With Richard Dawkins rapidly accelerating his schedule of Twitter meltdowns recently, it’s clearly time for some RICHARD DAWKINS TWITTER MELTDOWN BINGO!
The rules are simple:
Category: narcissism
Over in the Men’s Right’s subreddit, one new Social Injustice Warrior is weary, worn down by fighting the Bad Fight against the “Sarkeesian feminists” on Twitter. And what better way to convey one’s weariness than with a melodramatic monologue?
So he posted this:
Share this:
In the comments section to philosopher-douchebag Stefan Molyneux’s review of Frozen, a self-described “attractive young woman” posts a review of his hour-long review that is so effusively positive that it almost sounds like it was posted by the man himself.
Oh, wait: he did post it himself.
![Screen Shot 2014-07-10 at Thu, [Jul 10], 14 1](https://i0.wp.com/www.wehuntedthemammoth.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/screen-shot-2014-07-10-at-thu-jul-10-14-1.png?ssl=1)
Can this be real? I mean, it is real; I just went and got the screenshot. But is it really possible that Mr. M tried to sockpuppet in the comments to his own video, posing as his own biggest fan? Or did some worshipful young hottie sneak onto his laptop when he wasn’t looking and post the comment? What kind of “philosopher” does that? Did Jean-Paul Sartre send love letters to himself? Did Kierkegaard leave gushing messages on his own answering machine?
I think we can safely say “no,” at least to the latter, given that Mr. K died in 1855.
But what the hell, Stefan? I eagerly await your two-hour video explaining this one.
Also, if you could explain why my cell phone keeps randomly beeping, that would be great too. It’s really annoying.
(Thanks to everyone who sent this to me.)
UPDATE: I figured out the problem with my cell phone! Oh, and I have also been told that Stef’s self-congratulatory comment was actually a repost of a comment from someone else. He wasn’t pretending to be a young hottie. He was posting a quote from a young hottie without indicating in any way that it was a quote from someone other than him. Good job! So I’ve changed “written” to “posted” in the text above.
Now, though, I’m wondering if that person also wrote the comment that Stef used to introduce his video:
![Screen Shot 2014-07-10 at Thu, [Jul 10], 14 2](https://i0.wp.com/www.wehuntedthemammoth.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/screen-shot-2014-07-10-at-thu-jul-10-14-2.png?ssl=1)
I mean, that has to be written by someone else, because what kind of arrogant douchenozzle would not only write about himself in the third person but also describe his own video as “must watch?” David Futrelle needs to know.
Share this:
Misogyny Theater is back with Episode 4!
If you paid any attention to A Voice for Men’s recent conference in – well, near – Detroit, you probably heard about the guy who was ejected from the conference after reportedly “petting” a reporter and a number of other men. (You can read about him here.)
In this episode of Misogyny Theater, we return to the Man Going His Own Way who calls himself Sandman to hear his highly speculative theories about this gentleman and his activities.
Sandman also warns Men’s Rightsers and MGTOWers that if they get together in large groups, they will inevitably attract opportunistic sex-seekers eager to take advantage of the man surplus for their own perverse ends. Apparently, angry dudes who hate women are like catnip to gay men and straight ladies alike.
The audio for this little cartoon of mine comes from Sandman’s video “Men’s Rights Molester.” I have indicated edits in the audio with little scratchy sounds. And I’ve bleeped out the name of the alleged molester. Otherwise it’s all straight Sandman.
My previous Misogyny Theater episode featuring Sandman can be found here.
Crowd chatter and buzzer sounds from FreeSFX.
Share this:
Categories
a voice for men antifeminism antifeminist women attention seeking boner rage creepy elliot rodger empathy deficit entitled babies entitlement evil sexy ladies evil women grandiosity heartiste imaginary oppression incel irony alert men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny MRA narcissism PUA PUAhate racism
Heartiste takes on an "egotistic, attention starved, solipsistic, passive aggressive, perpetually aggrieved … manlet" who somehow isn't him.
The We Hunted the Mammoth Pledge Drive continues! If you haven’t already, please consider sending some bucks my way. (And don’t worry that the PayPal page says Man Boobz.)
Thanks! (And thanks again to all who’ve already donated.) Now back to our regularly scheduled programming:
Well, the great minds of the manosphere have been going into overdrive trying to explain away the fact that a man who had a lot in common with them, ideology-wise, murdered six innocent people on Friday as part of a “Day of Retribution” that he had hoped would involve a lot more dead bodies, particularly of the blonde, female variety.
We had noted cultural commenter JudgyBitch (Janet Bloomfield) looking at Elliot Rodger, a man who wrote a 140-page manifesto detailing his hatred of women and girls, a manifesto that contained the following paragraph:
Women are like a plague. They don’t deserve to have any rights. Their wickedness must be contained in order prevent future generations from falling to degeneracy. Women are vicious, evil, barbaric animals, and they need to be treated as such.
