Categories
advocacy of violence antifeminism armageddon creepy douchebaggery drama emotional abuse entitled babies evo psych fairy tales excusing abuse gender policing grandiosity man strike mansplaining matt forney men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny MRA penises PUA rape rape culture reactionary bullshit red pill taking pleasure in women's pain unsolicited penis updates

What Matt Forney’s “Case Against Female Self-Esteem” Reveals About His Own Deep Insecurities

seekall

 

Matt Forney is desperate for attention; it’s as glaringly obvious as the giant MATT FORNEY that adorns the top of his blog, creatively named MATT FORNEY. And like some caricature of an emo teen “acting out,” the misogynistic manosphere blogger has decided that any attention — even bad attention — is better than no attention.

And so, perhaps at least dimly aware that his ideas are and his prose are both too lackluster to command much attention on their own, he seems to be trying to rile up as much of the internet as possible with posts that are deliberately designed to offend liberals and feminists and pretty much anyone who is not a woman-hating douchebag. He had a minor hit a this spring with a post entitled Why Fat Girls Don’t Deserve to Be Loved, which did in fact live up — that is, down — to its title.

Now he’s got an even bigger hit in a post titled The Case Against Female Self-Esteem.

Categories
a voice for men all about the menz antifeminism are these guys 12 years old? artistry crackpottery drama kings entitled babies evil women grandiosity gross incompetence hypocrisy imaginary oppression mansplaining men invented everything men who should not ever be with women ever MGTOW misogyny MRA oppressed white men pedophiles oh sorry ephebophiles penises playing the victim racism rape rape culture straw feminists the c-word we hunted the mammoth

“Pregnancy is No Excuse For Misandry” and other pithy, baffling slogans from the Men’s Rights propaganda squad

pregnancy is no excuse for misandry
A real Mens Rights poster from deviantART

Pity the poor Men’s Rights activists. The real civil rights movements that MRAs like to compare their, er, “struggle” to may have faced many obstacles that MRAs haven’t — from legal prohibitions on voting to fire bombings and assassinations  — but at least they haven’t had a hard time explaining just what it was, and is, that they’re seeking redress for.

When Martin Luther King so famously dreamt of a world in which “my four little children will … not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character” he was not only speaking eloquently; he was expressing an idea that was, well, pretty easy to understand.

Categories
a voice for men a woman is always to blame advocacy of violence antifeminism creepy douchebaggery evil single moms evil women excusing abuse harassment hypocrisy imaginary backwards land irony alert mansplaining men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny MRA oppressed men patriarchy paul elam pedophiles oh sorry ephebophiles playing the victim rape rape culture rape jokes sexual harassment statutory rape apologists

A Voice for Men’s Paul Elam blames rape chants at Canadian schools on feminism

Paul Elam: If he hears any ore about rape culture, he might possibly lose it.
Paul Elam: If he hears any more about rape culture, he might possibly lose it.

You might not think that student orientation events would be an appropriate venue for chants celebrating the rape of underage girls. But such chants have apparently been something of a tradition at not one but two Canadian schools — and possibly more? Last week, a scandal erupted at the University of British Columbia after word got out that an orientation event at its Saunder School of Business had included a chant on this particular theme, led by orientation leaders from the Commerce Undergraduate Society.

According to one woman who disgustedly live-tweeted the event, it went something like this:

Y-O-U-N-G at UBC, we like ’em young, Y is for your sister, O is for oh so tight, U is for underage, N is for no consent, G is for go to jail.

Meanwhile, in Halifax, someone made a video — and posted it to YouTube — of student orientation leaders at Saint Mary’s University chanting a nearly identical chant.

Naturally, noted, er, human rights activist Paul Elam of A Voice for Men felt compelled to weigh in on the issue. He started off by expressing his deep disgust … with having to hear anything about the issue at all:

I swear if I read one more outraged “report” — aka feverish, paranoid rant — that twists something stupid into “evidence” of a “rape culture,” I am going to just lose it.

Yes, how outrageous that a chant joking about raping underage girls at an official school orientation event could possibly be construed as contributing in any way to rape culture! So sorry that your delicate sensitivities were offended, Paul.

