Categories
antifeminism creepy disgusting women douchebaggery evil women men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny MRA nice guys oppressed men pedophiles oh sorry ephebophiles penises racism rape rapey reactionary bullshit reddit that's not funny! thug-lovers

Is Reddit nothing more than a collection of rape jokes and pedophilia apologias?

Nope! As the totally scientific chart above shows, it also contains: generalized misogyny, racism, atheist dickbaggery, and last but not least: lots of pics hosted on imgur!

Here, some recent data, most of which I have borrowed from ShitRedditSays. I’ve put the number of upvotes for each post in brackets, when relevant.

Rape jokes:

Guys, you’re not making enough rape jokes! [+856]

“I’d fuck her until the neighbours complained about the smell.” [+250] [Bonus points: Also a murder and necrophilia joke!]

Rape clock [+36]

Redditors mock a rape victim! [Assorted upvoted posts]

Pedophilia apologia:

Admitted pedo and child porn fancier compares himself with Gandhi [+83]

More goodness (by which I mean badness) from that thread, courtesy of SRS.

Oh noes! Evil anti-pedos threaten free pedo speech! [+25]

He’s been shamed into deleting it by you. Are you happy now? For the record, mattperrin said “Why does she have to be 18? So she can be in porn? Very very few girls enter porn, and if you’re just talking about being sexually aroused by her, that’s okay for anyone 13+”.

Pedo joke … perfection! [+100]

General Misogyny (and creepiness):

Ha Ha! Girls can’t work cameras! [+636]

Girls only like thugs and they’re all dumb and why oh why won’t they go out with a nice guy like me? Did I mention I hate women?  [+assorted massive upvotes]

Help me prove to this guy feminism is no longer needed. (Please do not use profanity and words like “cunt” though.) [This whole discussion is sort of delicious; our pal ThingsAreBad, aka JeremiahMRA, pops in to argue that feminism was never needed because everything was peachy back when women couldn’t vote.]

I’d fuck her right into a broken hip. [+588] [Referencing Helen Mirren.]

“She has very large holes in her earlobes. About the circumference of an erect penis. She is also very attractive. Myself and many other redditors, immediately upon viewing the picture, imagined putting our penises through those holes.” [+10]

Bonus! More random misogyny.

Racism:

“I just had sex with my first black guy, and believe me it’s true what they say…he stole my t.v.” [+477]

“No no no, that will just attract more rapists.” [+70] [BONUS POINT: Is also a rape joke!]

Atheist douchebags:

Reddit Makes Me Hate Atheists, by Rebecca Watson. As you’ll notice, her examples from r/atheism contain many massively upvoted rape and pedophilia jokes, not to mention lots more generalized misogynistic douchebaggery. The circle is complete!

But generally speaking you can pick almost any random highly upvoted post here for endless more examples of what makes even atheist activists hate Reddit atheists.

Which have helped to inspire this meme.

Pics on Imgur:

Top posts on (my) Reddit at the moment:

Then again, random pics of cute dogs and squirrel-riding frogs are certainly preferable to more angry racist rapey hatey pedo-justifying crap. So, yay imgur, I guess? (At least when it’s not being used to post still more angry racist rapey hatey pedo-justifying crap.)

Categories
antifeminism creepy evil women I'm totally being sarcastic misandry misogyny MRA none dare call it conspiracy oppressed men paul elam threats

AgentOrange and the Screencaps of Feminazi Doom

Santa is no longer interested in bringing joy to girls.

Christmas came early for the MRAs this year. Earlier this week, a generous soul calling himself AgentOrange posted a 165 MB present online for them, an assortment of super-secret internet postings from a private forum connected to the RadFem Hub, which Mr. Orange collected by bravely going behind enemy lines and, er, screencapping a bunch of shit. As the OFFICIAL PRESS RELEASE declared:

[B]oth feminists and MRAs alike, have been anxiously awaiting the promised complete files of screen shots and associated materials collected by Agent Orange.

