Spearhead readers: Not actually as cool as Fonzie.
When sites enable users to upvote and downvote comments and posts, the rationale is generally that it improves discussion and filters out trolls. In practice, this is almost never the case; instead, the up and down arrows offer the majority a way to reward those who simply rehash the party line and punish those who dare suggest anything even remotely challenging. This punishment is accentuated on sites on which dissenters who are downvoted beyond a certain threshold see their comments literally vanish, unless readers click a special link to make them visible again.
So if these sorts of comments get upvoted, the question arises: what sort of horrible, beyond-the-pale nuttiness actually invites downvotes on the site? Well, in a recent guest posting there, someone calling himself Big Daddy From Cincinnati offered some (not really very good) internet dating advice for the misogynist masses. Along the way he opined that “women are amoral creatures, flakes, and they will reject you for anything, everything, nothing, the phase of the moon, or who knows what. They will lead you on and waste your time … . ”
While most commenters seemed to agree with this characterization of the ladies, one anonymous gal suggested instead that:
Yep, you can practically hear the Spearhead guys furiously downvoting that bit of heresy. What an outlandish opinion, clearly the work of an evil, misandrist troll! Probably a lesbian, too. I mean, what kind of crazy man-hating monster would she have to be not to be utterly smitten by the Spearhead men?
If you enjoyed this post, would you kindly use the “Share This” or one of the other buttons below to share it on Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, or wherever else you want. I appreciate it.
The woman he (allegedly) shot is apparently doing surprisingly well. The most recent news story on the incident I’ve found — posted on the 6th — says she was about to be released from the hospital:
April Lagasse, the mother of 20-year-old Amber Tripp, who was shot in the face with a .357 caliber handgun on New Year’s Eve, says her daughter has “recovered miraculously.”
Tripp, who was initially treated at Sky Lakes Medical Center in Klamath Falls before being air lifted to Oregon Health Sciences University in Portland, underwent surgery Wednesday and is scheduled to be released and return to Klamath Falls Thursday.
On what is evidently her Myspace page, the status update now reads: “Hello wonderful world i got shot and im still sexy.”
Meanwhile, on Gunwitch’s message board, someone claiming to be Amber Tripp’s sister has posted her account of the incident:
Hello my name is Meagan Tripp. My sister is Amber Tripp , the young women that wS shoot in the face on News Years Eve. It is a pure mircale that she is alive. Allen Ryese shot my sister in the face after he had been grabbing and touching her inapporite and my sister pulled her knife out and told him to leave her alone. My sister then put her knife away and went into a bedroom for about fifteen minutes. When my sister came out of the room Allen walked up to her and shot her in the face with a 357 magnum . The bullet that came out of the chamber was the only 38 bullet in the gun. The other two bullets were 357 s. This man had plenty of time to decide to shot her or not. This awful evil man deserves to rot in prison
Later, in response to some of those who responded to her, she added:
My sister is alive. No I personally was not at his brothers house when it happened. I did not know Allen personally but yes I do recognize him and his name. No it was not drug related and yes he shot her in the face point blank .
One of the regulars on the board responded to her original comment with this “hilarious” remark:
Gunwitch, if you really shot an unarmed woman, then fuck you. Fuck you for putting a bullet in a woman’s face. Fuck you for fueling many women’s fears about male sexuality. Fuck you for contributing to a stigma against harmless guys who are trying to study pickup to improve themselves.
As for the small subset of PUAs or MRAs who are making excuses for Gunwitch, and the feminists who are trying to paint Gunwitch and the people excusing him as representative of PUAs, or of men? Stop, just stop.
The diverse pickup subculture freaks me out a lot of the time, and frankly I’ve had hours of pickup artist research where I have read what these men have to say and felt like I wanted to take a vow of chastity rather than ever risk having sex with one of them, ever. … I think there’s good in the subculture. … But, damn. News like this is awfully hard to stomach.
You said it.
