Category: MGTOW

Categories
antifeminism evil women further reading lying liars MGTOW MRA Uncategorized

Factchecking a list of “Hateful Quotes From Feminists”

 

Making a list, checking it twice.

Periodically, in the comments here, someone will post a dubious list of “evil feminist quotes” they have found on some Men’s Rights or antifeminist website. These lists are always faintly ridiculous, filled with decades-old quotes from a handful of radical feminists (most notably, Andrea Dworkin), most of whom have been soundly criticized by other feminists and whose ideas have been rejected by the majority of feminists today. The lists also tend to be very sloppily put together. When I’ve gone to check the accuracy of these lists, I’ve invariably run into problems — one quote may have come from a character in a novel, another may be a quote that doesn’t reflect the author’s own point of view, and so on.

Recently, one of the antifeminists who regularly comments here (Cold) posted a link to one such list, helpfully titled “Hateful Quotes From Feminists.” It’s fairly typical of these sorts of lists: many of the quotes are decades old, there are ten quotes from a single radical feminist — yes, Andrea Dworkin — and the list is sloppily put together.

I decided to give this list a fairly thorough fact-checking. And the results were, well, more or less what I expected, which is to say that the list was a sloppy mixture of truth, half-truth and outright falsehood.

The story, in brief: Some of the quotes I checked were indeed accurate — or mostly accurate. But several quotes were simply imaginary, or uttered by fictional characters; one was a complete misrepresentation of what the author was saying; two were paraphrased, which is to say, words put in the mouths of feminist authors by feminist critics; some were from obscure or anonymous sources, and in a few cases it wasn’t clear if those quoted were feminists at all; several were improperly sourced. There were a number of quotes that didn’t specify where they were from, and which turned out to be impossible to check. And then there were a couple of quotes which were not actually hateful at all.

I didn’t check everything in the list, but –if you have the patience for it — let’s go through what I did check, as a sort of case study in the shoddiness of much antifeminist propaganda.

Let’s start off with the very first quote:

“In a patriarchal society all heterosexual intercourse is rape because women, as a group, are not strong enough to give meaningful consent.” Catherine MacKinnon in Professing Feminism: Cautionary Tales from the Strange World of Women’s Studies, p. 129.

We’re off to a bad start here. This is not a quote from MacKinnon. The words were in fact written by Daphne Patai and Noretta Koertge, the actual authors of “Professing Feminism,” a polemical book critical of feminism. They purport to summarize the views of MacKinnon and Dworkin, though, as Snopes points out in its debunking of the false quote, both M and D have specifically stated that they don’t believe intercourse is rape. Apparently the quote was attributed to MacKinnon in a column by right-wing columnist Cal Thomas, which is evidently how it entered the land of antifeminist mythology. Somewhere along the line, Catharine had her name changed to Catherine.

Then there’s this alleged quote from Andrea Dworkin:

“Heterosexual intercourse is the pure, formalized expression of contempt for women’s bodies.”

According to Wikiquote, this quote is quite literally fictional:

The first appearance of this quote is from P: A Novel (2003) by Andrew Lewis Conn as a quote from the fictional feminist “Corinne Dwarfkin”. The original reads “In capsule form, my thesis is that heterosexual intercourse is the pure, distilled expression of men’s contempt for women.” In the slightly altered form given above, the quote is attributed in several books to Andrea Dworkin. Neil Boyd, in Big Sister (2004) attributes the quote to Letters from a War Zone, however, this quote, nor any one with similar phrasing, appears in that work.

Indeed, our listmaker seem to have a lot of trouble quoting Dworkin correctly. A bunch of the quotes are taken from her book Letters From a War Zone, which I happen to own. The first quote I checked was this one:

“The newest variations on this distressingly ancient theme center on hormones and DNA: men are biologically aggressive; their fetal brains were awash in androgen; their DNA, in order to perpetuate itself, hurls them into murder and rape.” Andrea Dworkin, Letters from a War Zone, p. 114.

It’s a weird quote, which sounds a lot like it’s coming from the the middle of a complicated argument. That’s because it is. And when you read what precedes it, it becomes clear that  it’s NOT a statement of Dworkin’s own beliefs. She was in fact summarizing (in her own words) the beliefs of “male supremacist” sociobiologists like Edward O. Wilson. It may or may not be a fair summary of their views, but that’s not the point: it’s NOT what she thought. Later in the paragraph, in fact, she compared these views to Hitler’s.

The other quotes from the book are more or less accurate. Words are missing, moved from one sentence to another, verb tenses are changed; they’re very sloppy transcriptions, but at least they aren’t complete and utter misrepresentations of what Dworkin wrote.

There’s also quote from Andrea Dworkin that’s listed as being from “Liberty, p. 58.” Dworkin never wrote a book called Liberty. But I found the quote in what seems to be a scholarly work; it’s evidently from Dworkin’s book Our Blood.

Finally, there are a few other alleged quotes from Dworkin; they don’t have sources listed for them. I found the quotes elsewhere online — but only on dubious “quote pages” and other iterations of “evil feminist” lists. They sound Dworkin-ish, but given the listmaker’s track record I have no faith that they are actually real, correctly transcribed Dworkin.