These files are apparently so vile and incendiary that Mr. Orange has deemed it necessary to reveal the personal information of some of the RadFemHub commenters. Not to encourage anyone to stalk or harass or harm them, just so that those offended by them can do whatever it is people do when personal info is leaked on the internet that doesn’t involve stalking or harassing or harming them. Send them postcards?

But in any case there is no reason whatsoever to think that a group of really really really angry people who love making threats on the internet and  think their opponents are as bad as Hitler could ever do anything that would be in any way problematic.

So, you might ask, what dastardly secrets do these new files disclose? Oddly, the PRESS RELEASE doesn’t actually specify. The AgentOrange website doesn’t say either. And the 165 MB download is just a bunch of files with no explanation.

But I have spent some time going through these files myself in a completely random manner, which is evidently what AgentOrange expects everyone who downloads the files to do. To be perfectly honest, I haven’t spent that much time on this. I’ve really been quite busy with other things. But I have spent some time. More than twenty minutes, anyway.

So let me share with you some preliminary findings.

Here, straight from the AgentOrange files, are some RadFems discussing a news story about a male midwife who thinks that mothers should embrace the pain of childbirth as a “rite of passage.” (Click on the teensy image on the right to get it full-sized.)

Apparently some of those RadFems don’t think this is a good idea! One of them says:

Does he even know what uterine cramps/contractions even feel like?

Another adds:

I read that and rolled my eyes. … If only it were possible to subject mister midwife (my ass) to the joyous pain of childbirth. I guess a swift kick to the balls is as close as he’s ever going to come to it.

Clearly suggesting that a male midwife suffer pain similar to what he suggests women should suffer is nothing short of GENOCIDE!

But wait, there’s more! Another woman writes:

There is no reason why women should have to endure pain like this in this day and age.

That sounds exactly like something HITLER would have said! (If you replace “women” with “Jews” and “no reason” with “every reason.”)

Still another adds:

This is phenomenally stupid, and completely out of step with current pain management theory and procedures.

Is there no end to this feminazi depravity!?

Oh, but there’s more, much more. In this thread — click the image to the right — the evil RadFems complain about guys trying to pick them up in a creepy manner. One of the ladies suggests that a good way to get the guys to leave you alone is to tell them you’re a widow.

You see now that feminism is all about DECEPTION!

Maybe it should be called Deceptionism!

Ok, ok, just one more. In a thread called “I’m mad as hell” — right over there on the right again — one commenter complains about getting a computer virus.

She’s so mad she says she’s even considering downloading Ubuntu and forgoing all Microsoft products, which are frequently targets of viruses! What? Huh? DOES NOT COMPUTE. BZZZZZZZ. LADY USING LINUX ERROR ERROR. *$^*$()*%(*$$$$$$$$. EMERGENCY SHUTDOWN.

CARRIER.

REBOOTING.

FLUSHING CACHE.

Ok. I’m back. Another commenter there says something about castrating guys who write viruses.

That does seem a little excessive. Though I don’t think she means it literally.

I will return to this topic later, after I recover.

In the meantime, if you want to see the most ridiculous comments on the matter from Reddit’s Men’s Rightsers, you can find some of them collected together here. Among the highlights:

Violence on men is incited daily, by the hour, by the second. Every time someone makes a post on reddit there is a sexist opinion about all men.

This isn’t public shaming, its outing criminals that are planning your genocide.

A story of a plan of naziesque proportions is about to broken.

I think we can all agree that feminism inevitably heads down the road of male genocide.

MRAs, more melodramatic than emo kids.

Oh, and by the way, two of the Reddit quotes above come from a fellow known on Reddit as Sigi1, but who may be more familiar to Man Boobzers as Eoghan. Without clicking on the links, can you guess which two?

This post contains:

Categories
$MONEY$ crackpottery creepy I'm totally being sarcastic men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny MRA oppressed men PUA racism rapey reactionary bullshit sex

Homeless girls: A frugal alternative to pricey prostitutes!

NOTE: The title of this post is sarcastic. If you found this post through a Google search because you’re actually looking for tips on how to exploit desperate young women, you’re a piece of shit, and this post is not for you. Go away, and go fuck yourself.