— If you enjoyed this post, would you kindly* use the “Share This” or one of the other buttons below to share it on Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, or wherever else you want.
When pick-up guru Roissy isn’t going on about herpes and hypergamy, and demonstrating his utter ignorance of both subjects, he’s apparently helping to rid the world of misogyny. At least according to one of his readers. a guy names Marcus, who offered his take on Roissy’s teachings on “Game” in a comment that Roissy highlighted as one of his favorite “comments of the month” for December. Here’s Marcus:
It sounds strange, but this blog has made me less of a misogynist. I have come to view women as elegant machines — machines for using, to be sure — that mostly do a damned good job of doing what they were designed to do. As I get more comfortable and consistent at either aggressively torquing their levers or gently greasing their gears at just the right moments, my appreciation only deepens.
All this talk of talk of torque and gears and levers reminds me a little of one of my favorite songs by T. Rex, Jeepster, in which Marc Bolan offers a strangely similar, er, appreciation of women:
Just like a car you’re pleasing to behold I’ll call you Jaguar if I may be so bold ‘Cos you’re my baby, ‘cos you’re my love Oh girl I’m just a Jeepster for your love – oh
Now why is it that Marc Bolan could get away with comparing a woman to a luxury car without sounding like a complete douchenozzle? Well, for one thing, he’s fucking MARC BOLAN, and his lyrics are always completely fucking insane. For another, he also compared himself to a car, specifically the Willys-Overland Jeepster. And, third, because he did it in one of the sleaziest, catchiest glam rock songs ever.
Peggy Olson has no time for pseudoscientific PUA crap.
Note: As regular Man Boobz comment readers will notice, this post is an expanded version of some comments I made here and here.
An extraordinary number of men in the “manosphere” — whether they’re wannabe Pick-up artists or woman-avoiding Men Going Their Own Way — have a very strange notion of what goes on (and what doesn’t go on) behind the closed doors of America’s bedrooms. (And sometimes in the bathrooms of dive bars.) They envision a world in which a small number of men are having all the sex they want, with any women they want, while the rest of the men out there — at least the straight ones — are condemned to lives of celibacy or near-celibacy.
So who gets blamed for this (imagined) state of affairs? Women. And something called “hypergamy.”
The term refers to the practice of “marrying up”in social class. But the dudes of the manosphere aren’t merely content to accuse women of being mere gold-diggers. They’ve combined the notion of hypergamy with some ill-digested evolutionary psych speculations and convinced themselves that women are in fact a giant gang of nymphomaniacal sexual status seekers, compelled by their very genes to throw themselves at the males on top of the sexual heap — variously described as alphas, jocks, bad boys, and thugs.
And, since men are similarly programmed to spread their seed far and wide — by which I mean fuck anything that moves — these women are getting all the attention from the alphas that their hearts and loins desire, while themselves making beta guys beg for scraps, or, more often, rejecting them outright. Or so goes the theory.
Naturally, those manosphere men who find themselves sitting on the sidelines of this (imagined) orgy tend to build up a great deal of bitterness about this (imagined) state of affairs.
This little mythical tale of alpha males and the hypergamic nymphomaniacs who love them (long time) is repeated again and again on the blogs and message boards of the manosphere. But is there any real convincing evidence for any of this? I haven’t seen any yet.
But in a post earlier this year one of the more influential bloggers in the manosphere, a pick-up guru of sorts who calls himself Roissy, claimed he had found something like the smoking gun of hypergamy:
Twice as many women as men have genital herpes. This could only happen if a smaller group of infected men is giving the gift of their infectious love to a larger group of women. Looks like female hypergamy is conclusively proved.