It’s bizarre. How hard is it to find hair-raising quotes from Andrea Dworkin? Dworkin was so radical that most feminists disagree with her, sometimes violently. You could practically pick a sentence at random from almost any of her books and chances are good it would offend somebody — including me. A number of her writings are available online. How lazy and sloppy do you have to be to fuck up your Dworkin quotes like this?

Let’s now turn to Marilyn French’s famously fictional quote:

“All men are rapists and that’s all they are.” Marilyn French in People, February 20, 1983

Oh, the quote is real — she wrote it — but it is not a statement of French’s beliefs. Nor did it originate in People magazine. It is a line of dialogue from her book The Woman’s Room. Wikipedia, take it away:

Following the rape of Val’s daughter Chris, Val states (over Mira’s protests), “Whatever they may be in public life, whatever their relationships with men, in their relationships with women, all men are rapists, and that’s all they are. They rape us with their eyes, their laws, and their codes” (p. 433). Critics have sometimes quoted Val’s dialogue as evidence of French’s misandry without noting that the passage is only spoken by one of many characters in the novel.

Now, it’s true that this sentence was quoted in People magazine — in the issue of Feb 20 1979, not Feb 20, 1983 as claimed. It’s not clear from the rather sloppy People article that this is a line from the book, but it is.

In the article, French notes that the book is partly based on her experience — drawing on the emotions she herself felt after her own daughter was raped.

“Sometimes I felt so violent about it and how the courts treated her,” French admits, “that there seemed no recourse but to go out, buy a gun and shoot the kid who did it, and the lawyers too. I couldn’t help my own child.” Plenty of that rage made its way into The Women’s Room. “I’m less angry now. Being too deep in anger corrodes your interior.”

So, again, it is very clear that the “all men are rapists” quote is meant to reflect a character awash in rage and pain; it is not an ideological statement of misandry.

The “Hateful Quotes” list also contains a bunch of quotes from people I’ve never heard of; they’re obviously not major feminist figures, and may not even be feminists. Gordon Fitch? Never heard of the guy, and can’t find anything about him online.

Hodee Edwards? Never heard of her either, and I can only find a handful of mentions of her online, but she’s mentioned in the footnotes of a Catharine MacKinnon book, and it looks as though she is, or at least was, a feminist with Marxist leanings. But there is no way to even find out what the source of the quote is — a book, an essay, a quotation in a news story? — much less actually find the source and confirm that the quote is real.

EDITED TO ADD: I’ve been contacted by Hodee Edwards’ granddaughter, who tells me that her grandmother never said or wrote the quote attributed to her; while Edwards was indeed a Marxist and a feminist, she was not anti-sex. (The faux quote in question claims that all sex is rape.) Edwards has recently passed away, and her family members have been, the granddaughter tells me, “very distressed to learn that this quote has somehow been linked to my grandmother’s name on the Internet.”

Then there’s Pat Poole:

Melbourne City Councilwoman Pat Poole announced her opposition to renaming a street for Martin Luther King: “I wonder if he really accomplished things, or if he just stirred people up and caused a lot of riots.”

Who the hell is Pat Poole? I looked her up, and yes, she was a city councilwoman in Melbourne, Florida, but I was unable to find out much beyond that. Is the quote accurate? I don’t know. There’s no source given, and I can’t find the original quote online. Is she actually a feminist, or is the author of the list simply assuming she is one because she’s a woman?

And then of course there is the anonymous “Liberated Woman” whose quote ends the list. She definitely sounds like a feminist. We just don’t know for sure if she or the quote are real.

Moving on, I can’t help but notice that a number of the allegedly hateful quotes are in fact not hateful at all. Take, for example, Barbara Ehrenreich’s quote about the family, which is in fact part of a sharply written essay on “family values.” You can find it here.

Here’s another distinctly non-hateful quote:

“Women take their roles of caretakers very seriously and when they hear of someone who’s taken advantage of a child, they react more strongly than men do.” – Kathleen C. Faller, professor of social work at the University of Michigan

Faller, if she did indeed say this, may or may not be correct, but it’s hard to see how this is “hateful.” Women on average spend much more time caring for children than men do and it may well be that, on average, they react more strongly than men. I couldn’t find the quote in question — again, this is because the listmaker didn’t actually provide the source — but her faculty web page is here.

Then there’s this “hateful” quote on religion:

“God is going to change. We women… will change the world so much that He won’t fit anymore.” Naomi Goldenberg, Changing of the Gods: Feminism and the End of Traditional Religions.

The quote is real; Goldenberg is indeed a feminist theologian. But here’s a little newsflash: There are lots of people in the world, feminist and non-feminist, who do not believe in traditional notions of God. Or in God at all. Nietzsche famously said “God is Dead,” Richard Dawkins says God is “a delusion,” and about 80 zillion internet athiests (many of them not feminists in the slightest) regularly compare belief in God to belief in unicorns, fairies, and Santa Claus.