Fellas! Want sex, but don’t have the money to shell out on prostitutes? Hate the time and effort it takes to talk a non-professional sex-having women into having sex with you? A recent post by Advocatus Diaboli on the always delightful In Mala Fide offered an elegant solution for horny but frugal men. In a post titled Pooning on a Tight Budget, AD explained the technique that has worked for him:

Getting poor, but good-looking, young girls (18-23) to have sex with [you] in return for some timely financial help.

Turns out that women who are poor and desperate can be exploited for your own sexy purposes!

Of course, it’s not always quite as easy as it might seem.

I should be upfront that getting amateur women to have sex for money can be tricky as most of them believe that they are not whores. Moreover, poor young women often have “boyfriends” and white knight orbiters. So I created a set of filters and rules to screen out the most problematic types.

According to AD, all you have to do is to:

Avoid all girls who have obvious and serious drug and mental health issues or have lived on the street for over 6 weeks at a stretch.

Happily for you, that still leaves lots of girls ripe for the picking! AD suggests you focus your attention on:

Freshly homeless young girls, especially those who hangout in mixed groups.

The safest ones are those who are into pot, drumming, dreadlocks et cetera. You can find them in many larger cities in the spring and summer. While I would never trust them with any significant amount of money, many are reasonably decent human beings.

You might not think you’d have much in common to talk about with these women – what with them being “reasonably decent human beings” and you being a “completely reprehensible pile of shit” – but you’d be surprised.

Strike up a conversation with them, engage them and see where it leads. But you must make it plainly obvious that you are interested in them sexually, but that all favors require reciprocation. Once you get to know them, a decent round of drinks, snacks, money for pot, a small necessary item of clothing, decent dinner with booze will almost guarantee you a good lay (or at least a couple of BJs).

And if you crunch the numbers you’ll see it’s really quite a frugal solution.

Your initial financial hit for hanging out with them is very small, and once they are sleeping with you.. it will often work to about $30-60 (cash equivalent or cash) per session. You may also get freebies..

But girls don’t necessarily have to be literally homeless to be desperate enough to sleep with you for money. Nope! You may also find great cost-savings from targeting:

Girls who are not homeless, but are just hanging on.

How do you find these lovely ladies? Keep an eye out for women working really shitty jobs that don’t pay shit! You’ll find them conveniently located

in smaller retail stores or businesses that pay minimum wage with no tips. Build a rapport and be fairly upfront about your interest, but do not come across as desperate. Go to her workplace and talk to her when you are in that area, but do not stalk her.

Yep, it turns out that even desperate women can be creeped out. So play it cool! Stalking’s for fools!

There’s another possible hurdle: other dudes.

Such women often have “boyfriends,” however, they are often just as poor or poorer than her. You can get pussy as long as you are firm about the need for reciprocation. This category of girls might be more willing to give BJs than having ‘real sex.’ But do you really care?

Just remember to keep to your budget!

Restrict your help to less than $200 at any one time AND only after she has put out a couple of times.

And then there’s AD’s favorite category of desperate women:

Girls who are poor, but not homeless and have no “boyfriends” + have moved to the city within the last eight weeks.

You have hit the jackpot! 

Just don’t get carried away. Remember: you’re in charge, and she should know it!

Remember these girls can become de facto GFs, but do not restrict yourself to one. While you do not have to rub it in their faces, they should know that you are always looking around for a better deal. But treat them a bit better than type 1 and 2, they do give more per dollar spent on them.

Your accountant will be so, so proud of you!

Just remember:

They will play by your rules as long as they are not too dehumanizing, and they are often cheaper than professional whores.

Now that’s a motto to live by!

Amazingly, not all of the readers of In Mala Fide appreciated AD’s little treatise.

Simon invoked the c-word, before tossing in some racism:

Mate you are one deadset sad cunt. It’s no surprise to know you’re Indian.

Cathater broke out the other c-word:

Pretty damn creepy. You sound like you have no soul. Actually, you might be the first member of a new species: the perfectly rational, purely selfish utility-maximizing agent (Homo Economicus) that Austrian economists and Randroids have always droned on and on about.

Yes, I was as surprised as you are to read an actually reasonable critique of the post on In Mala Fide.