After some more predictable histrionics on this “hyper-hipster-hysteria” from Mr. Elam, he got to his main point: blaming feminists for the rape chants.

No, really.

I am an older guy. I find it interesting, given that I came from a more “patriarchal” generation, that something like this when I was 18 would have been unthinkable. Why? Because other men, especially older ones, would have pulled those young people aside and said, “Hey, we don’t do that around here.” That would have been that, as they say, if it had even happened in the first place.

We can thank feminists for this. Through policy and governance they have eroded positive male role models, and male authority, right out of the culture. After feminist undermining of the family, removing fathers from the lives of children and demonizing male heroes, we have a population of young people, especially young men, growing more socially feral with each new generation.

And now what do we see? Feminists running around everywhere telling men they need to tell each other, “Don’t rape. Don’t abuse women. Don’t this. Don’t that.” …

You can’t assault the identity of half the human race, marginalize and disempower them, which is exactly what feminism has done, and expect anything in return but what you are getting.

In other words: You gals asked for it.

Paul Elam, you are rape culture.

Categories
antifeminism fidelbogen grandiosity gross incompetence hypocrisy imaginary oppression mansplaining men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny slacktivism straw feminists taking pleasure in women's pain the sound of his own voice twitter

@Fidelbogen sez: “We needn’t treat feminists fairly or ethically. Underhanded tricks r the order of the day.”

Silly Fidelbogen! Tricks are for kids!
Silly Fidelbogen! Tricks are for kids!

It’s labor day here in the US of A, a day for picnics, parades honoring our nation’s workers, and going through Fidelbogen’s timeline on Twitter looking for especially obtuse tweets from the always obtuse Men’s Renaissance Agitator and would-be philosopher-king of the Men’s Rights movement.

Yes, I know we just did Fidelbogen the other day, but we’re doing him again.

Because it’s my blog, that’s why!

Categories
a voice for men a woman is always to blame antifeminism are these guys 12 years old? artistry boner rage disgusting women evil sexy ladies evil women false accusations I'm totally being sarcastic irony alert manginas mansplaining men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny MRA vaginas

The Cartoon Artistry of Victor Zen, Men’s Human Rights Activist Human

logicVictor

I think I have a new favorite MRA. Sorry, this one’s an MHRA, because he spends all his time hanging out on A Voice for Human Men. (Oh, it’s still just A Voice for Men? Then Why did they put that H for “Human” in that other acronym?)

Anyway, his name is Victor Zen. And according to Victor’s MHRA Resume — and yes he really does have one — he is quite an awesome MHRA, I mean, just consider these accomplishments:

AVFM Forum Moderator (4/7/2013-7/1/2013)

  • Enforced AVFM policy in the AVFM forums
  • Maintained unity in MHRA community
  • Encouraged peaceful online activism

I mean, it totally sounds like he was one kickass AVFM policy-enforcing, MHRA-unity-maintaining, peaceful online activism encouraging moderator for nearly three months!

If I were hiring any MHRAs, I would definitely put Victor Zen’s MHResume (see what I did there) at the top of the virtual pile.

Oh, but that’s not all! Since then, Victor has been doing a bang-up job as AVFM Backup System Administrator, which I assume means he system administrates the hell out of AVFM whenever it backs itself into a corner, which it sort of does pretty much all of the time. (I think. I’m not really up on these sorts of technical things.)

But that’s not the part of Victor’s MHResume I want to celebrate today. For if you scroll down to the bottom you will find a list of his real accomplishments:

  • First day as MHRA: December 5th, 2012
  • Posters designed: 8
  • Videos produced: 38
  • Cartoons drawn: 18
  • Articles written:  27
  • YT Subscribers: 120+

Woah, woah, what’s that about cartoons?

That’s right, he drew EIGHTEEN MOTHERFUCKING CARTOONS. Not eight. Not eighty. EIGHTEEN.

That cartoon at the top of this post. That’s just a taste of just ONE of these EIGHTEEN cartoons.

