MRAs, by and large, aren’t big fans of chivalry, and complain bitterly about the terrible injustices forced upon them by this archaic concept, like having to hold doors open for ladies from time to time.
But perhaps they are not considering the many fine benefits of chivalry. In the comments section of Alcuin’s pro-patriarchy blog, our traditionalist friend fschmidt recently set forth the case for chivalry in a way that even the dullest misogynist could appreciate:
In early western culture around the time of the Renaissance, chivalry meant that ladies should be honored and sluts should be raped. This is a totally sound concept and encourages good behavior on the part of women. You cannot expect women to behave if they are not rewarded for good behavior and punished for bad behavior.
Fschmidt’s opinion inspired a lively discussion. Caeser’s Ghost argued that fschmidt had gone a bit too far with the whole rape thing:
Women who dress and behave like whores shouldn’t be raped. They should be prostitutes and treated as such.
Fschmidt replied:
Caesar’s Ghost, I have the greatest respect for prostitutes. Prostitutes provide a valuable service. But sluts provide no value and undermine morality. This is why sluts, identified as provocatively dressed women outside of areas of prostitution, were regularly raped around the time of the Renaissance.
CG argued that prostitutes deserve only the most limited sort of respect:
I respect prostitutes in so far as they fulfill a lowly but necessary function in society. Outside of that function, I have no respect or value for them.
Promiscuous women who are not prostitutes should be treated badly, but I don’t believe that they should be raped. I regard the Renaissance as a great era, but I would have to disagree with their way of handling the problem of sluts.
The mission of Alcuin’s site is, as he states at the top of every page, is to “Promot[e] the Intellectual Renaissance of the Western Tradition.” Apparently you can’t have a real renaissance without sorting out whether or not sexually active women should be raped, or just treated like shit.
His evidence in this case? A recent study of speed dating that showed that (straight) women, in addition to being attracted to attractive men (duh!), also seem to be attracted to men with high “sociosexuality” ratings. “Sociosexuality,” for those not fully immersed in the SCIENCE!! of dating, is basically someone’s propensity for casual sex.
In other words, the study found that guys who do a lot of casual dating tended to do better at casual dating.
Heartiste/Roissy puts it this way:
Men who have high sociosexuality (HSS) are more attractive to women because the suite of characteristics associated with HSS suggest prior experience bedding women and possession of mating skills that attract women.
It’s akin to a form of preselection for men, minus the actual women he’s banging being physically present at his side to aid in the alpha judging process that all women, consciously or not, impose on their suitors.
In a very loose sense, high male sociosexuality is male sluttiness.
If you strip out the PUA nonsense about the “alpha judging process,” all this seems fairly self-evident, if not simply tautological. Guys who’ve been with a lot of women will probably do better with women in the future than guys with no experience who view women as strange alien creatures. (Note: In all this, we’re only talking about straight people; PUAs don’t seem aware that gay people exist, outside of their own fantasies of hot bi girl threesomes.)
It’s at this point that Heartiste/Roissy amps up the assholery:
Male sluttiness is not equivalent to female sluttiness. It is more difficult for a man to be slutty that it is for a woman owing to the discrepancy in worth between sperm and egg, so people justifiably perceive male sluts to have higher quality mate value, and higher quality mating skills, than female sluts for whom the act of sexual conquest is merely synonym for being easy.
In other words, it’s bad to be a female slut, but great to be a male slut:
[T]he study results confirm the validity of game when its conclusions find that male sociosexuality is a relatively powerful predictor of attractiveness to women, even to women looking for long-term relationships.
Not only can this SCIENCE!! of game help to get dudes laid – it can basically save the world from evil fat chicks.
It’s vital to readers to get this scientific information validating game out there, because there are a lot of doubters and haters who are blinded by what they won’t see. Sometimes, men need to know that there is an experimental foundation supporting all these seduction techniques and peculiarities of female behavior. It’s not necessary to know this stuff to start gaming chicks out in the field right now, but for men with a cynical bent or shy disposition, it helps to know that there are rules that govern human interaction. It may be the boost they need.
Turning former nerds into wily lotharios will help to put those uppity female sluts in their place:
[A] moment of candor. This blog is first and foremost a source of self-amusement, but it is also a true and real desire to teach and to see men succeed sexually and emotionally with women. Men who become better at attracting women increase their options in the mating market. Men with increased options cause women to behave better. Women behaving better redounds to the benefit of families, and to society.