Don’t worry, though, the rest of the comments mostly lived up to the foul standards of the blog.

Ryu worried about the old slippery slope. If you start by suggesting that PUAs target homeless women, the next thing you know they’ll advocate sex with children! And then down the slippery slope you’ll slide:

This is the direction that PU takes one in. I’m surprised that there haven’t been any PUAs who say that during a dry spell we should go to gay bars and pick up men. Just to keep your dick wet, you know.

Savrola returned to the theme of race:

There’s a problem WNs have yet to deal with. Well off second-generation foreigners like AD taking advantage of your impoverished women of older native stock, after they’ve taken your jobs.

Can’t keep ‘em here, can’t send ‘em back.

What to do?

Blog proprietor Ferdinand Bardamu waded in to take a shot at all the “white knights” sticking up for the gals.

ROFLMAO at all these white knights. …

If you want to blame someone, blame the morally debased white women who would rather blow a stranger for $200 then work honestly (pull yourself up by your bootstraps, slob! nobody owes you anything!).

We’re living in Soviet Amerika (and Soviet Kanada). All of your daughters are whores or will become whores, soon as the price tag gets high enough.

Meanwhile, Stoner With a Boner, who sometimes graces the comments section here with his always trenchant wisdom, took a stand on behalf of the real victims here: dudes paying their own hard-earned money to icky ladies for sex.

Personally, I find the idea of clocking more hours at a job I hate just to hand $200 to a prostitute who would probably leave me dying in the street rather than help degrading.

Men, the forgotten victims once again.

This post contains:

Categories
beta males manginas misogyny MRA nice guys oppressed men rape rapey reactionary bullshit victimhood

Dudes: silent no more!

This tiny kitten actually has nothing to do with the post.

Did Tom Matlack of the Good Men Project – not to be confused with Ben Matlock, fictional defense lawyer beloved by the elderly – swallow one of those mysterious “red pills” I keep hearing about on Men’s Rights blogs? Whatever he swallowed, it’s apparently causing him to hallucinate.

How else to explain his recent post on the GMP site titled “Being a Dude Is a Good Thing.” Now, as a dude who spends a good deal of time every day being a dude, I’ve got nothing against anyone being a dude, provided that’s what they want to be. It’s just that the piece itself is full of some rather strange generalizations that don’t actually seem to be, you know, true, at least not in what’s commonly known as “the real world.”

Rather than try to rebut his argument, because he doesn’t seem to have much of one, let’s just look at some of his loopier pronouncements:

Why do men get blamed for everything?

Uh, because they don’t? Sure, men get blamed for things, but guess what? Women get blamed for things all the time, too, from witchcraft, to divorce, to getting themselves raped, battered or killed. They’ve been blamed for earthquakes, for “inciting” male lust, for killing chivalry and “killing off real men,” for “taking roles intended by God only for men.” Heck, some inventive sorts have even figured out how to blame women for men who are assholes. And this guy has decided that “Black Women are to blame for the disrespect Black Men show towards Black Women.” For endless additional examples, scroll back through the posts and comments here, visit any of the blogs on my “boob roll,” or simply continue living on planet earth.

Back to Matlack, whose generalizations get more surreal by the sentence:

In the locker room, in the bathroom, on the walk out of the board room, in my conversations with men of all kinds, that’s what I hear more than anything. The resignation that to be a man is to be unacceptable at some level to the woman in your life.

Really? Who on earth are you hanging out with? And what women are they hanging out with? Are men other than Tom Matlack and his possibly apocryphal conversational partners actually having conversations like this on a regular basis? If the “woman in your life” basically hates men, what is she doing with you, and what are you doing with her?

One close friend jokes, “When speaking to my wife I always make sure to look at the ground in deference. And I make sure not to make any sudden movements.”

Um, what?

I’ve watched him. He loves his wife.

He’s a very competent human being. But with her he’s decided the only way to survive is to submit. The female view is the right view. The male view just gets you into trouble.

You see what I meant before about the hallucinations, right?

But Matlack suggests there is hope for the poor demure, never-before-heard-from men of the world. Apparently they are starting to open their mouths at last.