You can can see the loving craftmanship — sorry, craftsMANship — he brings to the task.

Let’s take a look at the rest of them, which have been helpfully posted for us in a bunch of AVFM forum threads and on his own site.  Be prepared for some violence and maybe a teensy bit of hate, because the TRUTH IS NOT PRETTY. Also, neither is his terrible drawing style.

Also, one of the cartoons features a talking vagina.

Here you can see the ironic conclusion to the story started in the two frames above, as well as an assortment of other cartoons posted under the heading Victor.Zen On Absurdity via Inequality.

And here is Victor.Zen On the MHRA’s Enemy.

And Victor.Zen On the Screech of Feminism.

And wait there’s more!

Victor has posted some of his favorites on his own site as well. (He starts with the vagina one; apparently he’s quite proud of his passing familiarity with that sexual organ.)

He’s got posters, too.

As well as an explanation for why the word “mangina” is totally not misogynistic, just like a simple descriptive term with no misogynistic overtones that means a dude who’s, you know, a “philogynic misandrist.”

A Phil a who now?

Categories
a woman is always to blame evil fat fatties excusing abuse harassment mansplaining men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny PUA

Roosh V forum members baffled that fat woman doesn’t welcome sexual harassment

Online dating: It doesn't always work like this.
Online dating: It doesn’t always work like this.

For a certain subset of horrible men, there are few things more infuriating than the fact that women they find undesirable can turn down men for sex. For this upsets their primitive sense of justice: such women should be so grateful for any male attention, these men think, that turning down even the most boorish of men shouldn’t even be an option for them.

Consider the reactions of some of the regulars on date-rapey pickup guru Roosh V’s forum to the story of Josh and Mary on the dating site Plenty of Fish. One fine December evening, you see, Josh decided to try a little “direct game” on Mary.

That’s what the fellas on Roosh’s forum call it, anyway. The rest of us would call it sexual harassment.

Categories
antifeminism boner rage dozens of upvotes evil women mansplaining men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny MRA none dare call it conspiracy penises pig ignorance racism reddit the enigma that is ladies the eternal solipsism of the MRA mind

Women are lying when they say they want more dicks on TV, Men’s Rights Redditors explain

Artist Louise Bourgeois also pretended to like dongs.
Artist Louise Bourgeois also pretended to like dongs.

So for some reason the fellas on the Men’s Rights subreddit are discussing an article by Australian newspaper columnist Clementine Ford in which she expresses her desire to see more dongs on television.

As she notes, there are plenty of boobs on display on HBO shows like Game of Thrones, yet “rarely are we treated to the visual smorgasbord of a well stocked meat platter. ” Ford is sick of it.  “So bring on the parade of wangs, willies and woodies!” she demands. “I’m fond of a wand and I’m not ashamed to say it.”

I’m not terribly familiar with the writings of Clementine Ford, but evidently she’s not big on subtlety.

Anyway, the fellas in the Men’s Rights subreddit aren’t having any of it. Nuh uh. They ain’t buying it, ladies! You may write columns about how you want more wang on TV. You may talk about it with your friends. You may have gigantic collections of peen pics hidden away on your hard drive.

But the MRAs of Reddit know better. It’s all some devious feminist ploy, as Steampunk_Moustache helpfully explains.

Steampunk_Moustache 1 point 5 hours ago (2|1)  It's rather funny seeing feminists pretend they want to see penises just so that they can make this (weak) argument, isn't it?  Women don't want to look at dicks. Women don't get turned on by the sight of dicks.  Do you know who gets turned on by the sight of dicks? Ironically, straight men.

Huh. That took an odd twist at the end there.

But it’s our old friend Giegerwasright who provides the real answer, in the form of a wall-o-mansplainin’ so giant that I had to shrink the text to even screencap it.

giegerwasright 27 points 10 hours ago (31|4)  OK, my negroes. I'm going to lay this out for you. Because the women in this article and the writer of this article... they aren't interested at all in the male form. Not a single bit. They're just being spoiled brat children (as usual) stomping their feet and nasally sneering "what about you! what about you!" They're just looking for something to whinge about and make demands of (as usual) that they never really have any interest in making use of.  How may women in visual arts profess an adoration for the male form? Can you name a single female visual artist who has expressed her passion for that male form through her art in a manner that is sublime? I can't. I can easily fine male visual artists who do so. Michelangelo's David is a pretty classic example. Everything by Caravaggio stands out quite beautifully. Mapplethorpe's photos of men show a passion for the male form, a passion that ultimately killed him, that I have never in my life seen expressed in a single woman's work. Never. Women don't appreciate or even like the male form very much. They like what it gets them.  You're just as likely to find men who express that adoration for the female form as you will the male. I'd start with Mona Lisa, but I find that painting to be rather reserved and dispassionate. Take a look at the work of John Singer Sargent. Picasso expressed adoration for the female form both in and out of his cubist works. Monet, Manet, Van Gogh, to Man Ray and Helmut Newton. On and on and on is a list of male artists with a visceral and obsessive adoration for the female form.  And female artists? What do they like? Nearly unilaterally, they seem to prefer the female form as well. They are not driven by the same compulsion for the opposite sex that so many male artists seem to experience. They just aren't interested. What did Frida Khalo paint? Herself. Georgia O'Keefe? her vagina. Cindy Sherman? More women. Even pop photographers are more interested in the female form. Look at the work of Bunny Yeager. Women as artists are only concerned with their own form.  The only interest that women have in the male form is it's utility and as fodder for humor. "tee hee! a penis! tee hee!". These women aren't requesting "cocks". They don't want "dicks". They aren't raging for "erections". They want "dongs". Fodder for jokes. Remember when Ensler came out with the Vagina Monologues? We all know it here. The play waxed poetic about the beauty and versimilitude of the female organ. What did men get that year? That year, the penis got "Puppetry of the Penis". A joke. A ridicule. A parlour trick. A fucking carnival act.  So, when women clench their fists and bawl with quivering lower lip "Why dere is no dongz on da tee vee!?!?" I have to respond "Because you don't fucking want them. That's why."

Huh.

So why exactly are women pretending to be interested in seeing more penises on television? So they can point at them and laugh?

Women are such an enigma, especially if you just assume that nothing they ever say is true and that it’s all part of some weird plot to screw with men’s heads.

(H/t to r/againstmensrights for pointing me to geigerwasright’s lovely comment.)

Categories
antifeminism evil sexy ladies irony alert lazy women eating bon bons mansplaining men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny MRA patronizing as heck reddit the eternal solipsism of the MRA mind women in tech

Men’s Rights Redditor: It’s not sexism that holds back women in STEM. It’s just that women are inferior.

Over on the Men’s Rights subreddit, the lovely IHaveALargePenis explains that it’s not sexism holding back women in science and technology. No way! It’s just that women are inferior at science and technology. No sexism involved at all!

IHaveALargePenis 10 points 1 day ago (15|6)      The fact that women are so underrepresented in many STEM fields indicates that there must be some educational, societal, or institutional force pushing them away.  There is. It has a lot to do with women though. First with STEM, the hierarchy in the workforce always favors the smartest/most knowledgeable people. This means you can't flirt your way to the top or simply just "make it" eventually.  The work is somewhat quantifiable, so people can be tracked in how much work they do. You can't sit around and chat or take extra time off and fuck around. People will find out.  Many fields have horrible deadlines and any person not finishing their work on time can slow an entire project and become the weakest link. When you're holding up something that thousands of people are working on, relying on, etc and they're all waiting for you, not fun. Additionally you'll be pushed to do overtime, heavy overtime. When it comes to software development for example, in the last few months leading up to release, you'll be better off bringing extra clothes and a sleeping bag to work. This can apply to virtually all other fields in different ways for different reasons.  Women and men study differently. Women are great and memorizing but don't focus on understanding. This is why there's a relatively equal amount of girls/boys in STEM the first year, but then it significantly favors the boys as time passes. The problem is that women do great on tests, but don't bother to understand that knowledge, which is fairly important later on and everything you learn will be used in the future (as you move from first to 4th year). This is why girls have been doing better (or so it seems) ever since standardized tests.  There are no problems in STEM for women. There's nobody out there trying to hold them back. My university cracked down hard on this shit, even had security cameras installed to ensure there was no harassment or sexism going on. And you know what changed? Nothing.      The key is attacking gender issues from both sides, rather than the BS of encouraging women to enter and just ignoring all problems men have.  What exactly is there to attack? There's 50% more women in college than men. Women have infiltrated every major out there outside of STEM. Do you know how HUGE STEM is? Let me tell you how huge it is. Go look up any non STEM focused University out there (MIT or Standord) and check the faculty for STEM or other majors. You'll find out quickly that the entire STEM curriculum has fewer faculty than a single major like business.

Maybe IHaveALArgePenis should have taken an English class or two and learned what “irony” is.

Also, uh, how exactly are security cameras supposed to guard against sexism? This is a new one to me.

Thanks to Wrecksomething on the AgainstMensRights subreddit for pointing me to this mantastic quote.

 

Categories
antifeminism crackpottery demonspawn dozens of upvotes evil single moms evil women evo psych fairy tales GirlWritesWhat it's science! mansplaining misogyny MRA oppressed men patriarchy playing the victim reactionary bullshit reddit

Men’s Rights Redditors wonder why nobody else realizes that the ladies aren’t oppressed any more

For example, women never have to fight off flying squirrels, which are very bitey, mind you.
For example, women never have to fight off flying squirrels.

So the regulars in the Men’s Rights subreddit are currently discussing one of the most important — if often overlooked — issues of our time, which is: How come nobody but us sees that the ladies aren’t oppressed any more? Or, as  paranoiarodeo497, looking hopefully towards the future, has chosen to put the question: “What future event/tragedy do you think will happen that will make people realize not only are women no longer deprived but in fact equal to men?”

Alas, the Men’s Rightsers aren’t hopeful that anything will wake up the snoozing sheeple. BrambleEdge, for his part, worries that men will remain oppressed forever.

Categories
alpha males antifeminism bad boys crackpottery domestic violence excusing abuse mansplaining men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny MRA reddit whaaaaa?

Men’s Rights Redditor: Nigella Lawson should have expected choking because Saatchi is a rich dude, and rich dudes are EXTREME!

So the regulars in the Men’s Rights subreddit are discussing the Saatchi/Lawson divorce, as we were yesterday, and, well, it’s going better than expected, in that quite a few of them are actually willing to accept that Saatchi actually abused Lawson and that his demand that she defend him against the accusations of abuse thus don’t really make much sense. I guess that’s what happens when the abuse is literally caught on camera and printed on the front page of every British tabloid.

But not everyone there has responded so, well, rationally. Take this fellow:

Sasha_ 10 points 1 day ago  This is one of those things where anything you say will run up against the absolutism of the ideologues. The fact is that neither Charles Saatchi or Nigella Lawson are 'normal' people - he's a billionaire art-collector and ad-man, she's a lifestyle guru and millionaire in her own right. They get up to all kinds of shit that don't make any sense to anyone outside that kind of rarefied circle. Was he wrong to throttle her in public? Yeah, probably. But he's the kind of fella who thinks nothing of chartering a helicopter to scatter rose petals on her birthday, so you know, it's all going to be a bit fucking extreme isn't it? This is the thing; if I began a relationship with a playboy centrefold, I wouldn't be THAT surprised to come home one day and find her in bed getting strange with the tennis-coach. I'd be disappointed, but not surprised.  Same goes if you marry the world's No1 golfer, or Oscar Pistorius - you're going for the extremes here, and if you're going to fuck a Rolling Stone, things are going to get fucking odd at times.

Dude, I’m pretty sure the rich and/or weird are subject to the same laws (and moral judgements) as the rest of us. Billionaire art collectors don’t get a free pass to choke their wives in public. Nor is that equivalent to a hypothetical Playboy centerfold cheating on you.

Also, as a point of fact, Saatchi isn’t a billionaire. According to Celebrity Net Worth, he’s worth something on the order of $100 million; the site estimates Lawson to be worth $15 million.