Category: MRA

Categories
homophobia MGTOW misandry misogyny MRA oppressed men

Flo the Progressive Insurance gal: a “symptom of a decaying society.”

A tool of the matriarchy?

It may be hard to find a summer blockbuster movie in which two female characters have even a single conversation about anything but a man, but MRAs and related species seem to believe that the entertainment industry is one giant conspiracy against men. Why? Because sometimes men are portrayed as buffoons.

Given that it’s hard to have comedy without buffoons, I have to admit that this is often true. Of course, given that the buffoon role is generally a much better role than straight man (or woman), I’m not sure how this is a grave injustice against men. I’d love to see more female buffoons. Like this:

 

 

I doubt the guys at NiceGuy’s MGTOW forum spend much time watching old French and Saunders specials. No, they seem to prefer watching those Flo the Progressive Insurance gal ads on YouTube until their heads nearly explode from anger at Progressive’s insidious misandry.

For you see, in these ads – I’m not going to bother to post one, since I assume most of you have seen them — Flo is sort of quirky and charming, but the guys are all, well, to me a lot of them also seem quirky and charming, but to the MGTOWers they – and by extension all men — are being played for fools.

Oh, and apparently these ads also portend the end of civilization. As Juno3 puts it,

Just another symptom of a decaying society. …

Imagine the ad agency staff, probably a bunch of dykes with a few dudes wearing pantyhose to work.

If that were a show — a sort of lesbian revamp of Mad Men, perhaps? — I would totally watch it.

The other commenters aren’t quite so worried about the end of the world, but perky little Flo really seems to get under their skin. G40IntercontinentalGhost writes:

Am guessing she’s the one with the irritating, smirky assed grin on her face that looks like said grin is/was the result of wiring being put in some mighty sensitive places. KEE-RIST on the Concorde! From under what rock(or cock as the case may well be) did Progressive Insurance find that twat? I’m also really glad that my u.s. Driver’s License(Washington) expired some time ago.

I kinda like Flo. Now that I know the MGTOWers hate her, I feel a lot more comfortable admitting that.

If you’re going to get angry at car insurance ads, get angry at this shit. That jingle just makes me want to punch someone.

 

Categories
alpha males antifeminism beta males creepy evil women false accusations men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny MRA rape rapey reactionary bullshit sex sexual harassment sluts terrorism the spearhead woman's suffrage

Spearheaders on the SlutWalks. Again. It’s bad.

From the Dallas SlutWalk

Oh dear. The Spearheaders are talking about the Slutwalks again. The discussion may be the worst on the subject that I have run across so far. Some of the lowlights:

Keyster seems downright pissed that women actually have the right to say no:

They’re high functioning children with sexual power and they don’t want you to forget it. They’re outraged that just because a young woman dresses and acts in a sexually provocative manner, that she might receive unwanted attention from young men that don’t appeal to her.

She should be able to dress like a street whore and abuse alcohol to the point of delerium and they feel compelled to lecture us on how that doesn’t mean this is an advertisment to be sexually harrassed, sexually assaulted or heaven forbid raped. …

They want the “RIGHT” to dress as sexually provocative as they want to without being constantly annoyed by lowly beta males. They’d prefer you not “sexually victimize” them, unless you’re hot and they’re into you, then it’s totally OK. …

Remember this: She didn’t bother to get dressed up for the likes of YOU. Her hope was a worthy athelete or Hollywood star might notice her and talk to her; not some weak, pathetic loser …

 “We’ve got the sexual power, the power of consent, the gate keeper of the holy vaginal crevice. See our bouncing propped up cleavage, our long legs and glorious ass protruding from those heels? You want it don’t you?

    ….ha, ha, ha…you can’t have it because I SAY SO! Because I have THIS power over you, lowly little man. Bow down to me and beg me a little, I might even let the others see me talking to you, without calling the cops.” …

    This isn’t feminism, it’s flaunting female sexual power in the faces of men.

You’re seriously complaining that woman have the “power of consent!?” EVERYONE has the power of consent. No one male or female is obliged to have sex with anyone they don’t want to. That’s, you know, rape. It bothers you that women are the “the gate keeper[s] of the holy vaginal crevice?” Who the fuck else should be the gatekeeper of a person’s vagina other than the person whose vagina it is? The mind reels. But apparently the 50+ upvoters of this piece of abhorrent nonsense aren’t bothered by any of this.

Demirogue, meanwhile, suggests we need to better discipline our women:

While perusing FB last week I came across the newest deviation of this mentality which is going topless. …  And they want to cry about rape? They need to cry but only because people said enough is enough and started to belt them on their asses.

Women need to be controlled and on a very, very short leash. They’ve been given every right, every option, every opportunity to be something and what do they do with it? Abuse and manipulate it with reckless abandonment and incessant demands.

Geography Bee Finalist himself thinks the slutwalkers must be retarded:

I wouldn’t worry too much about these Slutwalk sows.

They have no redeeming features. None.

They cannot figure out that if you dress like a whore, you deserve to be treated in a disrespectful manner. Even conservatively dressed mentally retarded women can figure this out and conduct themselves with more propriety and intelligence than these Slutwalkers … .

Knuckledragger blames it on those damned suffragettes:

…we let ‘em drive, we let ‘em vote, and this is what we get.

Ridiculous to even offer attention to another excuse to dress like a whore, goof off in public, and not bring me a beer.

Any man worth his salt should fire any skank who was “sick” from work to attend this nonsense.

SingleDad seems to think that all accusations of rape are made up:

Rape is now the extra tax women charge men if some how their unsatisfied with whatever arrangement was made before or after any encounter in or outside of marriage.

Other lowlights:

Poiuyt agreeing with Anders Breivik’s  “observations surrounding this femaleist pandemic,” while adding  that he  “is to be rebuked for taking the wrong cureative actions to solve it.”

Demirogue (in a second comment) complaining that “overvalued pussy is all [women today] have to offer and only to certain men.”

Anonymous age 69 explaining that “rape laws were intended to protect women of good character, from being sexually violated,” not “to protect promiscuous sluts .”

And more, much, much more. Many of the worst (including most of those quoted here) have many dozens of upvotes.  Go read the thread yourself, if you think you can stomach it.

There are no arguments to rebut here; I can only repeat the basic message that the slutwalks are trying to convey: no one deserves to be raped, no matter what they are wearing or how much consensual sex they engage in. Even if they show some cleavage or prefer athletes and/or rocks stars to so-called beta males.

Categories
antifeminism evil women misogyny MRA reddit woman's suffrage

I refuse to see dead people

We gave them the vote and they STILL won't shut up about it!

Apparently, all that time I spent studying history in college and grad school was a complete waste of time. Because once people die, nothing about their lives or the events that happened during their lives matters. At least according to merlin34 in Reddit’s Men’s Rights subreddit, who recently set forth this cogent argument as to  “Why feminists should SHUT THE $^%# UP about women’s suffrage in US/UK.”

The 19th Amendment of the US Constitution was ratified in 1920, before that year’s election. At the time, the voting age was 21. Any woman who was denied the right to vote would have had to have been born before Election Day of 1898. Today, she would be 113+ years old. That means dead.

In the UK, it was in 1928 that women were granted equal voting rights to men, again at the age of 21 (although women over 30 were given the vote 10 years earlier). Any woman denied the right to vote based on sex in the UK would be over 105 years old now. There’s still probably some around, but not a lot, and not for much longer, and they weren’t denied the right to vote for long.

What does this have to do with anything? It means that feminists using the “women weren’t allowed to vote, wah” or “black men got the vote before women of any color” canards should SHUT UP, because the list of those actually denied the right to vote based on sex is rapidly diminishing. In another ten years, none will remain.

Naturally, the comments are also a delight. OThompson says:

You can also tell them that Suffragettes were often domestic terrorists.

AntiFeministMedia adds:

It isnt just feminists though is it, its any woman you get into an argument with.

If its not ‘women wernt allowed to vote’, its ‘rapists get off scott-free’. They ignore the context. When did universal sufferage for men go ahead in the UK? 1918?

Most women are ignorant of most of these issues, but they are happy to just parrot all this stuff because that makes them victims, and so they get privileges they arent really entitled to.

They dont care wether what they are saying is out of date, or that most men didnt recieve the vote untill very recently either, they only care that the female gravy train of victimhood keeps rolling on.

Is the Female Gravy Train of Victimhood anything like Soul Train? Because that would be awesome.

Categories
antifeminism armageddon homophobia men who should not ever be with women ever MGTOW misandry misogyny MRA terrorism threats

More violent talk, more excuses for terrorism, this time from the inaptly named Happy Bachelors Forum

Try pointing the finger at yourself, for once.

On the ironically named Happy Bachelors forum, the regular poster who calls himself khankrumthebulgar – and whose real name is Randall Joseph Shake — has been complaining about those of us who’ve pointed out that much MRA and MGTOW rhetoric sounds all too similar to the rhetoric of Norwegian terrorist murderer Anders Breivik. In response to Hugo Schwyzer’s post on the topic at the Good Men Project, he wrote:

 This smacks to me of extreme desperation. As they are trying to draw us into a response. They should hear Crickets chirping. … they are in need of traffic, controversy some off the wall unhinged response. When they receive none, it simply means we will not waste the oxygen to answer these absurd and insane accusations. No evidence exists that the MRA or MRM is in any way connected to the Norwegian gunman. IF we were there would be dozens of dead Feminists by now. There is none, hence this is a weak and pathetic attempt to incite violence and is irresponsible on their part. …

If such violence were to happen. After such outrageous accusations, it is Hugo Schwyzer and the Good Menz Project who is financially liable for stoking and promoting extremism in the hopes of generating a violent response. The blood will be on their hands not ours.

You will notice that this argument is identical to that of Angry Harry: if an extremist commits an act of terrorism or violence, don’t blame him or his extremist ideology; blame the people who pissed him off. Taken to its logical extreme, this specious argument would mean blaming the Jews for the Holocaust; after all, they’re the ones who got Hitler so worked up in the first place.

It seems to me that if you don’t want people to associate you with terrorists, you should probably stop talking like terrorists, referring casually to “dozens of dead feminists” and trying to blame the enemy in advance for any violence that comes from your side.

Also, you should probably stop making comments like the following, which were posted in response to Amanda Marcotte’s recent post on Misogyny and Terrorism. The first one, from spocksdisciple, a board moderator, fantasized about a violent backlash that would put women in general and feminists in particular in their supposed place:

[T]he backlash against feminism and it’s misandry will be both awe inspiring and terrifying at the same time.

Modern radical feminism is doomed, any woman sprouting these kinds of statements after the backlash won’t last very long, people and especially men are growing angrier everyday and all these whining losers in the feminist movement is doing to kicking a sleeping bear even harder.

Feminism is so done that women will be lucky if any man bothers to even look at them other then as a piece of meat, the days of the 19th century are going to come back where women either know their place or they’ll suffer the consequences of their actions and arrogance, big daddy gov’t isn’t going to be around to protect the rights of women to act like bitches.

And you probably shouldn’t talk about burning down buildings with people inside them, as khankrumthebulgar (that is, Randall Joseph Shake) does in this comment:

Feminists will be treated like the French Nobility was during the French Revolution. There will be a payback to these Evil Bitches. … As to the Good Mangina Project, they are our enemies. Burn the building to the ground with them in it.

Is he literally talking about burning down a building, or is he speaking metaphorically? In the wake of a tragedy that involved a man literally gunning down the children of his leftist and feminist enemies, khankrumthebulgar’s comments are indefensible either way.

Let me reiterate: these are posts from men who are angry that people have linked them in any way to the Norwegian terrorist. Are they really this lacking in self-awareness, or are they so used to talking in an environment where violent comments about feminists are so common and accepted that they don’t even realize the irony?

I don’t know, and I don’t care. I just wish that those in the MRA and MGTOW movements who are bothered by this kind of talk – and I know there are some who are – would actually step up and declare this sort of shit out of bounds. I’m not holding my breath.

Note: The Happy Bachelors forum is members-only, so the links to the forum won’t work if you’re not a member. Here are screen shots of all the forum comments mentioned in this post, in order. Click to see the full-sized image. I edited several of the comments, but indicated all removed material with ellipses. As you will see the edits did not change the meaning of what was said.

khankrumthebulgar gives his real name

khankrumthebulgar on Hugo Schwyzer (just the portion of the comment that is from him; the rest quotes Schwyzer’s post).

spocksdisciple comment

khankrumthebulgar’s “burn the building” comment

Categories
anti-Semitism antifeminism armageddon misogyny MRA oppressed men terrorism threats violence against men/women

Angry Harry: Violence is justified, but don’t blame us for it.

Anyone who has spent much time at all on MRA message boards knows that they tend to be littered with vague and ominous “predictions” of an inevitable violent backlash of men driven to fury by our supposed feminist overlords; some of these predictions are delivered with such obvious relish that they seem little more than justifications in advance for future murderous rampages on the part of people not too far distant in their ideology from  Anders Breivik.  

Of course, most of those making such predictions-cum-threats don’t want to actually face any culpability when their bullshit gets real. Fear not, MRA prognosticators, for one prominent British MRA has come up with what he sees as a brilliant way for MRAs to avoid getting implicated in future terrorists attacks. According to longtime MRA blogger Angry Harry we shouldn’t blame violence on the beliefs of right-wing terrorists – we should instead blame it on the people they’re mad at.

Angry Harry uses this bit of sophistry to explain away any culpability the right seems to have in the Norway massacre:

The recent massacre by Anders Behring Breivik in Norway is being portrayed by the left-wing media (such as the BBC) as being motivated by extreme right-wing groups – the idea, as ever, being to demonise and, hence, to intimidate, as much as possible, anybody who does not support their malicious self-serving agenda.

But if you look more closely at the evidence, it is quite clear that, if anything, it was the various machinations and rhetoric engaged in by the deceitful LEFT that infuriated this man. …

Quite simply, it is the Left, not the Right, who are the more to blame for this incident.

Ingenious. Of course, this logic only really works if you agree with the extremist ideology of the terrorist or murderer in question. Let’s apply Angry Harry’s approach to a historical example that also involved extremism and murder on a large scale:

Hitler hated Jews. Hitler killed Jews. Therefore, according to Angry Harry’s logic, we should blame the Jews for getting him so mad in the first place.

Is that unfair? Given that Breivik is a mass murderer with many ideas strikingly similar to those of Hitler, I think not. The logic is the same, whatever the body count.

Apparently Harry thinks his bit of rhetorical sleight-of-hand will absolve MRAs when, not if, the violence comes:

MRAs need to get to grips with this type of situation because it won’t be long before they are being blamed for something or other – perhaps a family court judge being murdered.

Why might this be a particularly sensitive issue for Harry? Perhaps because in another posting of his, he offered a justification for doing just that — murdering family court justices and those involved in enforcing their decisions.

In a post with the blunt title “Why Violence Is Often Justified,” Harry put it this way:

[A]nybody who takes away a man’s children and/or his home deserves little sympathy if they suffer significant retribution.

I suppose that for some men, arguing their case in court is a reasonable option, but for many men – particularly the less intelligent, the less wealthy, the less articulate and/or the less able they are to deal with officialdom – such an option is going to get them nowhere. And so, in my view, violence is not only understandable and predictable, but also morally quite justifiable.

To put it bluntly: If someone is taking away your home and your children then I think that you are quite justified in behaving violently towards them.

In his recent posting on Breivik, Harry offered an obligatory comment suggesting that, if course, he wasn’t actually justifying the Norwegian’s actions – oh, no! – even though the logic of his argument seems designed to do just that. Then he went on to make some predictions about what the future holds for his leftist and feminist enemies:

I think that it is fairly obvious to my most excellent readers that the war against the Left is hotting up. …

In fact, what I can never seem to understand is why it is taking so long for people – particularly for men – to rise up against the Left, given its appalling attitude and behaviour over the past two decades.

In combination with the feminists, the leftists have done their very best – with much success over here in Europe – to break up our countries, our cultures and our families, while at the same time heaping hatred upon hatred on to their very own people!

I just cannot understand how they have gotten away with this for so long.

You cannot go round continuing to display rigid intolerance and horrendous injustice against millions of men in your very own country and not expect some kind of violent backlash from them.

And matters are definitely going to get much worse.

He ends with a weasel-worded half-endorsement of this “violent backlash.”

The war against the Left will just continue escalating and, at some stage, with any luck, the leftists and the feminists will be defeated without too much carnage.

Well, that’s reassuring. Harry doesn’t want there to be “too much carnage.”

Which naturally leads to the question: just what does Harry regard as the right amount of carnage?

I hope we never have to find out.

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
alpha males misogyny MRA penises reddit

Batmen’s Rights

I didn't know they carried books like that in the library.

There are many things that are annoying, obviously, about Reddit’s Men’s Rights subreddit. One thing that isn’t: a relatively new commenter there by the name of BatmensBegins, a fellow who knows how to get right to the heart of any argument. Provided that heart is him, Batman.

A few of his recent comments will give you an idea of his perspicacity.

In a discussion of a New Zealand business lobbyist sacked for saying that women get paid less because they menstruate:

This is why the best form of labor is me, Batman. Batman don’t menstruate. Batman is driven by a psychopathic desire for vengeance and unresolved Oedipal feelings. Batman’s the perfect man. Batman men-struates.

Batman.

In a discussion of an article about prominent men recently accused of rape:

[T]here’s one blind spot in the article: what of the billionaire playboys who have lost their fathers and now fight crime dressed as a bat? Not that I’m one myself, mind you. But if you think about it, they’re the real victims here.

In a discussion of women being, you know, evil goldigging whores:

As Batman, I have many hysterical biddies seeking to con me out of my hard-earned money. Women such as Grass Girl, Girl Joker and Latex Ass. Thankfully, I’ve built up a resistance to their feminine wiles and devious behavior. I can’t even get an erection anymore.

I would just like to salute BatmensBegins for his single-minded devotion to bringing up the important topic of Batman whenever and wherever he posts.

Also, if you’re a Redditor, I highly recommend that you check out a fledgling subreddit called r/againstmensrights. It’s not actually against men’s rights, per se, just the army of douchebags who make up the Men’s Rights Movement as we know it today. It hasn’t quite hit critical mass yet in terms of comments or subscribers, but it’s a handy place to find out about the latest bits of egregious misogyny being upvoted elsewhere on Reddit.

 

Categories
evil women I'm totally being sarcastic misogyny MRA reddit

All the Spinster Ladies

How spinster ladies try to distract themselves from their deep loneliness

Oh, you ladies. Getting jobs! Hiring other ladies! Demanding to be paid the same as men! You don’t realize just how short-sighted these strategies really are.

Luckily, you’ve got Sgt_Sweetness on Reddit’s Men’s Rights subreddit to explain just where you went wrong.

[W]omen are slowly but surely becoming in charge of the work place. They dominate the HR Department of almost all companies. Especially large corporations. I’ve have never met a male HR person before and I am no young person anymore. This allows for women to decide who gets hired and fired. Do you know what pattern I see though? More and more women being chosen over men simply because women like to hire women over men. …

So this creates a shift in society towards women having more jobs than men. Better paying jobs too.

Ladies! With jobs! Oh noes! Damn those HR ladies, who totally and completely run the workplace, and never, say, just handle the paperwork when some dude higher up on the corporate ladder decides to hire someone!

But these ladies will get their comeuppance, for sure. For, you see:

Women while keeping their thin veneer of Feminist ideals, still want the ideal American family. They yearn to quit their jobs and marry a man who is handsome, funny, and makes more money than she does. …

So what we have hear is a situation: Women are taking more jobs than men and are starting to make more than men. But they want to have a partner who earns more than they do.

Uh oh.

What we have hear is a ticking time bomb. I’ve seen its effects first hand too. I know of 10 different women who are college graduates and have decent jobs. They are also desperately single. Like talks to their cats lonely.

Huh. I’m not sure where he’s going with this whole “talks to cats” thing. I mean, I talk to my cat. I think it’s only when the cat starts talking back to you you’ve got to worry, because then either you’ve just swallowed a handful of peyote buttons, or cats, who could speak all along, have just launched their secret plans to take over the world.

That aside, back to that ticking timebomb and those lonely, lonely women:

Nothing wrong with them: they are in shape, look good, nice personality, and make good money. But they won’t date down, as it were. I tried to set them up on some dates, but they would rather die inside from loneliness than date someone who they view is beneath them.

Just wait until this little problem becomes widespread. Because this is going to cause a lot of spinsters.

Bad news for the ladies, I guess. Good news for cats, though. Their supply of spinsters is going to go through the roof!

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

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

The work of a "hero?"

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

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

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

And then the justifications began:

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

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

Followed by a smug told-you-so:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Then back to the “innocent children” remark:

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

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

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

Categories
idiocy MRA

MRA headline of the day: The More Affective We Are …

It’s a good thing that the guy behind the blog What Men are Saying About Women doesn’t actually speak for all men. Because this headline, well, it doesn’t exactly make me proud for my gender.

Let’s set aside the spelling for a moment, and turn instead to those mysterious two dots at the end. WHAT ARE THEY?!! A period is one dot. Ellipses, three. NO LANGUAGE ON EARTH USES TWO PERIODS FOR ANYTHING.

UPDATE: He “fixed” the headline by correcting the spelling of “louder.” But he kept “affective.” And the two dots are STILL THERE. Is he just fucking with me? Bastard.