It seems that the blame game in the mainstream, whether through the minimization of male life in pop culture or on television or through the continued obsession with men behaving badly, has finally struck a chord with the average guy.

Let’s just pause a moment to reflect on this whole “minimization of male life in pop culture or on television.” Mr. Matlack, do you actually watch movies or television, or visit libraries or anything like that? Most movies revolve around men as the main characters, with women in many cases serving as little more than a love interest or simply as scenery. Have you ever heard of the Bechdel test? Read up on it, run the test on some of your favorite films, and then get back to us on the “minimization of male life in pop culture.”

Now back to Matlack’s manifesto:

We are no longer willing to be blamed for being men. We are no longer willing to avert our gazes and stay silent about our feelings. We are raising our voices and telling our stories in our own male vocabulary.

Yeah, because men have been so utterly silent about their feelings, their opinons, and pretty much everything, up until now.

To women, I assume the response is, “well, it’s about time.” But just remember when we talk it’s not going to sound like a women in a man’s body. It’s gonna be all dude. And you are just going to have to deal with that.

Ladies, prepare yourselves for a lot more Dudesplaining in the near future.  Dudes will be ignored no longer! Dudes!!! DUUUUUDESSS!!!!!!

EDITED TO ADD: Matlack’s gotten some responses on Twitter to his dudely roar; he’s posted a bunch of them here. Guest appearances by Amanda Marcotte and (seriously) Roseanne Barr.

Categories
douchebaggery false accusations men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny MRA oppressed men rape rapey reddit that's not funny!

The False Rape Society is shocked — shocked! — by a fraternity’s “who would you rape?” survey.

The False Rape Society is shocked and stunned that frat boys would joke about rape.

So you may have seen the story yesterday about the University of Vermont fraternity that was suspended for sending out a charming little survey that allegedly asked, among other things, “If you could rape someone, who would it be?” (FWIW, the frat now says it was the work of an individual frat member, not the chapter.)

Reading about this incident, I’m guessing that you probably didn’t ask yourself: “I wonder how the guys at the False Rape Society will use this news to push their own agenda?” Heck, I didn’t even think to ask myself that question. But while doing the rounds of the MRA blogs I’ve discovered the answer to that question, and here it is: FRS head honcho Pierce Harlan described the survey as “perhaps a poke at feminism’s fascination with rape,” then denounced it as “indefensible,” then ranted about the evils of false rape accusations. I guess that isn’t really shocking at all.

First, Harlan offered this take on the “who would you rape” question:

I assume the survey was sick humor, a crude satire of the fratboy culture, and perhaps a poke at feminism’s fascination with rape.

Yes, because any time men make rape jokes it’s probably because, you know, feminism, and its wacky obsession with rape.

Then Harlan went on to suggest that rape was no laughing matter – especially when it comes to rape that doesn’t happen:

Whatever it was intended to be, ultimately it is indefensible, because trivializing the word “rape” is no laughing matter, whether it’s a joke about the rape of male prisoners, or the fantasy “rape” of women, or a false rape claim intended to get a guy in, or a woman out of, trouble.

Well, that was quick. Let’s not talk about the trivialization of real rape. Let’s talk about the epidemic of “false rape accusations” that Harlan has convinced himself is the real problem here.

With nary a pause, Harlan moved on to complain about hypothetical feminists making a big deal out of this survey instead of joining him on his crusade:

There most certainly will be an outcry in the feminist blogosphere over this isolated incident

This what incident?

and it will be cited as proof positive to support the myth that ours is a  “rape culture.”

Yeah, I wonder why casual jokes about rape would possibly be considered as part of “rape culture.”

A “rape culture,” of course, not only would tolerate but would condone such a puerile survey.  Our society does neither. The only “rape” jokes our society condones concerns prison rape — and that’s because society actually encourages prison rape as a sort of “added bonus” punishment for any hapless male who lands in prison.  It is ironic that actual prison rape does not garner the outrage that this this sick fratboy humor is generating. Go figure.