I checked out a few other quotes on the list. The Hillary Clinton quote is accurate; the source is here.  The Barbara Jordan quote appears in a Texas Monthly article here.

The quote from Catherine Comins — a favorite “evil feminist quote” amongst MRAs — has its origins in a Time magazine article, but it is not actually a quote from her; it is someone else’s summary of what she told Time in the article in question. Nor do we know the full context in which she spoke.

I don’t have the time or patience to fact-check the rest of the list. If anyone out there happens to have time and/or patience, or happens to own any of the books that are cited as sources, feel free to fact check it yourself and post your findings. (EDITED TO ADD: triplanetary has risen to the challenge, and has factchecked the rest of the list, as well as offering some excellent commentary on the alleged “hatefulness” of many of the quotes. You can find the post here.)

The numerous errors in this list — some minor, some huge — say something not only about the creator of this list but about all those who’ve distributed this list without, clearly, bothering to check anything in it .  (Or, in the case of Cold, to contine to distribute a list he’s pretty sure is less than reliable.) Is this the result of laziness, or dishonesty? A bit of both, I imagine.

But I think this list is also a symptom of the tendency of many in the Men’s Rights movement to inflate the evils of their opponents. So many MRAs are so determined to prove that their supposed oppression is worse than that of women, and so determined to blame it all on feminism, that they need to make their opponents larger than life and twice as nasty. Given that the feminism they fight is largely a paranoid fantasy, bearing very little resemblance to feminism as it actually exists in the world today, it’s hardly shocking that a number of the quotes on this little list are fictional — and that none of the MRAs posting this list here and there on the internet seem to have even noticed (or, if they have noticed, to care, or at least to care enough to stop distributing the list). When you’re fighting phantoms in your own mind, the truth doesn’t really matter, does it?

Given how poorly this list held up to my fack-checking attempts, from now on I will consider this list and others like it spam, and delete any comments that  link to them.

If any of you antifeminists still feel the desire to post “evil feminist quotes” in the comments here, you may do so, but only if you (or the list that you link to) provides clickable links to the original sources of the quotes in question.  If you can’t provide a link to the source, I’ll delete it.

When I quote from MRAs and MGTOW-ites and other misogynists on this blog, I provide links to the sources. What’s so hard about that?

EDIT: Fixed links, and a few verb tenses.
—

If you enjoyed this post, would you kindly* use the “Share This” or one of the other buttons below to share it on Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, or wherever else you want. I appreciate it.

*Yes, that was a Bioshock reference.

Categories
marriage strike men who should not ever be with women ever MGTOW misogyny oppressed men sex Uncategorized

>The Price of Love

>

Apparently, it’s only 15p!
With Valentine’s day fast approaching, I thought I’d point you all to an interesting little set of online apps, courtesy of the fellows at NoMarriage.com: calculators that purport to tell dudes the true cost of sex — with wives, girlfriends, and what the kids today are calling “randoms.” 
The assumptions behind each of these calculators are pretty revealing: they essentially assume that guys generally resent the women they’re involved with, and only spend time with them because it’s necessary to pretend to be interested in them in order to get sex. The calculators also assume that guys are more or less paying for everything.
 
I ran a few numbers, and the results are telling: for the guys for whom these calculators are basically designed — that is, guys who generally dislike spending non-sexy time with women, and who believe that “every kiss begins with Kay” — the cost can easily be hundreds of dollars for each and every time they and their special ladies manage to set aside their resentments long enough to engage in a grudging bout  of the old in-and-out.

By contrast, for guys going out with independent (and perhaps even feminist) women they actually like and enjoy spending time with, who pay their own way, and who live nearby, the putative cost of sex can literally be pennies a pop. For married men who actually like their working wives, the cost of sex can actually be negative, because it’s cheaper to cohabit than to live alone.

In a nutshell: misogyny costs you, big time. But actually liking women? That makes sense — dollars and sense!

For dedicated Men Going Their Own Way, the calculators, with a little tweaking, can also be used to calculate the cost of NOT having sex. Using the girlfriend calculator, replace “How many hours do you spend having stupid conversations with your GF (per week)” with “How many hours do you spend having stupid conversations with other MGTOW (per week).” Ignore the rest of the questions until you get to the one about your hourly wage. Then, for the question asking how many times you have sex per week, ignore this wording and simply input “1.” Voila! You have calculated the (opportunity) cost per week of not having sex!

So, dear readers, what is YOUR cost of sex?
— 
If you enjoyed this post, would you kindly* use the “Share This” or one of the other buttons below to share it on Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, or wherever else you want. I appreciate it. 
*Yes, that was a Bioshock reference.
Categories
douchebaggery feminism MGTOW violence against men/women

>”I don’t hate women. I just want them all to die bitter and alone.”

>

Non-haters also gonna hate.

The “Rant you very much” section of NiceGuy’s MGTOW [Men Going Their Own Way] forum is the place for commenters to post stuff that they think might be too crazy and “out there” for the forum’s other sections. Given what else is posted over on NiceGuy’s — the stomping ground of a fellow named Nightstorm and his wild fantasies of moustrap vaginas and leech women —  this is a tall order indeed.