And by “behave better”, I mean the whole panoply of awful modern female behavior: cheating, cock carouseling, divorcing on a whim, eat pray loving, straycationing, spinstering, attention whoring, voting and fattening up into repulsive dirigibles.
Yep, he did slyly insert “voting” into all that. Sneaky!
So slut it up, fellas! It’s the only way to put those evil lady sluts in their place. And, thereby, save the world from sex-having, vote-casting slatterns.
You know those guys over on MGTOWforums.com, who spend so much of their time complaining about women and talking about how glad they are to not have anything to do with icky lady stuff? Well, it turns out they don’t hate women at all! They just think that women are all money-hungry narcissists who deserve to be punished for abusing their “rights.”
That may seem like a rather subtle distinction there, or possibly a giant heaping load of steaming bullshit. So I’ll let the eminently rational Spocksdisciple explain it all to you.
A Misogynist hates women because they’re women…
An MGHOW distrusts women for the powers they abuse…
Go on.
An MGHOW isn’t a misogynist and should never be, he’s a person who doesn’t allow women to impact his life and doesn’t care what women think about him.
Evidently he means “a person who doesn’t allow women to impact his life except for the hours he spends every day complaining about them online.”
He’s also a person who doesn’t actively hate women, but hate the things women do with their gov’t granted powers. The abuses and legal atrocities women commit is the fault of the gov’t and judicial system allowing these abuses.
Yes, those evil feminazi judges that run the country, headed up by that evil Chief Justice Judy on the Supreme Court.
Women will be women just as men will be men, their ingrained nature is no more different then how other animals behave.
Well, perhaps a bit different than how some animals behave. I mean, flatworms have swordfights with their penises in order to determine who gets to be the dude flatworm when they have sex, and I don’t know many people who do that.
I personally think women are hardwired to be hypergamous and self centered, they have to be in order to survive.
We don’t hate women! It’s just that they’re HARDWIRED to be selfish moneygrubbing bitches. It’s SCIENCE!!!
Just as men are hardwired to be analytical problem solvers as well as highly aggressive creatures when the need arises.
Don’t hate us because we’re so smart, ladies!
The trouble is that society today lets women get away with anything and everything, from getting harassed by random dudes on streetcorners to getting paid less than men for the same work.
Sorry, those were bad examples. Back to Spocksdisciple:
Today’s women may not be worthy of trust as has been proven over and over again in the news but in the past women were granted privileges their predecessors earned for them in blood and pain, privileges which were then turned in “inalienable” rights without the ability to suffer the consequences of abusing these “rights”.
Exactly! Now that women have the right to (for example) own property, they should be roundly punished each and every time they abuse these rights! Like, if they buy too much shit, they should have to pay money to rent storage units to keep it in.
NO MORE FREE STORAGE UNITS FOR LADIES!!! We’re on to you!
I’m not sure Spockdisciple has thought of that example. I’ll have to mention it at the next meeting.
But anyway, even though Spocksdisciple thinks women should suffer some sort of consequences for “abusing” their rights –oddly, he doesn’t actually mention what rights women are abusing or how they should be punished – he wants to make it clear that this doesn’t mean he hates the ladies.
Hating women for their innate nature is like them hating men for ours, nothing will come of it, men and women won’t change their innermost nature so why bother wasting the energy in the first place.
A true MGHOW doesn’t hate women, he hates the system which enables such bad behavior in women without them suffering the consequences of such behavior, if women suffered the consequences of their misbehavior you can bet many of them wouldn’t be so eager to abuse their “rights” with impunity.
So, again, MGTOWers don’t hate women. They just think women are inherently a bunch of greedy hoebags who are completely untrustworthy and deserve to be punished.
What on earth is hateful about that?
Naturally, most of the totally non-woman-hating dudes over on MGTOWforums.com found Spocksdisciple’s argument to be logical as shit. As cdub noted:
I don’t hate women. I hate that they are not held accountable for their actions. There are too many blue pillers out there to ever see thru this shit. I think the only thing that will change any of this is if there is complete collapse of the Western world and all those strong, independent women will have to rely on men just like nature intended.
AussieSteve, though, thought Spocksdisciple was being a bit too lenient on the ladies.