This from a guy who doesn’t seem to have ever even bothered to mention the leading anti-prison rape organization, Just Detention, on his web site. (See here for more on the issue on Man Boobz.) Though he does offer three links on his main page to information about the statute of limitation for rape charges, in case anyone reading is worried about getting caught being falsely accused for something they did didn’t do a long time ago.

Meanwhile,rape jokes — and not just prison rape jokes — are everywhere. Harlan, I assume you are at least somewhat familiar with a little site called Reddit, where people not only laugh at rape jokes – they laugh at actual rape!

Meanwhile, in the comments on Harlan’s article, some False Rape Society readers don’t even bother to pretend that the “rape survey” bothers them. According to the commenter called “bad,”

We should be celebrating young men who stand up against misandry. We should be celebrating the frat that said “no means yes” and we should be celebrating the frat that created this survey, if it’s a real story.

An anonymous commenter takes it a step further:

I do not condemn this action,

in fact, I wish I’d thought of it.

It is a brilliant and very appropriate response to the way young men are being treated by college campuses.

When the answer to “who would you like to treat like a rapist” is “all college men”, I think that asking them who they’d like to rape is more than fair.

But it is Harlan’s response to these comments that is the most revealing:

By the way, I read the reaction of Bad and others as a natural backlash … against the unconscionable PC culture of misandry on campus. I happen to disagree with those who suggest this was acceptable, but their remarks should not be construed as evidence that we live in a “rape culture.” Like Steve, I read their comments more as an affirmation that we live in a false rape culture–a culture that more and more men are finding intolerable.

I, on the other hand, doubt that these young men have the first clue about misandry, feminism, or how colleges run roughshod over the rights of young men. I am always amazed when we hear from falsely accused people who “had not idea this goes on.” My guess is they were just being being “funny.” I would, frankly, love to find out I am wrong, and that not only would they never call for a woman to be actually raped, but that this was a protest against the pendulum swinging too far. In that case, I am still not sure I could find it acceptable but it would initiate an entirely different dialogue.

So the survey is “indefensible,” yet a totally understandable reaction to, and protest against, an “unconscionable PC culture of misandry.”

Got it.

EDITED TO ADD: Harlan has written a response, of sorts, to this post. It is a bit — what’s the word I’m looking for here? — zany.

Categories
$MONEY$ antifeminism evil women I'm totally being sarcastic men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny MRA oppressed men reactionary bullshit reddit

MRA: Women hate engineering because it’s too hard and they’d rather mooch off their husbands.

Computer Engineer Barbie is sick of this bullshit.

Ever wonder why there are so few women engineers? Well, wonder no more, because carchamp1 over on the Men’s Rights subreddit has the answer! It’s apparently his wife’s fault, or something. In a comment with two dozen upvotes at last count, he explains:

I put my wife through four years of college to be an engineer. That’s four years worth of college tuition and expenses, plus not having any income from her. She got a great job and worked for a couple years. She decided she didn’t want to work anymore so she could be a “stay-at-home-mom”. When I urged her to work she said if I didn’t like it she would take our kid and I could leave.

Women don’t want to be engineers that’s why there are so few. It’s too hard. It’s a lot easier doing the “hardest job in the world”, you know, be a mom and living off your husband.

End of story.

Yeah, it’s not like there might be any other reasons beyond laziness and ingratitude, or anything.

Categories
$MONEY$ antifeminism evil women marriage strike misogyny MRA oppressed men reactionary bullshit

You May Kiss the Other Bride: Girl-on-Girl “Feminist Marriage” will destroy America, apparently.

Our dystopian future.

MRAs, and manosphere dudes in general, tend to have some strange notions about marriage, many of them believing it to be little more than an elaborate scam, perpetrated by women, to rob men of their money and freedom and even their precious bodily fluids.

Given that they generally see marriage as a tool that women use to pry money from men, MRAs tend to be simply baffled by the very idea of gay marriage, and lesbian marriage in particular – why would any woman want to marry another woman instead of a man whom she could exploit?

Now the right-wing Center for Marriage Policy has put forth a case against gay marriage that’s even more bizarrely conspiracy minded than any MRA screed on the evils of straight marriage.