NiceGuy richbansha tried his best to live up to these high expectations with a recent rant titled “Why not hate?” Why bother to pretend that we don’t hate women, rich asks his fellow NiceGuys, when this won’t actually do us any good? As for him, he admits his hatred up front. (I’ve taken the liberty of bolding some expecially ranty bits in the quote below, and adding a paragraph break.)

Do I “hate women”? You bet your ass!  …

[T]he most common reason why one of us will deny the possibility that we hate them  is not not look bad. Is there any doubt that they don’t hate YOU or that those listening in wouldn’t just as soon see you violated? … No matter what you do, you can still expect the most inconscionable treatment at the hands of AW [American Women]. If the response to both kindness and cruelty are identical, what is the reason for such a lopsided favoritism for appeasement?

When saying that you want to rape and cut up a woman with a band saw is met with the exact same reaction as saying you want to want to buy them a drink, what … is the incentive to not be hateful and violent? We have seen for ourselves that refraining only makes you are more likely target for hatred and violence. … So when a stinking cavern gets out of hand why not pulp her? You know you want to. Does anyone really think that stopping yourself or saying you would stop yourself will make it any easier on you?

In a followup post, he blames it all on the alleged tendency of women to adore “bad boys” and treat kind, considerate nice guys — richbansha apparently thinks he is, or at least was, one of them — like dirt:

My fate was decided in 7th grade when that girl said I had cooties. …  If you ever got a “P” in the box on your report card that says “Respects the rights of others” then you are a marked man. …

I have suffered far more for the things that I had nothing to do with than any active and intentional infraction that I ever committed. … Who do skanks even call the cops on? Violent meth dealer Bf who routinely beats her and impregnates her or the honest, hardworking auditor who pays for the meth dealer’s offspring? Is it any wonder that I think dudes should get on the good side of that equation?

The “good side,” of course, being the side of of the girlfriend-beating “bad-boy” meth dealer.

So, yeah, that’s what a rant on NiceGuy’s looks like.

More interesting to me than the actual rant, though, are the responses of others in the forum. TheDude suggested he tone it down a bit: 

So you think that violence may be the answer when there are thousands of cops who would love to beat your ass because you “disrespected a lady?” I think talking about it on this board just makes us a target and it is bad advice.

In other words, the voice of reason in this discussion frames his advice in entirely self-interested terms: Don’t attack women because then cops will beat your ass. Don’t talk like this on the forum, because it makes MGTOW look bad.

And then there are those who chime in to say they didn’t hate women … but. There is always a “but.” A couple of the “buts” are fairly mild and inoffensive. the american, echoing the famous Dr. Freud, notes

I don’t hate women. I just don’t understand their thought processes.

Our friend Yohan goes a little further (bold in original):

I am not hateful or violent, but I am highly MISTRUSTING against all and everything a Western female will ever tell me.

It’s not only about my past, it’s about the present legal situation in feminist countries, which encourages females of any age to consider men of any age, even young boys and old people, even your own father as nothing but trash except for quick money supply.

About hate, it should be said, hate is really bad for your health cousing heart problems, stomach problems etc..

And then there are … these. Richard Cranium blames those evil Sufragettes (and the manginas who loved them) for it all:

It’s not a matter of hating women per se, it’s hating what they’ve become, or more specifically what manginas have let them become. As has been stated here & elsewhere, the day we let them out of the kitchen and let them vote was the day it all went to hell.

Big R takes his non-hatred to a whole other level:

I dont hate them either. I want them to live to see how lonely and suicidal they,ll become when they find out all the men have dumped them forever in the feminized world. I want them to live and suffer without men or the attention they receive from us. …

I have turned out just a little vengeful towards women for the treatment I have received from them throughout my life. Just seeing an AW maybe lying on the sidewalk after a drunken suicidal depressive drinking binge after being dumped and cheated on would brighten up my day.

Our friend Yohan obliged this last wish by posting a photo of a drunk woman lying on the floor in what appears to be a pool of her own urine, with a friendly little note advising Big R to “have a nice day.”

So very considerate, these Men Going Their Own Way.

—

If you enjoyed this post, would you kindly* use the “Share This” or one of the other buttons below to share it on Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, or wherever else you want. I appreciate it.

*Yes, that was a Bioshock reference.

Categories
cupcake douchebaggery men who should not ever be with women ever MGTOW misogyny sex Uncategorized

>The Cupcake Files, Part Three: MGTOW Proboards Forum Edition

>

Delicious, but deadly!

As I pointed out in the previous two installments of  The Cupcake Files, the Men Going Their Own Way movement has taken the deliciously innocent word “cupcake” and turned it into a synonym for an evil-she-bitch-from-hell.

Today, quotes on “cupcake” from the MGTOW proboards forum. (I’m too lazy to provide links for every example; they all can be found by searching for the word “cupcake” on the forum.)

Cupcake: Uses more than her fair share of health care resources.