Case closed? Not exactly. Had Roissy actually bothered to read all of the news story he cited, or the CDC press release, or done even a minute or two of Googling, he would have seen the real explanation for the disparity: because of biological differences between men and women — you know, the whole penis vs vagina thing — it’s simply much easier for women to be infected with herpes. As one online FAQ notes (and I’ve put the key parts in bold):
Women are approximately 4 times more likely to acquire a herpes simplex type 2 infection than men. Susceptible women have a higher likelihood of contracting genital herpes from an infected man than a susceptible man becoming infected by a woman. In other words, if a non-infected man and woman each have intercourse with an infected partner, the woman is more likely than the man to contract a herpes simplex virus infection. …
Women may be more susceptible to genital herpes infections because:
* The genital area has a greater surface area of cells moist with body fluids (mucosal cells) than men. *Hormone changes during a woman’s menstrual cycle may affect the immune system, making it easier for the herpes simplex virus to cause an infection.
You’d think a sex guru would know enough about herpes to know this, wouldn’t you?
For newcomers to this blog, here’s a handy guide to some of the strange acronyms and lingo you’ll encounter here and in the “manosphere” in general. (For a definition of that term, see below.) I will update this entry periodically as needed.
First, the acronyms you’ll see most often here:
MRA: Men’s Rights Activist MRM: Men’s Rights Movement
MGTOW: Men Going Their Own Way MGHOW: Man Going His Own Way
Ok, so what do those terms mean?
MRM: TheMen’s Rights Movement: A loosely defined, but largely retrograde, collection of activists and internet talkers who fight for what they see as “men’s rights.” Unlike the original Men’s Movement, which was inspired by and heavily influenced by feminism, the self-described Men’s Rights Movement is largely a reactionary movement; with few exceptions, Men’s Rights Activists (or MRAs) are pretty rabidly antifeminist, and many are frankly and sometimes proudly misogynistic. Those who oppose the MRM are generally not against men’s rights per se; they are opposed to those who’ve turned those two words into a synonym for some pretty backwards notions.
MGTOW: Men Going Their Own Way: As the name suggests, MGTOW is a lot like lesbian separatism, but for straight dudes. MGTOW often talk vaguely about seeking “independence” from western and/or consumer culture, and a few MGTOW try to live that sort of zen existence. But most of those who embrace the term have a deep hostility towards and/or profound distrust of feminists and women in general. Many MGTOW refuse to date “western women” and some try to avoid women altogether. As one MGTOW site puts it:
It is basically a statement of independence, and irrelevance – men declaring themselves free of the social expectations of women and western culture as a whole, because both have come to hate men. …
Men basically have most of the rights we need, as long as we treat women like they have the plague. …If the only way men can avoid “oppressing” all these strong-as-men-but-oh-so-fragile-when-offended princess wannabes is to steer as clear of them as possible, a lot of men are quite ready to do that.
Some other terms and acronyms you’ll run across here:
Anglosphere: Countries in which English is the primary language, or, more narrowly, those countries that used to be British colonies. They are full of evil Western Women (see below).
Incel: Involuntarily Celibate. Perpetually dateless guys, though the term “involuntarily celibate” seems to place the blame for this situation on the women who aren’t dating these guys rather than on the guys themselves. For those incels who are genuinely socially awkward or phobic, this can be a self-defeating stance that can lead to bitterness towards women. (There are a few female incels, in which case reverse the genders of everything I’ve said above.)
Mangina: Derogatory term used by MRAs, MGTOW, etc. to describe guys who disagree with them — e.g., me. You can figure out the various connotations of this term yourself.
The Manosphere: The loose collection of blogs, message boards, and other sites run by and/or read by MRAs, MGTOW, and assorted friendly Pick-up Artists. The primary source of material for this blog.
NAWALT: Not All Women Are Like That. Dudes in the manosphere make so many ridiculous and untrue generalizations about women that they’ve come up with their own little acronym to describe the most common reaction to their nonsense: “not all women are like that.” Remarkably, many seem to think that making a reference to NAWALT is actually some sort of clever rebuttal of their critics.
PUA: Pick-up Artist. PUAs are obsessed with mastering what they see as the ultimate set of techniques and attitudes — known as “Game” — that will enable them to quickly seduce almost any woman they want. There is a vast literature on “game” online, though PUA is at its essence simply a male version of the age-old female ploy of “playing hard to get.”