In a recent post on the Center for Marriage Policy website, the group’s president, David R. Usher, argues that proponents of gay marriage like the National Organization for Women are using the issue as a Trojan horse to promote a new kind of evil he calls “feminist marriage.”

Forget the adjectives “same sex” and “gay” as prepends to marriage.  These are victim-based marketing ploys invented by NOW to send us off into a heated debate about homosexuality and equal rights – distracting us from seeing their real goal of establishing “feminist marriage.”

Feminists … intend to convert marriage into a feminist-controlled government enterprise and subordinate the rest of America to fund it.

So what exactly is the strange beast he calls “feminist marriage’?

Feminist marriage is a three-way contract between two women and government.  Most women will have children, and few women can afford or will go to the extreme of using artificial insemination to achieve pregnancy.  Government is the automatic third party collecting “child support” entitlements for children born in these marriages.

Even non-lesbian ladies will want to get on this gravy train:

Feminist marriage will be far more attractive to women than heterosexual marriage.  Sexual orientation does not matter when two women marry and become “married room-mates.”  They can still have as many boyfriends as they want and capture the richest ones for baby-daddies by “forgetting” to use their invisible forms of birth control.  On average, a feminist marriage will have at least four income sources, two of them tax-free, plus backup welfare entitlements.

Meanwhile, those in traditional man-lady marriages will pay through the nose:

Those in traditional marriages will pay taxes that will be used to support feminist marriages where child support or welfare cannot be recouped, as occurs in our existing welfare state.  Traditional marriages have only two income sources, neither of them entitled or tax-free.  Over time, many women will prefer “feminist marriage” because of the very substantial economic and sexual liberation advantages.  Heterosexual marriage will be heavily burdened by costly marriage penalties, and be comparatively unattractive to women.

But what about dudes who marry each other? Tough luck, fellas!

Marriages between two men are destined to be the “marital underclass.”  In most cases, these men will become unconsenting “fathers.”   Women in feminist marriages will not mention they are not using birth control.   Men in male-male marriages will be forced to pay child support to women in feminist marriages and become economically enslaved to these women.

Apparently, most of the dudes who marry other dudes will not actually be gay.

Most men in these marriages will still have regular sexual encounters with women.  Some men in these “marriages” will want to have children.  These men will have even more illegitimate children with women in (or contemplating) feminist marriages, most often without informed reproductive consent. Over time, reproductive fraud will become the norm in the United States.

In addition to being so very very evil, feminist marriage is apparently very very complicated.

Women will no doubt enjoy the financial benefits of these new arrangements. But all of us – even the ladies married to other ladies — will pay in the long run  when “feminist marriage” ushers in a sort of economic fempocalypse:

Feminist marriage will demolish men’s drive to be successful, motivated workers.  It will also further weaken the American job market and harm women’s employment opportunities.  Our “Competitiveness Gap” with marriage-based Asian economies will expand as men’s productivity and educational attainment continues to decline, while increasing social problems, violence, and higher taxes stimulate businesses to remove jobs overseas.

Oh, hypothetical women using hypothetical girl-on-girl marriage to extort hypothetical money from hypothetical men, why must you be so hypothetically evil?

Even though the Center for Marriage Policy is little more than a cheerleader for traditional hetero marriage, I wouldn’t be surprised to see marriage-hating MRAs taking up this argument as their own. Politics makes strange bedfellows. As does “feminist marriage,” at least in the fevered imagination of David Usher.

Categories
antifeminism evil women false accusations idiocy misandry misogyny oppressed men western women suck

Offshoring? More like Off-whore-ing! Amirite fellas?

Women pretending to work.

All those jobs going overseas? Blame it on the ladies. At least according to MRA blogger The Fifth Horseman – the guy behind The Misandry Bubble, a bizarre apocalyptic manifesto that took the manosphere by storm last year. In a heavily upvoted comment on The Spearhead, TFH explains:

Not many people realize that outsourcing happens mostly due to feminism.

Feminists impose all sorts of costs on businesses in the US, who are forced to employ women despite the low productivity of these female employees.

Since an office is not allowed to have too many men, the next best answer is to move the entire department to India or China, where Western feminists can no longer harass it.