[O]utside of sports medicine, 90% of health care is consumed by cunts. Men usually die from our first encounter with the system (heart attack, accident, violence, etc.) It is the cunts and their breeding that devour most of the health care dollars spent in this country. Probably even higher when you consider most men have chronic conditions as a result of either dangerous work to support cupcake or they live in total and abject stress due to having a manipulative withholding shrew at home who has racked up so much debt the man knows he’ll be working until he is 104.


Cupcake: A monster disguised as a cupcake.

Ever notice how the less attractive females generally have the better personalities? Why do you think that is? Do you think unattractive females are genetically predisposed to have fun, laid-back personalities?

No, of course not. They have better personalities because they are making up for a flaw in another department. They are getting away with the maximum they can get away with, but underneath that fun cupcake is a MONSTER.


Cupcake: Should probably be forbidden from using Facebook

If cupcake has a facebook account you are basically giving her a free pass to cheat on you. She will have old flings on her account, past men she was interested in, all it takes is for you to piss her off one day and she will have one these men provide a “shoulder to cry on”.


Cupcake: Has a loaded gun, and it’s pointed at YOU, mister!

The gun is loaded, cocked and pointed at your head. Cupcake has had her finger on the trigger from the moment you said “I do” and she will pull it the moment you cease to entertain her.

Cupcake: Tired of having sex with you, but enjoys luxury cruises.

I will admit, it feels good to eat, have sex, fall asleep, then wake up in again for morning sex but what guys don’t realize is that this does not last indefinitely .

Eventually, you get pussyfied from all this pleasure and you start putting up with more and more female demands as her pussy chips away at you to the point where you wake up one day and you have 3 kids, no friends, no hobbies, you’re overweight, she refused sex for the second week, and now you have to go to work in a few hours to put in a 12 hour shift because cupcake wants to go on a luxury cruise where she just might have sex with you; but even then, it won’t be all that great because she’s now overweight and don’t care.

—

If you enjoyed this post, would you kindly use the “Share This” or one of the other buttons below to share it on Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, or wherever else you want. I appreciate it.

Categories
cupcake hypergamy men who should not ever be with women ever MGTOW misogyny Uncategorized

>The Cupcake Files, Part Two: NiceGuys Edition

>

Grr! Argh!

As I pointed out in The Cupcake Files: Part One, the Men Going Their Own Way movement has taken the deliciously innocent word “cupcake” and turned it into a synonym for evil-she-bitch-from-hell.

Today we continue our  look at the characteristics of a truly modern cupcake — relying, this time, on the words of the good fellows at NiceGuy’s MGTOW forum. (I’m too lazy to provide links for every example; they all can be found by searching for the word “cupcake” on NiceGuy.)


Cupcake: A fan of cocaine. And abusive criminals.

What attracts the hottest females today? Simple. He has to physically and emotionally abuse her, have a police record and a cocaine habit (and must share the coke with cupcake) then he fucks her up and down the stairs, gets her pregnant, then leaves her forever off to the next hairy hole.

Cupcake: Less interesting than your dude friends, except you can fuck her.

[T]ake away hormones and what’s left?? You’re going to hang around cupcake for: her intriguing political views?, her love of sports, cars and motorcycles?, her culinary skills and the fact that she’s a selfless friend? Point is most women these days have NOTHING to offer a man & reply solely on exploiting men.

Cupcake: The cause of global warming.

Global warming is caused by women, why do you think rich men tear down the planet to make so much money, because some gold digging cunt has to have $20K in cloths a week, 3 SUV’s a year, 8 million shoes, etc, etc

Women constantly brag that they control the world, well why are we blaming the guy destroying the forest to supply cupcake with bubble bath oil. That’s like blaming the slave picking cotton.

Cupcake: Controller of the Nookie Faucet. Not obligated to stick around if she doesn’t want to.

You can have all the discussions you want, but Cupcake has the unalienable right to Change Her Mind, at any time, for any reason or none.

Social convention, the divorce courts, a tradition of chivalry, and Cupcake‘s control of the nookie faucet all conspire such that if you don’t meet her demands, as they change and evolve, you’re fucking toast, Jack.

Stay tuned for The Cupcake Files: Part Three.

—

If you enjoyed this post, would you kindly use the “Share This” or one of the other buttons below to share it on Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, or wherever else you want. I appreciate it.

Categories
antifeminism feminism ghosts homophobia men who should not ever be with women ever MGTOW misogyny racism reactionary bullshit

>Disorganized atheistic rectal sodomizing feminists of the world unite!

>

More from The Ghost Nation, a sort of MGTOW-ish site that hates MGTOW. And “rectal sodomites” and, well, a long list of others.