I hate the system and I hate what women are. I can hate both because both have earned my hatred. The system hasn’t made women loathsome it has merely created an environment that has exposed their true natures. If somebody lets a poisonous snake out of its cage am I not allowed to kill that snake because it isn’t its fault that it got out? The person that opened the cage should be held accountable as well, sure – but a snake is still a snake and if I have to kill it to protect myself then that snake is going to die. All the system has done is allow women to do abhorrent things, it hasn’t made them do it. It just removed the restraints that our forefathers, in their wisdom, put in place to keep them under control. Women are poisonous snakes and we have stupidly let them out of their cages.
Huh. Women represented by evil snakes. Haven’t ever heard that one before.
Watch out, ladies! And feminism! Because guys are totally onto you and your dirty periods. According to a study cited on the blog What Men Think of Women, men can tell when women are on their periods – just by listening to them talk! Well, some of the time, anyway. From a writeup of the research in the Times of India:
Men can actually tell from a woman’s voice when she is having her period, a new study has claimed.
For the study, conducted by Nathan Pipitone at Adams State College and Gordon Gallup from SUNY-Albany, the researchers asked three groups of men to listen to voice recordings of ten women who counted from one to five at four different points over their menstrual cycle.
According to Popular Science, all four recordings were played in a random order and then the first group of men were asked to guess which were made while the women were on their period. The tests revealed that the men were correct 35 per cent of the time, which was described as a ‘significant’ result.
That’s right, ladies! Men can tell whether or not you’re are on the rag – a third of the time!
I myself have developed a technique that can bring this success rate to well over 50 percent – just by listening to women talk!
All you have to do is to pay attention to subtle audio clues, like her saying:
“I just started my period.”
“My period came early this month.”
“Crap. I’ve got awful craps – because of my period.”
“Aunt Flo is paying her monthly visit.” (Note: this works only if she does not actually have an Aunt Flo.)
“It’s that time of month again. The time when I use tampons, in my vagina.”
“I have reached that point in my menstrual cycle during which blood leaks from my hoo-ha.”
So what does all this mean? According to Christian J at What Men Are Saying About Women, it means the jig is up, feminists! In a post titled How Men can Decode “Women’s” Menstrual Cycle.. , he writes:
This information is what feminist have been trying to hide, delete and deny for many a decade. They are of the opinion that the menstrual cycle is irrelevant and superfluous to their cause and one can understand why when one looks at the studies on how women are affected by it.
In the worst case scenarios, their behaviour are effected to such a degree as to make them totally dysfunctional and even bedridden for the period(intended) of the cycle. The other side of the argument is ofcourse that it is swept under the carpet and not discussed or taken seriously..
Just some added benefits from feminism, as they live in ignorant, self induced silence..
You might as well pack it in, ladies and manginas – because men know!
A third of the time.
NOTE: I have no idea why Christian J. put the word “women” in quotes in the title of his blog post. Like his now-legendary two-dot ellipses, this is a mystery that may forever remain unsolved. Or you could ask him, I guess.
EDITED TO ADD: This post has now inspired a completely disingenuous “Yahoo Answers” query from an antifeminist concern troll who seems to be pretending that this post was not DRIPPING IN SARCASM. Add your answers, if you want!
Now that I’ve got your attention I should point out that the sexy Robogals aren’t quite here yet. The not-quite-Robogals currently available, as we’ve seen, are a lot more scary than sexy.
But one dude has a much simpler and less horrifying solution: he’s invented a doohickey that will allow horny penis-having people to attach a Fleshlight to their iPads, so they can pretend to be having some sort of sexual relations with images of actual sexy ladies (or sexy anything else, for that matter) on their iPads.
Read more at The Register, which also has a photo of the doohickey at work. (Dude fucking it not pictured.) I really didn’t feel like having that picture here, hence the gif of Maru the cat with his head in a bag.
Jenna Jameson on a Harley. (Chuck E. Cheese not pictured.)
Sure, Man Boobz 2011 Troll of the Year NWOslave may live in an alternate reality — but he at least seems well-grounded in that reality. What might happen if he were to suddenly ingest a tab or ten of LSD?
I think I have an answer to that question. Meet blogger and conspiracy theorist Jay Dyer, a self-described “controversialist, writer, comedian, debater, and philosopher/theologian.”
That’s a mouthful, and Jay more or less lives up to it, delivering stream of consciousness rants that range from Aleister Crowley (he’s not a fan) to the evils of women dressing like Hannah Montana. Plus he quotes the Bible from time to time.
