver a big “told you so!” to women and “manginas” and probably their pet goldfish.

Over on MGTOWforums.com, our robogirl-obsessed friend avoidwomen has been reposting assorted comments he’s apparently found on The Spearhead, and which he just loves, loves, loves! Unfortunately, he hasn’t provided links or any other information about them, and Google didn’t much help, so I don’t know who exactly should get the credit for the following bit of postapocalyptic fiction.

It’s sort of long, but I think you’ll pick up the gist of it right away. (It also sounds really, really familiar – have I written about it before, or is it just that MRAs and MGTOWers are so predictably unoriginal?) Are you sitting comfortably? Good. Let’s begin:

An economic collapse will put women in their place. Virtually no women have the skills necessary to survive in the real world. They can survive in this artificial politically correct, multi-cultural, anything goes, “death to the West, death to the white male patriarch” system that we are presently in….

As the economy declines even further the government will be forced to make massive cuts. … The first things on the chopping block will be entitlements, the sort of entitlements that have enabled women to use big government as a substitution for a stable nuclear family, a family they would only be able to have by behaving themselves and conforming to acceptable standards of behavior as determined by their fathers and later their husbands.

And now we come to the payoff:

 In the near future women will be given the choice of starving in the street, finding some way to hunt/fish/garden on their own, or conforming to the standards men set for them and being kept alive by men who actually place value upon their continued existence.

Let’s throw some Ayn Rand into the mix:

This dysgenic society favors the weak and indeed it subsidizes the weak at the expense of the strong and the fit. … We are ruled by thieves who steal from the productive and give to the idiotic masses to keep themselves in office at the expense of the intelligent, the creative, the productive, the true movers and shakers of society.

Can I have some “we hunted the mammoth” to go with that “Atlas Shrugged?”

We build civilizations yet we are penalized at every step of the way in every aspect of our lives. Instead of being allowed to innovate, invent, and create, we are made to subsidize the recklessness of unworthy women, tens of millions of illegal aliens, and any other group that some clique of weak and effeminate politicians decides to cave to.

Hmm. That’s pretty good. But still not quite melodramatic enough. Can we add some big blustery clichés to the mix? Some “we stand on the edge of a precipice” sort of shit?

We stand on the cusp of the precipice, gazing down into the abyss.

Oh, ok. I didn’t expect you to take me quite so literally. But never mind:

After our civilization is pushed over the edge a new one will emerge from the void left by the collapse of the old one. All we have to do is make sure it is to our benefit rather than to our detriment.

And now, back to all those mean bitches who were so mean to us:

 The prospect of starvation, death by exposure to the elements, or being turned into a prostitute by a street gang that openly dominates some X number of city blocks in the absence of big government police, should be amply adequate to put most women in their place.

You can almost hear the writer jazzing in his pants as he writes this.

The question is not one of “will they come crawling back to us” but rather, “how do we respond when they do finally come crawling back.”

Yeah, ladies, maybe we don’t want you after all!

Most of them are bitter, selfish, self-absorbed, idiotic, brain-dead, used up whores, and I have no need for such creatures in my life. They don’t know how to cook, how to clean, how to butcher livestock, how to till a field, how to cultivate crops, how to hunt game, how to fish, how to defend themselves in hand-to-hand combat, how to zero a rifle, in short they have no practical useful skills for existence outside of an artificial globalist “post industrial” financial/retail services economic structure.

Ooh! In your face, ladies who can’t cultivate crops and take down bears in hand-to-hand combat!

Did your feminism prepare you for BEARS? I think not!

In addition they don’t even know how to treat people, especially men, in a right and proper fashion.

Um. What happened to hand-to-hand-combat and all that survival-of-the-fittest stuff? This seems a tad, er, petulant.

I personally have no use for a bunch of used up whores who “had their fun” and now expect men who know what is what and have their act together, to put their lives on the line to keep them safe.

Ah, now we’re rolling again.

Screw you, whores! It’s all fun and games until the economy collapses and the BEARS show up!

Hopefully in the new society, the one on the way, women will be treated as perpetual minors with no contractual capacity and no right to ownership of property. … what we cannot achieve politically will be achieved socially and physically by the nature of the coming collapse/implosion.

Yep, ladies. It’s our way … or the BEARway! (By which I mean, “the highway, except that the highway is covered with BEARS!”)

Never forget, that at some point back in time, EVERYTHING women have they obtained from MEN, either via big government initiated wealth/resource transfers, or because men were foolish enough to dote on them in some hope of obtaining sex/sexual access (or even just the affections/approval) from some creature that was doubtlessly a used up whore.

So there you have it. Our glorious future!

I’m not sure how the robogirls fit in all this exactly. If the economy collapses and we’re fighting the BEARS in the streets, won’t that put a little dent in production of robogirls?

Never mind. That’s a mere detail. The important things to remember are:  Apocalypse soon, women screwed, men happy, BEARS.

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 manginas misogyny MRA sex sluts

Dudes, watch out: Sex is a feminist plot to make your penis get sick and fall off

This is how they get you!
This is how they get you!

The dude at What Men Are Saying About Women – you may recall him as the inventor of the MRA two-dot period – remains my favorite illiterate MRA blogger. To be fair, the illiteracy is really just the icing on the cake of his ridiculous opinions. In a recent post he wrote about a new study that purports to show that there is more sex in countries with greater gender equality. (Probably true; the study itself, probably bullshit.)

Here’s the two-dot blogger trying to make some sort of point about it all:

Feminists have always promoted shagging as some type of recommended behaviour that should be allowed at random without limitation or indeed have any limits attached to it. Probably explains why most of the feminist mangina sites have little tags like “I support Porn” or “I support BDSM” as they would heartily agree that the promotion of free sex on demand would allow them unlimited access especially if there is a feminist female involved. Brainwashing does apparently have it positive side..

What surprises me the most is the lack of information concerning  sexually transmitted diseases of all types. Those nasty disease like HIV or those others that munch your body at random. Not really something you want to be told after a night of debauchery with some slut feminist ( they promote themselves to be sluts now) willingly spreads her legs for some horizontal tango..

So apparently having more sex is bad because feminists..

And then you get AIDS..

And sentences should always be ended with not one but two periods..

Categories
alpha males antifeminism evil women manginas masculinity men who should not ever be with women ever MGTOW misogyny MRA reactionary bullshit sexual harassment western women suck

America: Land of Soulless Hamster Wusses

Street harassment: The engine of civilization

Here’s a little screed, originally from happierabroad.com, that’s been making the rounds of the manosphere lately. The author, anonymous, describes himself as “an Arab, who has lived and travelled all over the world and is a keen observer of society and people.” The aim of his writing? To let those of us in the West know just how disappointed he is with all of us.  Especially the wussies and bitches.

Meeting Westerners, one of the things I noticed was how insecure and de-masculinized they seemed to me; compared to myself and the male-dominated, testosterone-driven culture of my land.

Using my own keen sense of observation, I have noticed just an eensy weensy bit of misogyny in his writings.  You may notice it as well.

On the internet, most Americans seemed to act like little bitches, little girls brought up in a Feminist perversion of nature.

Well, I don’t know about that whole “perversion of nature” thing, but I have to say the first half of that sentence is pretty spot-on.

It was only after coming to the U.S. and studying here that all the pieces came together – a fascinating look at a dysfunctional man-hating civilization that is the polar opposite of my own culture, and will eventually lead to the collapse of Western civilization.

Uh oh.

Where I come from, men walk proud and rule the streets and testosterone runs in the air; and strong patriarchal foundations of family and the father as ruler of the household. Men harass and aggressively follow women – it is unapologetically a man’s world.

That’s what makes a civilization great: the harassment of women.

Just remember this, men, when you lean out of your car window to yell “Nice ass………WHORE!!!!!!!!!” at passing joggers of the female persuasion, you’re doing your bit to uphold our most noble traditions and help to fend off the forces of darkness.

In the U.S., Feminism has so corrupted the society to it’s core, damaged the very concept of family and the family unit and the father’s role, that society as a whole is like some bizarre alien planet – where men are bland, lack personality, are anti-social, gossipy, soul-less. Men are weak and insecure deep inside … women have all the power and American men seem clueless as to how bizarre the male-female dynamic has become.

How bizzare?

In the workplace, Americans are Automatons, like soul-less hamsters on a wheel. Fake conversations, no intellectualism, no interest in other countries, peoples, or history.

Do soul-less hamsters act differently than soulful ones? How can you tell the difference? Do the ones without souls poop more?

Also, terrible social and people skills – at least in California. Most people communicate via twitter and Facebook, even though most of the people on their Facebook live in the same city and a phone call away.

Really? You’re complaining about Facebook? Sorry, that’s just lazy and trite. You’re like the Dane Cook of reactionary misogynist cultural critics.

People are vacuous, shallow, superficial, suggestible. Men raised here are fake, insecure, lack personality, they seem to have “issues.” Women are confused and messed up ..

Wait, what’s that? Is that the dreaded MRA two-period punctuation mark? NOT AGAIN!

Oops. He’s still talking:

You let your women take control, and your society will unravel- it will make your men weak, and destroy your society to it’s core. The patriarchy is a male conceived and enforced institution that was imposed on females, because men, and only men understand well the long-term impacts of civilization and harnessing male energies into productive family units and a stable society …. civilization itself is a result of patriarchy.