When novelist-turned-film-critic James Agee saw Bill and Coo, a feature-length 1948 film starring nothing but trained birds, he described it as “by conservative estimate, the God-damndest thing ever seen.” I believe that title may now belong to The Ghost Nation. Here’s a useful list from the site detailing The Personality Traits of Feminists:

If you are a feminist, you do not sincerely believe in God, you endorse Zionism, rectal sodomites, violence, police brutality, are two-faced, a liar, treacherous, a prospective adulterer, swear a lot, disorganized, vulgar, angry, a hacker and cybercriminal, untrustworthy, unfair, unjust, you share private information, are a misandrist, you commit blackmail and extortion, you are unpatriotic, you do not support the Constitution, are not humble, you hate straight whitey, have an erratic temperament, raise your voice to get a point across, are a sexual deviant, sadistic, violent, manipulative, fake friendships, enthusiastically associate with criminals, Zionists, sociopaths and psychopaths, cheat, are worthless and nonconstructive, are anti-heterosexual, heterophobic, atheist, agnostic, engage in gang-stalking, promote ugliness and scatology, do not respect other’s privacy, and do not believe that all rectal sodomites are homosexuals.

Hmm. I’ll just go through the list item by item: Yes, not exactly, yes, depends, no, no, no, no, no, yes, yes, yes, sometimes, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, erratic or … erotic?, sometimes, yes, maybe a little, sometimes, not really, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, yes, no, ugliness not really but scatology sometimes, no, yes.

I hope I didn’t leave out any answers and inadvertently make myself out to be a blackmailing gang-stalking adulterous cybercriminal rather than a humble disorganized agnostic who is friendly towards rectal sodomites and, really, sodomites generally. 

So how many of the personality traits apply to you, dear readers?

Oh, and by the way, if you didn’t believe me about Bill and Coo, here is a clip of this exceedingly WTF film masterpiece:

—

If you enjoyed this post, would you kindly* use the “Share This” or one of the other buttons below to share it on Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, or wherever else you want. I appreciate it. *Yes, that was a Bioshock reference.

Categories
beta males evil women men who should not ever be with women ever MGTOW misogyny sexy robot ladies Uncategorized

>More Dating Advice from the Boobz

>

Discussions of dating on The Spearhead? Pure comedy gold. So here are some more highlights from the Internet dating thread I talked about in my last post.

Let’s start with a comment so delightfully loopy I went ahead and screencapped it, for no good reason. Nergal suggested that women over 40 weren’t worth dating. Another commenter challenged him on this, which resulted in this response:

Now, granted, I’ve never actually seen deflated balloons half-filled with cottage cheese, but I, er, have  seen recent photos of Jennifer Aniston topless. And I’m guessing there isn’t really much resemblance. Anyone else thinking of that line in 40 Year-Old Virgin in which Andy compares a woman’s breast to a bag of sand? Seriously, if you’re going to throw Jennifer Aniston out of your bed, do it because of The Bounty Hunter. Or Love Happens. Or The Break-up. Or Marley And Me. Or All About Steve. (Oh, wait, that was Sandra Bullock.)

Meanwhile, The Man On The Street attacked evil women for deceiving men by wearing makeup:

Women’s supposed integrity, empathy, and virtue has been proven time and time again to be a farce. A mask. Just as the phony paint (made of foreskin and feotus’) that many women use to fool silly beta types into believing the false front of beauty.

Herbal Essence — not to be confused with the shampoo of the same name — lamented that “online dating is a female candyland of power trips, validation-seeking, and ego boosts,” and related how he totally put down some dumb broad he met online. I would bet good money that whatever happened between Herbal and his alleged date did not actually go down this way:

I once had a 2 month-long relationship with a girl. She flaked once without explanation (the third date) and I told her very politely but firmly not to do it again. She did it again three weeks later, and I sent her a text that said “You’re dumped.” Two hours later, I had a hysterically crying girl on my doorstep, begging for my forgiveness. I told her “In the age of cell phones there is simply no excuse to disrespect my time like that. Go home.” and shut the door in her face.

Big Daddy from Cincinnati, the author of the post that started the discussion, added a few more thoughts. including this bit of advice:

For the purpose of finding pump-and-dumps, don’t mention anything that sounds like conservative political views in your profile. The ones most likely to let you lick it and stick it will think you are an asshole if you espouse these views, no matter how logical you are in presenting them. Getting nookie is an emotional, not logical, process. Deal with it.

Yeah. I’m sort of thinking that a guy who uses the phrases “pump and dump” and “lick it and stick it” will set off asshole warning alarms in most women even if he doesn’t start blabbing on and on about how much he loves Glenn Beck. Interesting, though, how women wearing makeup is an evil act of deception, but a dude trying to conceal his retrograde political leanings is a-ok.

Firepower wins the award for brevity with this little gem of misogyny:

Playing hollowed-out courtship rituals with single-mom manatees stoked with anti-depressants (mainly SSRIs) is no great calling for a man.

But WGMOW wins some points for managing to compare women on dating sites to two different animals at once:

[M]ost of the women on the “serious” dating sites tend to look like elephants and/or have the intellect of a howler money. But they’ve been schooled by the dating industry to believe that they are beautiful on the inside, and that you, as a man, are shallow if you can’t sense their inner beauty. However, don’t expect one of these monsters to look for your inner handsomeness, only your wallet. Despite the fact that they claim to be strong and independent, they are just looking for a man who can “Support them in the style I’m entitled to.”

Keyster suggested that any man who decides to go ahead and date one of these SSRI-taking elephant-manatee-monkey women should make sure to illegally record their sexual encounters so he won’t be accused of breaking any laws:

[I]f you insist on persuing pooh-tang for fun, ALWAYS have a recording device rolling. Preferrably a video camera. You don’t want your life ruined by a bitter revenge seeking shrew. Remember all they have to do is dial three numbers 9, 1 and 1, and you’re screwed for life. Protect yourself!

I’ll end this little compilation with the always-quotable Peter-Andrew:Nolan(c), who attacks women for … not wanting to have sex with robots. Seriously.

You women endlessly moan on about how terrible us men are. Yet how much are you spending on creating your ideal robotic men? NOT ONE CENT. Why? Because you don’t want the man, you want what the man provides. Today measured in money. No-one is going to pay a robotic man to work so he won’t bring you what you so clearly want. MONEY.

On the other hand? How much money are MEN spending on robotic women? LOTS. And why are they doing so? Because they percieve that there is a MASSIVE market for robotic women. Why? Because they will be EASILY preferable to the VAST MAJORITY of real women. For a start they will have an OFF BUTTON.

Something tells me that when the sexy robot ladies arrive at last, there will be men on the internet complaining about what a bunch of bitches they are.

 —

If you enjoyed this post, would you kindly* use the “Share This” or one of the other buttons below to share it on Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, or wherever else you want. I appreciate it.

Categories
evil women men who should not ever be with women ever MGTOW misogyny nightstorm precious bodily fluids sex vaginas

The Mousetrap Vagina

 

We return again to a young up-and-comer on NiceGuy’s MGTOW forum, a fellow calling himself Nightstorm. Though a proud virgin, Nightstorm has some highly advanced theories about vaginas and the women who host them:

Its almost like a mouse trap is on a womans vagina, where when a men has to carefully insert his penis hoping not to spring the trap. If he is successful, he gets a free ride. If he is like most men, unsucessful, the trap springs, claps his penis into the vagina of the woman, and soon poisnous venom streams from her vagina and injects itself into the male genital.

This poison then creeps into the male brain and literally makes him stupid, it shuts down his intellect, and activates all his hormones for more pussy. She’s got the bastard. Now she can slowly but surely take all his wealth and keep pumping more poison into him. The man feels trapped, he can’t remove his penis from the vagina for the life of him, but he enjoys that pussy, so he continues to let himself get robbed.

Emphasis added.

It’s astounding that he’s able to discern so much about vaginas despite having had no actual contact with them since the moment of his birth.

Luckily for him, and luckily for the women of the world, Nightstorm has no plans to acquire any hands-on (or, more precisely, penis-in) experience with vaginas in the near future. In a later comment, he spells out some of the reasons for his continued abstinence (besides the whole poison-mousetrap thing): fear of STDs, fear of pregnancy, and fear of, well, this scenario:

if she was a virgin, how I would have to deal with the hassle of possible bleeding. Its not so hott when I make her spew red and white blood cells all over the sheets and doing it in the bathtub would required poor foreplay and not comfortable or roomy space. If she is a heavy weight girl, then there goes my bathtub, broken.

And if if, say, he’s somehow able to avoid the perils of STDs, pregnancy, icky blood and a broken bathtub, then what?

Well, then I would have to deal with her wanting more in the relationship, such as meeting her family, or perhaps even paying her for it, or her expecting some sort of “favor” in return for sex which we both equally enjoyed. 

Yeah, nothing ruins a nice evening of dipping your penis in a bloody, poison-infused mousetrap like the owner of said mousetrap asking you to meet her parents.

EDITED TO ADD: Sometimes people complain that I focus on the weird fringes of the MGTOW world. Thing is, within the MGTOW world, these things aren’t regarded as weird or fringey. Indeed, one of the comments I quoted above from Nightstorm was just highlighted on MarkyMark’s blog as an example of MGTOW thinking at its finest:

I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: we truly have some of the BEST & BRIGHTEST men in the world on there [that is, on NicGuy’s MGTOW forum]!  What you’re about to read will provide yet more proof of that.

Anyway, NowhereMan & Nightstorm were discussing CNN piece about how men supposedly have the upper hand in sexual matters.  What they say is gold, pure gold!  It’s stuff that my boys should read and heed. …

Even if you’re not religious, there are PRACTICAL reasons for avoiding sex with women.  The most important of these is to keep your power.  Sex is a woman’s ‘nuclear option’; take that away, and you take away a woman’s power over you.

—

If you enjoyed this post, would you kindly use the “Share This” or one of the other buttons below to share it on Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, or wherever else you want. I appreciate it.

Categories
evil women I'm totally being sarcastic manginas men who should not ever be with women ever MGTOW Uncategorized

>The ugly diva crisis … solved!

>

She’s out of your league, pal!

You may recall a little ditty from days gone by called “If you wanna be happy.” The song, the one hit of one-hit-wonder Jimmy Soul, was a song with a message for men in love. That message? Well, if my mere mentioning of the song hasn’t already gotten it stuck in your head, let me remind you of its basic thesis:

If you wanna be happy for the rest of your life
Never make a pretty woman your wife
So from my personal point of view
Get an ugly girl to marry you

Why is this? Well, put simply, pretty women are entitled bitches who will ruin your life and break your heart, while ugly women will be so grateful for your attention that they’ll treat you well and prepare meals in a timely fashion:

A pretty woman makes her husband look small
And very often causes his downfall
As soon as he married her and then she starts
To do the things that will break his heart

But if you make an ugly woman your wife
A-you’ll be happy for the rest of your life
An ug-a-ly woman cooks meals on time
And she’ll always give you peace of mind

By “piece of mind,” I believe Mr. Soul is referring to “blowjobs.”

But, alas, this simple formula for male happiness has been rendered ineffective. And it’s all the fault of evil manginas. A fellow called Lincoln, posting on NiceGuy’s MGTOW forum, reports that these dastardly woman-worshipping half-men have upset the old order by actively pursuing ugly women and making them think they’re all that. The horror! All this mangina attention has given

even the most ugliest man faced mountain beasts [an] overinflated sense of their own self-importance, and the net result is the most repulsive, vile, and ill-tempered skanks you could ever meet. Even now I can’t understand it, I can’t even look at these women much less want to bang them, but there it is. It’s already a given that the really attractive ones will of course behave the same way, but if even the ugliest ones behave like prima donnas, who’s left?

It seems an unsolvable dilemma. But Lincoln believes he’s found a way out: amputees.

The ideal is to find a beautiful woman that no mangina wants. it’s possible, but they usually have some kind of trait that puts men off for sometimes the fucking stupidest reason. One example was this one armed woman I knew of once. She had lost her arm in a car accident, and she was the sweetest, most kindest girl you could have met, but for some reason guys weren’t lining up the door for her. Stupid. If I ran across her again I wouldn’t hesitate to ask her out.

Love will always find a way.

If you now need to get “If you wanna be happy” out of your head, this ought to do it:

—

If you enjoyed this post, would you kindly* use the “Share This” or one of the other buttons below to share it on Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, or wherever else you want. I appreciate it.

*Yes, that was a Bioshock reference.

Categories
hypocrisy MGTOW misogyny Uncategorized western women suck women are...

>Women Are … Part 6: Herd of Hens Edition

>

We all agree that ladies are too conformist.

Another installment of our popular “Women Are …” series, in which I collect examples of manosphere misogynists rudely generalizing about women like there’s no tomorrow. I’ll let you figure out the theme this time. It’s not herd, er, hard.

Women are: A herd of hens

All women constitute one huge herd. They are a uniform group, and their thinking always falls into line. I’ve actually had women make that “I’m so shocked noise” and then ask, “you don’t really think that do you?” Yeah, I do. I have a mind of my own.

They don’t search for facts, reality, or truth. They search for consensus and emotional validation. They are cackling hens. Cackle cackle cackle 🙂

Women are: Herd creatures who won’t date you.

Most women in a culture are nearly psychologically identical. So … if you arent successful with the first 25 women, chances are you wont be successful with any of women within that same subset, cause they are herd creatures and take cues from the environment rather than having any real personalities of their own.

Women are: Bleating, uncritical sheep

Women are like herd animals and desperately desire to belong.

Men on the other hand are critical and won’t blindly follow someone if they don’t merit our approval. This is the difference in critical, mature thinking, and sheep bleating.

Women are: A herd of orgasmic voters

Women love to vote (group herd orgasm with her sisters). … In fact, women love any group activity. Men largely want to be left alone to live their lives in freedom. … That is why men do not really care about government. Men do not need it. So men do [not] vote that much. Women love government so women love to vote.

Women are: A herd of Facebook cunts

The problem is Ameriskank mindsets, they are close minded and stereotype every strange man as a pedophile, creepy, or a loser….

You need INTELLIGENCE & an OPEN MIND to meet & understand NEW people and Ameriskanks have none of the above.

Ameriskanks are the ultimate HERD animal. I can not stand these fucking cunts from Junior High & High School messaging me on Fucking Facebook (all single moms) wanting to start a “friendship” aka “find a sucker to take care of my bastard children”.

Women are: Matrimony-minded herd creatures who hate doing chores

Women ARE herd creatures – the mentality of the group is more important than the self realized truth brought by evidence. However woman also demand products to do every chore for them, and ask the government to freely provide money to they can live without working either from government handouts or by getting government to enforce draconian laws that allow women to rip men off with the lie of ‘holy matrimony’.

Women are: Hormonal herd creatures unchecked by patriarchy

The problem is, too many women allow their emotions, their hormones, their herd instinct, and the media to run their lives. Again, in past eras, these were all checked by patriarchal institutions, but these have long since disintegrated.

Women are: Herd beasts who don’t want anyone to see them naked. 

An ancient king was once faced with a rash of suicides of young women.
He ordered that the body if any woman who killed herself would be displayed naked in the public square.
The suicides stopped.
Shame works better on women than on men because women are herd beasts. Women care more about the opinion of the group than their own thoughts or even their own lives.


You know what’s ironic? Groups of like-minded lady-hating men gathering together online to talk endlessly about what herd creatures women are.