Since Western women cost more than what Western men produce, outsourcing is inevitable, as a means to avoid feminism.

The blogger behind the Pro-Male/Anti-Feminist Technology blog was impressed enough with this argument that he featured it in a post of his own, adding

Plenty of people have tried to run the numbers on the offshoring of jobs, but they can never figure out where the savings are supposed to be. Business would only offshore jobs if it made financial sense, and running the numbers indicates that it doesn’t make financial sense because any savings gets eaten up by the costs of offshoring.  That is the case until you include the costs of feminism in the analysis.  When someone runs the numbers on offshoring, they don’t include things like the costs of the false sexual harassment industry, affirmative action, and pure makework jobs for women in their analysis.  As soon as feminism is included, offshoring makes perfect financial sense for business. …

If you want jobs to come back to the US (and elsewhere), then you have to eliminate feminism.

Yeah, that’s gotta be it.

 

Categories
alpha males idiocy MRA oppressed men transphobia video

ABC’s “Work It”: Drag me to MRA hell

The programming executives at ABC have been secretly replaced by alien pod-people from planet MRA. That’s really the only logical explanation for “Work It,” an upcoming ABC sitcom whose premise seems to have been lifted straight from the comments section of The Spearhead. Here’s a description of the show from ABC:

With unemployment an ongoing issue and women now outnumbering men in the workforce, the new comedy series Work It follows two alpha males who realize the only way to beat the current “mancession” and land a job in pharmaceutical sales is to pass themselves off as women.

Yep, it’s a retread of Bosom Buddies, this time sprinkled with MRA buzzwords.  Alpha males, mancession – all we need is a few false rape accusations to complete the MRA-cliche soufflé.

Gawker has already hailed the show as an abomination that “Could Be the Worst Television Show in History.” After watching the promo clip below, I’m thinking that may be an understatement.

Of course, maybe I’m wrong. Maybe this isn’t an MRA show at all. Maybe it’s just a really inept and misguided attempt to explore the issues faced by trans women in the workplace.  But somehow I doubt it.

Categories
creepy evil women hypocrisy I'm totally being sarcastic kitties MRA oppressed men paul elam violence against men/women

Katherine Heigl: Ballbusting bigot?

That's not funny?

Most people who hate Katherine Heigl hate the actress because she seems like a bit of a diva, or because she keeps appearing in annoying rom-coms, including one with Ashton Kutcher that hurts my head when I even think about it. The fellas at Register-Her.com have another reason: she hates balls.  As in, testicles.

Well, not really. What the Register-Her fellas are worked up about is a PSA she did for Funny or Die in which she claims to be in favor of neutering pets not because she loves animals but simply because she hates balls so much. At one point she declares, tongue firmly in cheek:

I can’t cut the nuts off human men … yet. So, I’ve dedicated my time to the neutering of dogs, cause that’s legal.

The joke here, as any rational person can plainly see, isn’t that cutting off balls is inherently hilarious. The joke is that an actress with a reputation as a diva is basically doing her critics one better by portraying herself as a deranged, narcissistic, supremely creepy ball-hater.  And she’s spoofing her own bad reputation for a genuinely good cause: reducing cat and dog overpopulation and therefore the number of unwanted animals that are put to death in our nation’s animal shelters.

Of course that’s not how the fellas at Register-Her.com see it. And so they’ve put Heigl on their faux “offender registry” as a “bigot.” Their explanation?

The actress’s willingness to endorse male targeted sexual mutilation betrays a bigoted indifference to sexual violence, and justifies her inclusion on this registry in the category of bigot.

Presumably the fellas at Register-Her will next go after the people who have posted the more than twenty thousand YouTube videos that feature dudes getting hit in the nuts. Surely these videos, which feature actual violence against actual human balls are a far graver threat to the balls of the world than even Katherine Heigl.

The Register-Her Action Squad might start by tracking down the (admittedly quite ingenious) ball-hating dudes involved in this video.

And then move on to all the ball-hating bigots featured here:

And here are 50 more:

Better track down the ghost of Scott Joplin, too, for providing the music to the last one from beyond the grave.