Western Women: Also known as WW. Evil harpies, at least according to many in the manosphere. Contrasted with “foreign women,” a term that (in the manosphere, at least) sometimes refers to all women outside the Anglosphere, but often refers to a subset of these women from poor and/or Eastern countries, mostly Asian, who are regarded as more pliable and thus more desirable to haters of “Ameriskanks” and other WW.
I discovered an odd little manifesto the other day put forth by a raging antifeminist … who also hates the Men’s Rights Movement. “Not an MRA’s” site looks like a blog, but it’s essentially a long rambling rant cataloguing all the reasons “why I am NOT an MRA.” His basic thesis:
I hate feminism. I hate the destruction it has brought onto our society and culture. I hate male-bashing. I am sick and fed up with all of it. That said – I realize that the MRM – or MRA’s are doing way more harm than good in the efforts of getting rid of these things.
As the lead-in to a manifesto, it’s not quite up there with “a spectre is haunting Europe — the spectre of communism,” but it certainly grabs your attention. As do the illustrations he uses to illustrate his various points, taken from Disney’s version of Alice in Wonderland. (Don’t tell Disney!)
So what exactly does notanmra hate about the MRM? It’s a idiosyncratic list of irritations, some perfectly understandable, some just sort of cranky. Here’s a partial list:
He hates the endless blather about “manginas” and “White Knights,” and the slew of of oddball acronyms that litter most MRA discussions (PUA, MGTOW, MGHOW, NAWALT, and of course MRA). He thinks MRAs cheapen the notion of “male bashing” by complaining endlessly about ads in which men get kicked in the balls are the victims of slapstick violence. He hates the undercurrents of anti-Semitism and generalilzed bigotry that infect some MRA forums. He hates conspiracy theory in general. He hates the endless denunciations of “chivalry.”
Holding doors open for people is common courtesy. If you approach the door first, hold it open for the PERSON behind you. Where I work, men do this for men, men do this for women, women do this for men, and women do this for other women. It’s called being a human being. A few MRA blogs/sites label this as “chivalry” – poppycock. Come on out of that rabbit hole and stop acting like a screwball.
Holding doors open for PEOPLE is not what leads to male-hatred or male-bashing.
He hates that “some MRAs call themselves “”masculists” or “masculinists”. This makes me sick. I have no desire to “follow in the footsteps” of feminism by calling myself this, or even by associating with people who call themselves this.” He thinks all the talk of circumcision as “genital mutilation” is completely backwards, and that the procedure is actually beneficial. (I’m guessing of all his opinions this is the one that gets MRAs most angry at him.)
Of all his various complaints, I think my favorite is this one:
Observations have convinced me that the MRA agenda is not one of getting the laws changed or eliminating male-hatred, but rather – to argue the same points over and over.
Don’t I know it!
EDIT: I corrected a testicle-related error in the text above.
Here are links to, and brief excerpts of, some of the worst posts by Men’s Rights activists and/or antifeminists I’ve run across in doing this blog. These are not random comments by random MRAs; they are all by people who have a history in the MRM. In most cases, they are fairly prominent names, at least within the online MRA community. A few of these posts will be familiar to readers of this blog.
Lest anyone accuse me of taking quotes out of context, I urge you to read the originals. As you’ll see, none of these quotes are any more justifiable “in context” than they are here on their own.
If anyone out there has seen worse, please post a URL below. Conversely, if any of these posts have been publicly challenged by others in the MRM, I will happily post links alongside the original.
I am also taking nominations for a follow-up post, The Best of the MRM. Post URLs below.
In the name of equality and fairness, I am proclaiming October to be Bash a Violent Bitch Month.
I’d like to make it the objective for the remainder of this month, and all the Octobers that follow, for men who are being attacked and physically abused by women – to beat the living shit out of them. I don’t mean subdue them, or deliver an open handed pop on the face to get them to settle down. I mean literally to grab them by the hair and smack their face against the wall till the smugness of beating on someone because you know they won’t fight back drains from their nose with a few million red corpuscles.