Actually, that description doesn’t even begin to capture Jay’s peculiar charms. So, without further ado, I present to you some highlights from an essay titled The United Skanks of Amerika that Jay wrote with the assistance of someone identified only as M.B.
Amerika has become one, big, nasty, black metal mosh pit. Satan said to Adam and Eve “do what thou wilt,” Satanist Aleister Crowley said, “do what thou wilt” and the gospel of Amerika is “do what thou wilt.” … Churches are dominated by fat matriarchal women and homosexuals. Women open their purses and the priests of Ashtoreth bow and tell them whatever they want to hear. … Amerika is a play land – a bigger, gayer Disney world. It’s middle-aged moms on facebook, donning Montana garb. The nation is frozen in perpetual adolescence and arrested development.
After this dramatic opening, Jay offers up the strangest capsule version of American history I’ve ever seen:
Started by a bunch of tee-totaler puritan gnostics, this nation has jumped to the opposite extreme and become a cess pool of flesh. In fact, in the East Coast punk scene, kids are now eating chunks of each others’ flesh. Let that sink in. In the West Coast gay scene, it is now an honor to receive AIDS from trendy gays.
Then Jay gets around to the “skanks” of the essay’s title:
Women of this country, especially young women, are perpetual princesses stuck in a perpetual mirror glance, coated in chemicals and striving for the most unnatural goals – to be a manwoman. For a sensible male to get with one of these creatures is in serious danger. But watch out – before long, they’ve left you for another woman and taken your fake Federal Reserve notes. They get half of your all-seeing eyes. Whores with your Horus. Dressed like complete whores, will they soon be completely naked?
But young men don’t get off any easier in Jay’s critique:
The average twenty-something male is now a fat, gamer, feminized, emo freak, who spits every time he lisps, because he can’t form sentences.
Neither do middle-aged men:
Grown men – baby-boomer dads – collect comics and play Dungeons & Dragons. And if they don’t, they stare at pixelated football and the Maso-kabbalist videodrome complex.
Yes, he really did just say “Maso-kabbalist videodrome complex.”
Jay also has some issues with higher education:
The “wise men” of this culture are the Marxist, gay, feminist, druid college professors, who, if they have children, drive them to white horror core rap concerts. Just like the sociology professor mom involved with Pyscho Sam whom her daughter met over Myspace.
And lower education:
That any parent would put their children in public school is a sign of apparent hatred of their kids. Why would anyone put their kids in a government re-education camp? Public schools are prisons where the teachers screw students and students get doped up on pills become homosexual.
When they’re not shooting each other, that is:
[P]arents can’t understand why their children shoot each other at school. The[y] shoot one another at school because they are possessed by the demonic culture. And while you stupidly play golf and make scrapbooks, your kids are worshipping Lucifer, who, according to you, doesn’t exist.
Women working! Men raising kids! It’s all one big air-conditioned nightmare for Jay:
The family is now become stay-at-home dads that care for the 1.3 kids, while moms climb the skyscraper and has sex with the CEO for more fake fed notes. If it’s not this, it’s “my two dads.”
Preach it, Jay!
Amerika is just this – Chuck E. Cheese speeding at you on a Harley, holding Crowley’s Magick in Theory and Practice,with Jenna Jameson mounted on the back. …
Amerika is krunk. Amerika is funk. Amerika is junk. Amerika is Lil’ Jon having sex with Lady Liberty. …
Rationalism is what birthed this country, but it morphed into utter irrationality. Thomas Paine became Spongebob and Spongebob is Thomas Paine.
I think I’ll just leave it at that. Oh, there’s more — much, much more — in Jay’s little manifesto, but my poor brain can only take in so much in one sitting without exploding.
EDITED TO ADD: Also, if middle-aged women want to wear some sort of “Montana garb,” I’d suggest they go with Patsy, not Hannah. Patsy Montana was awesome!
Here’s a little one-question quiz to see how much you know about Reddit’s Atheism subreddit.
