Category: masculinity

Categories
antifeminism evil women hypocrisy I'm totally being sarcastic idiocy masculinity MGTOW MGTOW paradox misandry misogyny oppressed men PUA

Some of those video game princesses ain’t so Peachy

Why can't they all be like Princess Peach?

It’s almost impossible to catalogue all the ways men are oppressed by women in contemporary gynocratic society. There are so many! For example, did you know that men are oppressed by female characters in video games? I know, right? The last bastion of red-blooded manliness, invaded by imaginary ladies!

Luckily, the fellows at MGTOWforums.com are on the case, exposing this foul virtual misandry. I Am started off a recent discussion on the subject by asking

WTF is with empowered women in video games now? …

I see a new trend in the video/computer game world and that is the increase in strong playable female characters.

Now, I am no hardcore gamer but I do play computer games often and the recent one I have been playing recently is Shogun 2 total war. Now for those who don’t know what this game is, it is a strategy game based on the military of feudal Japan. I recently bought an upgrade for the game the other day and guess what one of the strongest military units was? Nuns. I shit you not. The nuns had an attack 20% -40% higher than most units in the game. Somehow I doubt that in real life a nun would have swung a sword or used a spear faster and harder than a feudal warlord, and this game was based on history.

Clearly nuns are incapable of manlike swordplay, though it is true that they are capable reenacting famous internet panda sneeze videos. (I have seen video proof of this.) But Shogun 2 does not depict them sneezing like pandas. It depicts them fighting.

This is an outrage because video games are meant to be a perfectly accurate reflection of reality.  Obviously there is nothing even slightly unrealistic about any of this:

Most of us dudes are in fact capable of karate-chopping heads in two. We just don’t like to show off all the time.

I think I have the right to ask steam and other gaming companes: WTF with the subliminal brainwashing? What now when I buy or play a game women will be doing all the ass kicking? …

I call bullshit on this subject. Video games are the last place for guys to hang out and now women are taking over. Why not just save us the trouble and instead of eliminating our fantasy world just throw us in work camp to provide for thier bastard children (literally speaking) while they shit all over us…wait they already do that.

I Am is not the only dude who’s noticed this alarming femtrend. Goldenfetus added his observations:

I’ve noticed this too, and it drives me insane. Was co-oping Gears 3 last month and there’s a point where 2nd player has to take over a female character. Almost ruined the game for me. It may seem minor, but once you’re aware of this type of brainwashing it’s impossible to ignore. There’s no way a slim female could keep up with the massive battle-hardened male Gears in that kind of environment. They would be a liability as they are in real life combat.

Exactly! By contrast, the male characters in Gears of War 3 are all completely accurate representations of real-world men.

This is what dudes look like, for real.

Goldenfetus continued:

You’ll see the same thing in most stat-based role-playing games as well, where you have the option of a female player character – like Fallout, Elder Scrolls, Mass Effect, Dragon Age, D&D, etc. The women never have any strength or intelligence penalties compared to the males. … They want to give the impression that people of any race, gender, and sexual-orientation are interchangeable – that there are no differences in ability between them, and that only a bigot could think otherwise. I’m sick of it too.

At the very least, female characters should be depicted as carriers of cooties.

Despite the very serious subject matter – video game misandry is never funny! – Xtc tried to lighten the mood with a little humor:

It would be hilarious to portray the female characters realistically. If you chose the female character in your FPS [First Person Shooter] she would have to move very slowly, dragging the gun around. You could build in some extra shake to the crosshairs to represent hopeless accuracy. Every time you needed to reload your gun, instead of just pressing a button, you’d have to find a male character and go through some flirting dialogue options to persuade him to do it for you. One out of every four missions the game would tell you that you were sitting out this one due to ‘women’s issues’.

Calloway, for his part, offered some historical perspective:

This is nothing new. I got heavy into gaming back in the late 90’s and even back then they had Tomb Raider, S.I.N., etc. Even in the original Unreal, you played as a big-breasted female.