And then make them clean up the mess.
Immediately after this quote, he claims he’s not “serious” about this, though apparently only because “it isn’t worth the time behind bars or the abuse of anger management training that men must endure if they are uppity enough to defend themselves from female attackers.” My post on the subject is here. Here’s another piece by Elam full of fantasies of violence against women.
Should I be called to sit on a jury for a rape trial, I vow publicly to vote not guilty, even in the face of overwhelming evidence that the charges are true.
This post from Roy Den Hollander, a lawyer and Men’s Rights activist best known for suing clubs that have “ladies nights,” suggests that men may have to take up arms to win their, er, struggle:
The future prospect of the Men’s Movement raising enough money to exercise some influence in America is unlikely. But there is one remaining source of power in which men still have a near monopoly—firearms.
And speaking of angry men and their guns, here’s a post from Citizen Renegade, a Pick-Up Artist (PUA) site popular with MRAs: Game Can Save Lives It’s about George Sodini, the misogynist killer who gunned down women at a health club a year ago. “Chateau” suggests that all would have been well if Sodini had learned how to be a Pick-Up Artist:
If Sodini had learned game he would have been able to find another woman and gotten laid after his ex dumped him. He wouldn’t have spent the next 20 years steeped in bile and weighed down by his Sisyphian blue balls, dreaming of vengeance. Game could have saved the lives of the women Sodini killed.
Actually, Sodini had taken at least one class from Don Steele, author of “How to Date Young Women for Men Over 35.” The comments to Chateau’s article are scarier than the article itself. For selected examples and commentary, see here.
[P]roperly owning a dog is excellent training for properly owning a woman. The behavior of dogs and women is eerily similar, and their relation to man testifies to that.
Like dogs, women need to be led. They *want* to be led. In fact, though they will never admit it, women want to be owned by their men.
Other MRAs don’t seem to be much interested in adult women at all. MRA Jay Hammers, a regular contributor to The Spearhead, has taken down his blog, but its worst moments live on in Google’s cache. Perhaps the worst of the worst: Age of Consent is Misandry. Key quotes:
Age of consent laws are designed to punish beta males. A beta male in his 20s, unsuccessful with women his own age who are infused with a sense of feminist entitlement and deride all but the top alpha males who take interest in them, who seeks companionship with a younger, sexually mature female who desires him, should not go to prison for acting on that which is normal male sexuality.
Females generally do not significantly mature mentally past puberty so it should always be illegal for any woman to have sex or it should never be illegal for any woman to have sex. There is no arbitrary age where females suddenly become self-aware, realizing the consequences of their actions, and stop seeking out alpha males. Thus there must not be an arbitrary age of consent for sex.
One of Hammers’ biggest defenders has been an antifeminist blogger by the nom-de-net of Schopenbecq, who is equally obsessed with the age of consent and what he sees as the superior attractiveness of teen girls. Here’s one of his posts on the subject, which argues:
The age of consent has always been central to feminism. In fact, it has been its primary driving force right from the beginning. The purpose of this website is not to campaign for a reduction in the age of consent from the present feminist age of 16. For one thing, there is little or no chance of that happening in this author’s lifetime. However, I have no shame whatsoever in stating my clear belief that the age of consent ought to be what it still technically is in the majority of major civilised nations – namely, 14.
In this post, he mocks any man who doesn’t think Heather Locklear’s 13-year-old daughter is hotter than Locklear herself:
Results of a poll on Schopenbecq’s site.
Here, he argues that feminism is a “Sexual Trade Union,” and seems to suggest that increasing the age of consent from 12 was bad thing :
Feminism exists as a defender of the selfish sexual and reproductive interests of aging and/or unattractive women. This is its entire raison d’etre, the reason it first came into existence with the social purity movement reformers of the 19th century, led by their harridan battle cry – ‘armed with the ballot the mothers of America will legislate morality’.
And legislate morality these pioneering feminists quickly did, even before they had won the vote. That is, they successfully lobbied for restrictions on prostitution, a rise in the age of consent from 12 to 16, or even 18, and the closing down of saloons where their husbands might mix freely with unattached young women.
Post-feminist women have been so indoctrinated by specious polemics extolling their (largely imaginary) talents, that they truly believe their ‘achievements’ are somehow self-determined. This is why the loss of their physical charms wreaks such havok on them. Having been nurtured on feminist pipe dreams, the cutting realization that their youthful ‘success’ was entirely due to sexual allure must be galling indeed. … Indeed, the staunch bitterness of middle-aged Anglo-American women can be entirely attributed to this realization:
It wasn’t your ‘talent’ and ‘intelligence’ that men admired: it was your sweet young pussy. That pussy-pass departed with your first wrinkle: live with it, bitch.
Big cities like London, New York and Sydney are jam-packed with beautiful foreign girls from Latin America, Eastern Europe and Asia. They are sexy, fun, good company and they treat men like human beings. They have not had their minds poisoned by feminist hate-speech. … I urge all Western men to boycott Western Women if they can. Don’t date them, don’t marry them, don’t have children with them. Find yourself a nice foreign girl, and find out what women should be like. If anyone asks you why, tell them it is a protest against feminist ideology. Once enough men start boycotting them, women will turn away from feminism.
Henry Makow has gotten too loopy for most Men’s Rights activists to consider him as one of their own. But he remains one of the internet’s most influential antifeminists. Here are some quotes from his classic in craziness How the Rockefellers Re-Engineered Women.
Feminism is an excellent example of how the Rockefeller mega cartel uses the awesome power of the mass media (i.e. propaganda.) to control society. … Nicholas Rockefeller told [producer Aaron Russo] that his family foundation created women’s liberation using mass media control as part of a long-term plan to enslave humanity. ….
The hidden goal of feminism is to destroy the family, which interferes with state brainwashing of the young. Side benefits include depopulation and widening the tax base. Displacing men in the role of providers also destabilizes the family.
While women and children often lack the capacity to grasp the inner workings of authority, they still have an instinctual, positive response to it. Authority brings chaotic, aimless things, people, events and circumstances into a state of good order. … Masculinity is properly expressed in the form of authority.
You know what I said above about reading the originals? Don’t bother in this case.
Single mothers, rampant divorce, abortion and falling birth rates are part of the cancer that is destroying what is left of Western Civilization. But very few people (even conservatives) fail to realize that the inception of this cancer can be found in the passage of the 19th amendment.
I wrote about the piece, and reactions to it, here.
More Worst Of links to come! The Men’s Rights movement produces fresh awfulness each and every day.
EDIT: Deansdale’s Blog has weighed in on this Worst-of list and is surprisingly positive about the whole thing. Oh, not my post — he hates my post, and me — but the original MRA-n-pals posts. Elam’s “Bash a Violent Bitch” post? “What’s the problem with this article? Nothing, really. … Elam has some insightful observations about the nature of women in our contemporary cultures.” Roissy’s post about misogynist killer George Sodini? “What’s wrong with this article? Nothing.”And RamZpaul’s How Female Suffrage Destroyed Western Civilization? “There are valid arguments supporting his claim. It’s not PC, sure, but that doesn’t mean it’s automatically wrong.”
He even sort-of defends good old Henry Makow and his bizarre conspiracy theoryies:
Actually this is not so crazy. You don’t believe it, that’s fine, but show me why this is soooo unacceptable. He states lots of things: some of them obvious, some of them researchable. But it’s not so radical.
The only people he doesn’t defend? The Manhood Academy guys. Apparently saying horrible, horrible shit about women is perfectly acceptable in Deansdale’s vision of the MRM, but saying horrible, horrible shit about women while also calling other MRAs “manginas,” as the Manhood Academy guys do, is totally BEYOND THE PALE!!!