QUESTION ONE: A woman describes being raped by a “friend” while both were intoxicated (though she doesn’t call it rape). Do the r/atheism regulars:
a) Respond with sympathy and support
b) Attack her and furiously downvote her posts, with the assistance of one of the moderators of r/mensrights, then return to posting and upvoting rape jokes
BONUS QUESTION: True or False: Someone on r/menrights links to her comment as “an example of how and why many people believe that rape is everywhere… because their definition of rape includes every sexual misadventure.” The most heavily upvoted comment in the r/mensrights thread declares that the woman who was raped “sounds like a delusional sheltered teen.”
Yes, the correct answers here are the ones you assumed were correct.
Amazingly, despite all the jokes and the victim blaming/attacking going on, the thread also contains some highly upvoted comments lamenting the tendency of people to blame the victim in rape cases. Apparently, when a rape victim is drunk, it’s not rape, even when she repeatedly says “no” and gives in because she’s scared, so it’s fine to attack away, and even to accuse the victim of being a rapist too.
This enables Reddit Atheists not only to blame the victim of rape without feeling guilty, or admitting that this is what they’re doing, while simultaneously feeling self-righteous in their condemnation of religious people doing the exact same thing.
And because their rape jokes are also couched as jokes about religious people’s views on rape, they can feel self-righteous while making them too.
Sometimes the actions of Reddit Atheists cause me to begin to doubt just a teensy weensey bit that “atheists are a community that’s pre-selected for clear thinking and empiricism,” as one commenter in r/mensrights put it not that long ago.
Ava Gardner, fortysomething hag, and some beta dude doing her a giant favor by even being seen with her in public.
My eyes are all dialated from an eye exam, but even through a blurry haze I can tell this guy is kind of a toolbag. Here’s The Rational Male on why the ladies totally don’t appreciate all that dudes do for them, like for example, not having sex with other ladies when they totally probably could have.
I think what most men uniquely deceive themselves of is that they will ultimately be appreciated by women for their sacrifices. … You can’t be because women fundamentally lack the ability to fully realize, much less appreciate the sacrifices a man makes to facilitate her reality. … Men making the personal sacrifices necessary to honor, respect and love her are commonplace. You’re supposed to do those things. You sacrificed your ambitions and potential to provide her with a better life? You were supposed to. You resisted temptation and didn’t cheat on your wife with the hot secretary who was DTF and ready to go?
Ladies totally don’t appreciate that shit. Seriously, gals, it takes a lot of willpower for us to keep from going around sticking our penises in other ladies. You should probably bake us all cakes, or something.
The worst offenders? Women 40 and over.
[A]ssume for a moment that a 40 y.o. Man with the options to pursue younger women “does the right thing” and seeks out a relationship with a woman his own age. Would he be appreciated for essentially giving an aged woman a new lease on life? Or would he be viewed as doing what is to be expected of him?
Seriously, women over 40 are practically senior citizens. Even talking to them is a gigantic sacrifice for a guy who imagines he might possibly be able to cajole a drunk 27 year old into bed for a night of deeply unsatisfying sex with him.
It’s best to remind the fortysomething hags what a giant favor you’re doing them while you are actually, you know, doing them. In the “having sex with them” sense, if you catch my drift.
“Aw yeah, baby, you saw that waitress totally smiling at me earlier. I think she’d probably do me. You’re lucky I even gave your old ass a second look!”
Repeat this until she hates herself. That sort of thing is what makes for spectacular sex.
Today in Did That Really Get 196 Upvotes on Reddit: A Redditor claiming to be the owner of a brothel in Thailand explains how what he euphemistically calls the “problems in the sex industry” are mostly the fault of evil, lazy whores. Literally.
A little further on in the discussion he makes this charming claim:
According to him, sex trafficking isn’t really a big issue, but when it does occur it “is more likely to victimize men” than women. (The main victims in his mind being trafficked men (by which I assume he means transwomen) … and male sex tourists.)
Those poor, poor Western sex tourists, suffering so at the hands of women and girls who’ve been kidnapped and sold into sex slavery!
While ChaChaKrahp seems quite sincere in his beliefs, this is the Internet, and so there’s a chance that this “brothel owner” is not actually a brothel owner at all, just some dude making this all up for Reddit karma points and lulz.
Even if that’s the case, we still have all those hundreds of Redditors who read his comments and happily upvoted them, either because they thought what he said was sensible or true, or because the thought of owning a brothel in Thailand gave them boners.
The question remains: does Reddit attract the worst representatives of those in its heavily young, male, geek demographic, or is this how most of these (mostly) guys really think — even if they don’t usually say so out loud?