I saw a documentary on the making of the original Tomb Raider once. The lead character, Lara Croft, was originally going to be a man. They saw him as an Indiana Jones-type character. Then, one of the designers suggested it be a woman because “if you’re going to be playing a game for hours, you might as well have something good to look at”. …

When you first take the red pill, it’s amazing the things you see. It’s as if you had blinders on before, and all of sudden they’ve been removed, allowing you to actually understand what you’ve been seeing.

Yep. And what you’ve been seeing is Lara Croft’s ass. Lara Croft’s ass oppresses men! The red pill tells me so!

Also, those tiny misandrist shorts just make the gynpression worse.

Now we come to the clincher.

When you try to get romantic with the imaginary ladies in video games, they don’t act like Roissy and those dudes say ladies act. I mean, you can’t even neg them! As Dave sadly pointed out:

I remember about 12 years ago playing the Baldur’s Gate rpg series and there were some romance dialog paths between your character and some of the women who could join your group but you had to treat them very nice. You couldn’t give them any attitude or make fun of them otherwise it would be over.

Basically you have to be a total mangina towards women in most games if you want to bed them.

Even imaginary ladies are stuck up bitches!

The horror!

 

I had a

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
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
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
links masculinity oppressed men patriarchy racism terrorism victimhood

Links: Michael Kimmel and Amanda Marcotte on masculinity, misogyny and Anders Breivik

The world doesn't need any more macho Nazis

A couple excellent pieces on Anders Breivik and misogyny.

First: The other day I posted a link to a piece by Michael Kimmel on Breivik and the sexual politics of far-right thought. It turned out that the article was a draft that got published prematurely.

Now the final version of the post is officially up at Sociological Images:  A tale of two terrorists redux. Kimmel argues that what we know about Breivik thus far

indicate[s] that … it will be impossible to fully understand this horrific act without understanding how gender operates as a rhetorical and political device for domestic terrorists.

These members of the far right consider themselves Christian Crusaders for Aryan Manhood, vowing its rescue from a feminizing welfare state. Theirs is the militarized manhood of the heroic John Rambo – a manhood that celebrates their God-sanctioned right to band together in armed militias if anyone, or any governmental agency, tries to take it away from them. If the state and capital emasculate them, and if the masculinity of the “others” is problematic, then only “real” white men can rescue the American Eden or the bucolic Norwegian countryside from a feminized, multicultural, androgynous immigrant-inspired melting pot.

Meanwhile, Amanda Marcotte at Pandagon offers some thoughts on Misogyny and Terrorism:

[T]here’s definitely a strong link between misogyny and violence that can’t be denied.  Misogynists are far likelier to be violent people than non-misogynists, which is why rape and wife-beating are such common crimes.  (Domestic violence is the number one cause of injury for women 15-44.)  All bigotry provokes violence at its ends, of course.  This isn’t the Oppression Olympics.  But misogyny and violence go hand in hand so often because misogynists really buy deeply into the idea that women are weak and men are “strong”, by which they mean aggressive.  A steady drumbeat of misogynist thought couldn’t be better designed to reach the unhinged and cause them to lash out violently, all while imagining themselves to be big, tough men who claim they were forced—with “why did you make me do this?” being the battle cry of wife beaters—into violence.

Discuss.

Categories
links masculinity misogyny MRA reddit self-promotion terrorism

Guest post for Shakesville

Just a note: I’ve got a guest post up on Shakesville today. It’s basically a condensed and polished version of my recent Breivik posts. (If you decide to comment there, be aware that their comments are much more heavily moderated than the comments here.)

And while I’m doing the link thing, here’s an excellent piece about Breivik’s misogyny:  Michelle Goldberg’s Norway Killer’s Hatred of Women on TheDailyBeast. And here is a not-terribly-excellent discussion of the piece on the Men’s Rights subreddit.

NOTE: This post originally linked to a piece by Michael Kimmel on Sociological Images. That piece, it turns out, hasn’t been officially published there yet, so I removed the dead link and a link to a cached version in the comments here. I’ll post the official link when the piece goes up.

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
bad boys feminism links masculinity misogyny MRA MRA paradox oppressed men

Ozymandias asks: Who cares about Men's Rights?

The Who does not care (about its equipment)

Great post by Ozymandias on her blog on the subject of “Who cares about men’s rights?” (Answer, Ozymandias, for one.) She offers a devastating critique of the Men’s Rights Movement and a critique of feminism I think I half-agree with as well.  (She critiques feminists for not caring enough about men’s issues and responding to them with “but what about the menz” mockery; I think she’s got a point, but the fact is that lots of feminists do in fact work on behalf of men and men’s issues, from feminists involved in fighting for men and women falsely accused of sex crimes to feminist shelter workers who work on a regular basis to help male victims of abuse.)

Anyway, you should pop on over and read it.

It’s being discussed all over Reddit as well.

The post also inspired a debate on the old “chicks only want to date jerks” thing, which she’s broken out into a separate post.

EDITED TO ADD: And now The Spearhead has noticed the post.

Categories
alpha males beta males masculinity pics PUA saturday morning cartoons

Saturday Morning Cartoons: Choosing a husband, and the world’s first PUA

In light of some recent discussions here, I thought this cartoon seemed relevant.  I got it from my new favorite Tumblr blog, Comically Vintage. It’s astounding how many of the comic panels posted there — especially those from melodramatic 60s-70s romance comics — apply to the arguments in and around the manosphere today. Perhaps because the world in which these guys live is as imaginary and out-of-date as the fantasy world of 40 or 50 year-old Romance comics.

And while we’re on the subject, here’s a bonus cartoon. Here, crawling from the primordial soup, is the world’s first PUA! (Granted, he hasn’t quite worked out all of the tenets of modern Game, but, hey, he’s still a lizard. Just as human evolution took millions of years, evolving something as complex as modern PUA theory takes time.)

Hmm. That fish over there has sprouted legs. Is that an IOI?
Categories
masculinity

New study: Braiding hair makes men want to punch things

Zach, is that a ... purse?

When a guy feels his masculinity is being undermined, he may want to punch something. That, in any case, is the implication of a new study by two psychology researchers at the University of South Florida. As the press release for the study explains:

In several studies, [the researchers] used [the] task [of braiding hair] to force men to behave in a “feminine” manner, and recorded what happened. In one study, some men braided hair; others did the more masculine—or gender-neutral—task of braiding rope. Given the options afterwards of punching a bag or doing a puzzle, the hair-braiders overwhelmingly chose the former. When one group of men braided hair and others did not, and all punched the bag, the hair-braiders punched harder. When they all braided hair and only some got to punch, the non-punchers evinced more anxiety on a subsequent test.

Aggression, write the authors, is a “manhood-restoring tactic.”

As is the case with most experimental psychology studies, it’s not clear to what degree this result applies to the real world, rather than to a specific set of people asked to perform a specific task in a lab setting. (There are a lot of bullshit experimental studies out there.) But the logic behind this study makes perfect sense, and I’m inclined to give it some credibility. I imagine the logic applies equally well to a range of supposedly “emasculating” tasks, like holding a woman’s purse, buying tampons, or, I dunno, watching “The View.”

Of course, with the first two examples, there is an alternative solution to the problem: to not actually give a shit about idiotic masculine stereotypes. What on earth is the big deal about buying tampons, or braiding hair? I find holding a purse annoying, but I’d be equally annoyed to hold a male friend’s wallet. (I just don’t like shopping with other people.)

In the case of The View, I can’t see a solution. Pretty much any exposure to that show makes me want to punch the television. Of course, I have female friends who feel the same way. As Zach Galifianakis once put it:

I have to stop crying when I watch “The View.” It’s not because of the topics at hand, I just feel sorry for that couch.

I think we all do.