.. and which ended with a fantasy of putting all the women in the world in concentration camps and starving them to death, while Rodger took a position in a giant tower built just for him “where I can oversee the entire concentration camp and gleefully watch them all die,” and suggesting that Rodger wasn’t actually a misogynist, because he wasn’t able to get into the sorority and murder all the “blonde sluts” he had hoped to murder and so ended up killing more men than women.
Share this:
Categories
a voice for men ableism advocacy of violence alpha males antifeminism armageddon creepy empathy deficit entitlement evil sexy ladies evil women FemRAs FeMRAsplaining fidelbogen grandiosity hypergamy imaginary oppression incel irony alert judgybitch lying liars men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny MRA narcissism oppressed men playing the victim PUAhate racism taking pleasure in women's pain terrorism
Why Elliot Rodger's misogyny matters
When a white supremacist murders blacks or Jews, no one doubts that his murders are driven by his hateful, bigoted ideology. When homophobes attack a gay youth, we rightly label this a hate crime.
But when a man filled to overflowing with hatred of women acts upon this hatred and launches a killing spree targeting women, many people find it hard to accept that his violence has anything to do with his misogyny. They’re quick to blame it on practically anything else they can think of – guns, video games, mental illness – though none of these things in themselves would explain why a killer would target women.
In the case of Elliot Rodger, who set out on Friday night aiming, as he put it in a chilling video, to “slaughter every single spoiled, stuck-up, blonde slut” in a popular sorority house at the University of California, Santa Barbara, some Men’s Rights activists and other manospherians are doing their best to convince the world that misogyny had nothing to do with it.
Share this:
Categories
all about the menz alpha males beta males boner rage empathy deficit entitlement evil sexy ladies evil women heartiste imaginary oppression incel internecine warfare irony alert men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny narcissism nice guys playing the victim PUA PUAhate red pill rhymes with roosh self-congratulation
Pickup artists argue that "Game" is the solution to Elliot Rodger-style rampages. Here's why they're wrong.
Pickup artists, classy fellows that they are, are using Elliot Rodger’s killing rampage as a marketing ploy. In the comments to one of Rodger’s videos on YouTube, a company called Strategic Dating Coach offered their solution to prevent similar shootings in the future: send disturbed young men who can’t get dates to one of their coaching sessions!
While this response to Rodger’s mass killing is uniquely crass, the argument that “Game saves lives” is hardly new. To PUAs like Heartiste and Roosh Valizadeh it’s practically an article of faith.
Share this:
Categories
all about the menz alpha males beta males boner rage empathy deficit entitlement evil sexy ladies evil women heartiste imaginary oppression incel internecine warfare irony alert men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny narcissism nice guys playing the victim PUA PUAhate red pill rhymes with roosh self-congratulation
Pickup artists argue that "Game" is the solution to Elliot Rodger-style rampages. Here’s why they’re wrong.
Pickup artists, classy fellows that they are, are using Elliot Rodger’s killing rampage as a marketing ploy. In the comments to one of Rodger’s videos on YouTube, a company called Strategic Dating Coach offered their solution to prevent similar shootings in the future: send disturbed young men who can’t get dates to one of their coaching sessions!
While this response to Rodger’s mass killing is uniquely crass, the argument that “Game saves lives” is hardly new. To PUAs like Heartiste and Roosh Valizadeh it’s practically an article of faith.
Share this:
Yesterday Warren Farrell – the intellectual grandfather of the Men’s Rights movement, the man who single-handedly came up with probably half of the terrible arguments that are endlessly rehashed daily in the manosphere – went to Reddit and proclaimed “ask me anything!”
And so we, and a lot of other people, did. And he even answered a couple of the questions I posted here yesterday – though as I sort of suspected he pointedly ignored the questions about his incest research. Still, there were so many astounding things said in that discussion, both by Farrell himself and by his various supporters, that it’s going to take a couple of posts to get to them all.
Let’s just start with the ass question, shall we? Because there was nothing quite so astounding in that whole sprawling thread, or at least the portion of it that I managed to read, as “Dr.” Farrell’s – he has a PhD in political science –answer to the ass question.
![DoloresCruz1982 86 points 22 hours ago (174|87) Why is a woman's butt on the cover of a book about problems faced by males in our society? permalink save report give gold reply [–]warrenfarrell [S] 2 points 20 hours ago (184|182) i assume you're referring to the profile of a woman's rear on the new ebook edition of The Myth of Male Power. first, that was my choice--i don't want to put that off on the publisher! i chose that to illustrate that the heterosexual man's attraction to the naked body of a beautiful woman takes the power out of our upper brain and transports it into our lower brain. every heterosexual male knows this. and the sooner men confront the powerlessness of being a prisoner to this instinct, we may earn less money to pay for women's drinks, dinners and diamonds, but we'll have more control over our lives, and therefor more real power. it's in women's interests for me to confront this. many heterosexual women feel imprisoned by men's inability to be attracted to women who are more beautiful internally even if their rear is not perfect.](https://i0.wp.com/www.wehuntedthemammoth.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/warrenbutt.png?resize=528%2C398&ssl=1)
That’s right. Warren Farrell literally believes that heterosexual men are powerless in the face of SEXY FEMALE BUTTS. They are BUTT HYPNOTIZED by women’s shapely buttocks, virtual prisoners to the power of DAT ASS.