You know, if you’re really into harnessing your male energies, you can buy the necessary equipment right here!

To sum if up, it seems to be that the whole country is phitzoprhenic [sic], like a Jekyll and Hyde monstrosity. There is no community, no camaredie, no soul, men and women are willing servants to their corporate masters and slaves to materialism and superficiality; and incredibly conformist, reserved, and politically correct to the point of totalitinarism.

“Conformist?” So now he’s turned into a high school goth?

Come on, dude, if you want to be a social critic, you’re going to need to work a little harder than that. Take a tip or two from this, er, duck:

Categories
gloating manginas men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny MRA oppressed men terrorism the spearhead threats

MRA Peter Nolan on Anders Breivik: “In different times … he would be called a hero.”

The work of a "hero?"

Some in the manosphere have been quick to label mass murderer Anders Breivik a “madman,” trying their best to pretend that his noxious misogynist ideology bears no resemblance to their own. Others, while endorsing at least some of his ideas, have distanced themselves from his actions.

As for MRA loose cannon Peter-Andrew: Nolan(c), well, I’ll just let him explain himself. In a comment on The Spearhead, which naturally earned him multiple upvotes from the assembled mob, the man with the strangely punctuated name offered this take [LINK FIXED] on the killer:

Anders Breivik sees himself as a soldier who is fighting for a worthy cause. That cause being his country. Women and leftists then make him out to be “insane” and are looking for “who is to blame”. Well they might start looking in the mirror. The most pervasive element of western civilization today is its hatred of men and all things male. There is a particularly strong hatred of fathers and husbands. I know. I used to be a father and a husband. I have never experienced hatred in my life as vehement as by women in divorce.

And then the justifications began:

It is only natural and normal that some men decide to take matters into their own hands at all the hatred spewed at them and their marginalization. Men often see that some things are worth fighting for. Men often then take action to fight for what they believe in.

Anders Breivik is not crazy. He’s as rational as the next man. He sees that his country is being destroyed. He sees that the people responsible for that destruction are the left of politics. And he would be correct. He took action to stop what he believes is the destruction of his country.

Followed by a smug told-you-so:

I have been telling women for three years now that hatred of men in general and fathers in particular is going to see men killing a lot of women and children. Well? We just saw 76.

Of course, when Nolan refers to “telling women” that angry men will erupt in violence, what he means is “offering guys on The Spearhead specific tips on how exactly to kill innocent people.”

I’m not going to repost the vile suggestions he set forth in a now notorious Spearhead comment some months back, but I will note that they included handy tips on how to efficiently kill police officers, as well as specific advice on the best ways to take out large numbers of people in “malls … girls schools, police stations, guvment buildings. Full of women and manginas.” He ended the comment with a not-terribly-convincing attempt at plausible deniability:

Do any of you here realise just how easy it is to ANY of these things? I am not recommending them or even condining them. But if a man got into the frame of mind of Sodini and was actually SMART about it. There are PLENTY of ways he could attack women and manginas and their cop protectors with NO CHANCE AT ALL OF BEING CAUGHT as long as he kept his mouth shut.

Naturally, this comment got dozens of upvotes from the Spearhead regulars.

In a followup comment on The Spearhead last night, Nolan mocked another commenter for offering words of sympathy to the “innocent victims.” That last phrase seemed to send him into a fury:

Those who were killed were not “innocent victims” in the main. Anders Breivik is as sane as the next man. …

This was an act of war and he considers himself a soldier. In different times, as in WW II, he would be called a hero.

The people he killed were the children of those who had betrayed him and his fellow norwegians. I would put forward the opinion that the political leaders are responsible for the war on men and the destruction of the families of men. What could be more “an eye for an eye” than to kill the children of those who were so willing to destroy mens families and destroy the homeland of men?

In killing children of those who are betraying men? He is sending a very clear message.

“You may think you are protected by your police and your security…..but we can find your children…and you can not protect them except by locking them into a secure area.”

He then went on to make what I think can only be called a veiled threat towards Predident Obama’s daughters; I won’t repeat it here.

Then back to the “innocent children” remark:

These “innocent victims” of whom you speak are the children of those who are criminals. And since Anders Breivik could not get to the REAL criminals he went after the children. Is that such a bad idea? Are they not legitimate targets if the primary targets can not be reached?

This also received multiple upvotes from The Spearhead crowd, and a much smaller number of downvotes. [UPDATE: The post has now started attracting downvotes, but the upvotes still outnumber them considerably.]

Yes, it is truly strange that anyone could possibly associate the MRM with violence in any way.