Not only that, but they are slaves as well, forced to earn more money than women so that they can “pay for women’s drinks, dinners and diamonds.” Who knew that the wage gap was caused by the ass crack?
We like big butts, and we cannot lie. But that way tyranny, I espy.
Only if men can free themselves from the TYRANNY OF THE BUTT they can “have more control over [their] lives, and therefor [sic] more real power.”
But who will write the new Declaration of Independence from the tyranny of Queen Ass?
When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for horny dudes to get rid of the boners which those ladies have caused with their smokin hot dumpers and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the babies who have got back requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation, and that is, ladies we can’t think straight if we’re looking at DAT ASS all the time.
Oh, but “Dr.” Farrell is worried about the ladies, too. I mean, he said so:
it’s in women’s interests for me to confront this. many heterosexual women feel imprisoned by men’s inability to be attracted to women who are more beautiful internally even if their rear is not perfect.
Yes, you’re beautiful on the inside to m….holy crap did you see the ass on HER!?
Now, this isn’t entirely new. As I’ve noted before, Farrell makes a version of this argument in his book, talking about secretaries manipulating their bosses with their “miniskirt power, cleavage power, and flirtation power,” [p. 21] describing “female beauty” as “the world’s most potent drug,” [p. 85], and arguing that “many men feel ‘under the influence’ the moment they see a beautiful woman.” [p. 320]
But these, er, arguments weren’t the central focus of his rambling treatise. Now, at the age of 70, by not only putting a naked ass on the cover of his book, but also by defending it in such ludicrously overblown terms, he’s decided to put this unsolicited update from his penis at the center of his argument about the alleged powerlessness of men.
Yep, the closest thing that the Men’s Rights movement has to an intellectual heavyweight seems to think that the most pressing issue facing men today is how sad and mad and confused they feel because they can’t immediately have sex with every hot piece of ass that walks by (and, presumably, the women attached to these asses).
It’s really hard to find a better symbol of the sexual entitlement – and sexual resentment – that lies at the heart of the Men’s Rights movement than this.
Oh, and by the way, my new book is still available for purchase. So far I have sold no copies. Which might have something to do with the $1000 price tag, and also the fact that I haven’t actually written it. But you’ve got to admit the cover is pretty good.
In case you needed a clearer explanation of the power of women’s bodacious hineys, one Redditor by the name of Doldenberg has scienced things up for us and provided us all this useful graph. First, his brief explanation:
Being a brave Alpha from TRP, I have found the solution to the evident misandrist oppression of men by cute butt owners meaning owners of cute butts, not cute owners of butts, or butt owners of cute, or…, that is, ranking butts on an objective BMV (butt market value) scale. I’ve made the data up in my head, but it seems plausible. According to this data, the butt loses BMV when having sat on to many objects, while it’s cuteness only works as a limiting factor. I have made a handy graph[1] with supporting data and sources to explain my theory.
Share this:
Categories
a new woman to hate a voice for men a woman is always to blame advocacy of violence antifeminism entitled babies evil women excusing abuse FemRAs GirlWritesWhat harassment hypocrisy mantrum men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny MRA narcissism not-quite-explicit threats not-quite-plausible deniability paul elam playing the victim things that aren't satire threats
After a feminist activist at Queen’s University reports being attacked, possibly by an MRA, the king of “f their sh*t up” responds with angry denial
A student at Queen’s University in Kingston, Ontario, says she was attacked and beaten by a strange man after receiving threatening messages about her opposition to a Men’s Rights group on campus. On Thursday, Danielle d’Entremont posted a picture of her bruised face to Facebook along with this explanation:
Just walked out of my house and got attacked by a stranger. I was punched in the face multiple times and lost half my tooth. This was after a few threatening emails regarding my support for feminist activities on campus. I can’t say for sure if the two are connected, however the attacker was a male who knew my name.
The campus Men’s Issues Awareness Society (MIAS) – the group d’Entremont has been fighting – has condemned the attack, as has the Canadian Association for Equality (CAFE), which co-sponsored a talk the MIAS put on Thursday. The police are investigating.
Right now, this is pretty much all we know about the story. Not that it this has stopped MRAs from offering their very fervent opinions on the matter.
Before we get to them, here are a few of my own:
