Category: the spearhead

Categories
$MONEY$ alpha asshole cock carousel alpha males antifeminism bad boys beta males evil women I'm totally being sarcastic melodrama men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny MRA oppressed men pedophiles oh sorry ephebophiles rapey reactionary bullshit shit that never happened sluts the spearhead your time will come

The Spearhead’s W.F. Price uses the death of 22-year-old Marina Keegan to argue that “after 25, women are just wasting time.”

Marina Keegan

A talented journalist, playwright and activist died last weekend in a car crash shortly after graduating from Yale. Marina Keegan was 22. Before she died, she wrote an essay for the Yale Daily News urging her classmates to keep alive the sense of possibility they brought with them when they first arrived at college:

We’re so young. We’re so young. We’re twenty-two years old. We have so much time. There’s this sentiment I sometimes sense, creeping in our collective conscious as we lay alone after a party, or pack up our books when we give in and go out – that it is somehow too late. That others are somehow ahead. More accomplished, more specialized. More on the path to somehow saving the world, somehow creating or inventing or improving. …

What we have to remember is that we can still do anything. We can change our minds. We can start over. Get a post-bac or try writing for the first time. … We’re so young. We can’t, we MUST not lose this sense of possibility because in the end, it’s all we have.

Over on the Spearhead,  W.F. Price notes her death, and quotes these words, and more, from her essay. His point? That she was wrong.

By the time you hit 25 or so – just three years out of college – your life is pretty much set, he argues, and “your future can be fairly well predicted by your life at that point.” And this apparently goes double for women. Price titles his post: “After 25, Women Are Just Wasting Time.”

And why is that? Because if they’re not married to a good earner by then, or at least with the guy they plan to settle down with, they’re fucked. While an “average girl,” as Price puts it, should have snagged her future husband by age 21, non-average college girls buy themselves only a few more years.

As Price explains it:

Four years of college buys women precious little time in the mating market. … I’d guess … about exactly as much time as it takes for them to complete it, because their pool of future mates tends to go through the same process … That’s to say that she has her best shot to land a good match up to perhaps 25.

There are a few, well, let’s just call them plot holes in Price’s story here, but let’s hear him out:

The problem with young women today is that they internalize this “anything is possible” attitude and don’t lose it until it really is too late for many of them. They think they can do better at 30 than at 22, which, in most cases, is simply wrong. Some might say that family and men are not a priority for these girls, but women for whom this is really true throughout life are an insignificant minority. In fact, most women are holding out precisely because they think they can get a better man later, perhaps when they have a better job and work with more powerful men.

But these girls are not going to change fundamentally, and in their early 20s are at the peak of their beauty while still retaining an innocent charm. Nothing about their looks or personality is going to make them more appealing at 30 than at 22, and the men available to them are not going to get any better, either….

The point is that neither men nor women change fundamentally past a certain point, and the same guys young women have available in their early 20s are generally the same guys that will be available at 30, only they will be older and, due to marriage, there will be far fewer of them.

Yep, we’re back to the hoary old story of the bad boy cock carousel once again. Better grab hold of a good hearted beta while the getting is good, ladies – because by the time you finish off your slutty dalliances with the bad boy alphas your looks will be gone and no man (alpha or beta) will want to have anything to do with you.

Price continues, cranking the melodrama up to eleven:

Time tends to accelerate past a certain age, and the 25-year old woman soon finds herself 30, and then 35, and at that point she’s got precious little of it left. Perhaps at 22 she was laughing about the “comical” notion that it could ever be too late, but after a certain point it is no longer comedy, but tragedy, and her laughter turns to tears.

Now, none of this is original, and none of it is true. What’s interesting is just how badly misogynistic manospherians want it to be true. They must, because they tell this same story to themselves over and over and over, like small children requesting their parents to read their favorite bedtime story “again!” They (the misogynists, not the children) love the idea that the women who turned them down – or who, at the very least, rejected their brand of patronizing patriarchy – will get their comeuppance in the end, the more humiliating, the better.

Price at least pretends to care about the women he’s trying to scare straight (into marriage). But some of the commenters on his site can’t be bothered to contain their glee at the notion of spurned thirtysomething women collapsing into tears.

The Contrarian Expatriate turns on the sarcasm:

But why shouldn’t women feel this way? Women “can have it all.” They are “fabulous.” Women rule. Women first. Women are 20 when they’re 30, and 30 when their 40. Women, women, women.

Screech, crash, halt! (Then comes reality when the cuteness wears off and the pounds set in….).

Eximio shares a “shit that never happened” story of a high school reunion he went to:

[M]en do age better than women. I looked around at the women and they all just looked old to me. I could not imagine myself with any of them. They had lost whatever charm they had and I found attractive the last time I had seen them. Almost all of the men that were there with their spouses were with younger women. …

As for the women specifically, while they all seemed old, I noted that the happiest of the lot talked about their family. Some of them were married, some of them divorced, but in both cases they talked about their kids. They were clearly the most fulfilled. Many of the other women than I knew had pursued consuming careers were not at the reunion. Those that were, and who did not have children, had a whiff of pain on their faces. They seemed to be looking around and suddenly forced to face the consequences of their choices.

Or maybe they noticed that a patronizing douche was giving them the once-over, and shot him a dirty look.

Ode apparently finds it all so hilarious he is unable to maintain his balance:

The problem with college today is that it teaches a woman that she has an IQ of 115 so naturally she spends her time chasing after men who she perceives to be her “equal”, the top 15% of the men within society. Or to put it another way, a college educated woman thinks she’s better than 85% of everybody else.

Sorry honey the only thing your degree in liberal arts or communications tells me is that you have IQ above 100. Which means you’re better than the bottom 50% of society. No other conclusions can be made. Of course most women will never understand this. They will spend the rest of their bitter lives believing the reason why they couldn’t get Mr. Right is because men are afraid of a strong and smart women.

Falls over laughing!

Rmaxd offers a somewhat different explanation for Marina Keegan’s optimism; I’m not quite sure I even understand it.

What Mira [sic] is expressing, her not needing a man, that precisely because she doesnt need a man she can get everything she wants, well into her 50′s …

She’s accepted her feminist brainwashed idiocy & tried to turn it into a social norm

Her fantasy entails her getting an education, & competing in cut-throat environments designed for men … which require a male intolerance for anything not rational or logic

All the while her fantasy involves a child as an accessory & strong alpha thug, who’ll rescue her instead of pumping & dumping her to kingdom come …

Her vagina also gives her magical powers to screw over sex hungry beta’s without game, as a backup plan, if the jamaican thugs from her sex tourism never get round to playing captain save-a hoe, when she hits 30 …

Beta’s, a deranged feminists insurance policy, for when her vagina no longer cashes cheques she cant write …

Our old pal JeremiahMRA (a.k.a. Things Are Bad) suggests, in a series of comments, that we should push the whole timetable up a few years, forcing girls to get married to whomever their fathers say shortly after puberty. No, really, that’s his actual argument:

Honestly women shouldn’t be going to college at all. It’s a complete waste and takes away from people who can actually get something from education: men. The only reason they do it is to inflate their egos….

[I]t’s more accurate that after puberty, women are just wasting time. Wasting time slutting around, going to school, working, when they should be getting married to whomever their fathers say and having children, which is really all women are good at.

Today women choose mates based solely on lust and greed. Women don’t love, the only thing they love is getting fucked hard and being provided for by a man or the government. This is why in any sane (patriarchal) society a girl’s father decides who she is to marry.

Lovely.

Most of these comments got dozens of upvotes, with only a handful of downvotes. Jeremiah’s comments, a bit reactionary even for The Spearhead, got more than a few downvotes, but still only a fraction as many as the upvotes they got. Only Rmaxd got more downvotes than up, perhaps because his comments made no fucking sense.

So nice that The Spearheaders have taken the time from their day to honor the memory of a promising writer whose life was cut short.

—

This post contains some:

Categories
a voice for men antifeminism asian fetishist evil women homophobia men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny MRA oppressed white men racism reactionary bullshit the spearhead western women suck

Spearheader: Let’s breed those stuck-up white western women out of existence.

Run, Dick, run!

One widespread belief of the manosphere crowd is that “Western women” – that is, white women in developed countries – are a bunch of stuck-up, demanding, divorce-initiating feminism-infected harridans. So the proper course of action for the almost-all-white dudes of the manosphere is to seek a woman with darker skin and a (supposedly) more pliable nature. Even better: beleaguered white dudes should move to one of the countries where these feminism-free gals live, because when you bring them to the United States they too have a tendency to become infected with evil feminism and to become as stuck-up and evil as their lighter-skinned sisters.

This belief isn’t universal amongst manospehreians by any stretch of the imagination. White nationalist manosphreians (like those who populate the blog In Mala Fide) get testy when their women are considered inferior to non-whites; others think that all women are equally evil. Still others think that moving to a whole other country is too much of a hassle. Rarely do you find a manospherian willing to state the obvious: that the “white women suck” mantra is as offensive to non-white women as it is to white women.

Over on The Spearhead, one commenter has taken the “white women suck” mantra to its logical extreme, arguing that these evil women need to be quite literally bred out of existence.

Let’s take a look at walking in hell’s argument:

If one thinks about it, the misandry and divorce problem are problems that occur in countries where the women are light-skinned–mostly Northern Hemisphere Western Contries, and where the governments are atheist or were atheist.

Problem countries are Sweden, Germany, Czech Republic, Poland, Russia, United States, France, Britain, Ireland, Canada, Austrailia, New Zealand, etc. In short–the West. Light skinned women are by nature more dominant and controlling. If you combine that with a culture that encourages bad behavior, you as a man are doomed.

So far, this is standard-issue western-women-suck-ism. But then Hell starts talking about genes.

So the misandry problem is problem of genetics and culture. We can see the genetic differences in the United States. Asian Women divorce their husbands at a much lower rate then the other racial groups. The exception in America is the American Black Women (But isn’t she exceptional, after all)? I mean native African Women have very little resemblance to American Black Women). 

Ironically, it’s fairly typical for the white-women-suck crowd to hate black women even more; in this case the only non-typical thing about Hell’s screed is that he’s willing to cut African women some slack.

Now Hell sets forth his basic thesis:

My point is this: I maintain the best wife for a white man is someone darker skinned then he is. I maintain that the best culture for the white man and his wife is a man-friendly culture. For example, a white man and Mexican woman living in Mexico; a white man and Thai Woman living in Thailand; a white man and a Morracan Woman, living in Morraco; a white man and Turkish Woman, living in Turkey. This strategy neutralizes the light-skinned genes, and at the same time neutralizes the cultural influences.

Note: If you plan to move to Morocco to escape the tyranny of white women, you should probably learn to spell the name of the country correctly first.

Naturally, Hell can’t bring himself to suggest that white men should marry black women. And he thinks that even black men should give African-American women a pass:

For a black man, possibly the best plan is to emigrate to Africa in order to have a family. I had a friend who did this. Most African divorce laws keep the man firmly in charge with sole custody automatically going to the man.

While some Western-women-hating manospherians have something of a fetish for Eastern European women, Hell warns his fellow men to avoid these sneaky deceitful harridans as well:

Whatever you do, never bring an Eastern European, Russian, or Ukrainian Girl to the Unites States.

But it isn’t only the Eastern European women who are spoiled by the evil feminism of the west.

 In fact don’t bring any woman to the United States. Remember: even the healthiest fish becomes sick when the lake is poisoned. Some fish will become sicker than others depending on their genetic makeup. For example, that nice girl you brought over from Asia might not divorce you when she comes to the USA, but she is likely to become a much different (difficult and unpredictable) person.

So who is the best man for the white woman living in the West? Quite simply, no man; or another woman. Very few men in the West will be able to satify Western White Women.

And this, naturally, leads to what what we might call Hell’s Final Solution to the problem:

These women need to be bred out of existence.

We as men can speed the extinction of Western White Women by encouraging them to pursue the single life or to pursue another woman as a spouse (lesbianism). We can do this actively and passively. Actively by outright encouragement, and passively by never giving a Western Woman access to our sperm, money, or time.

Despite its, er, problematic content, Hell’s comment managed to draw 21 upvotes from fellow Spearheaders, more than twice the number of downvotes it received.

I eagerly await A Voice for Men’s campaign to uncover and expose the identities of Hell and his upvoters – as well as against The Spearhead itself for providing a safe harbor for such thinking. I mean, AVfM literally offered a $1000 award for the personal information of a feminist who made similarly troubling remarks about men, and a separate $1000 reward for the identities of those involved in a theatrical production about a  feminist who wrote a famous manifesto about the evils of men. Surely the A Voice for Men crowd will be equally offended by these remarks from their comrades on The Spearhead.

Here on Man Boobz we content ourselves with highlighting bad ideas, not harassing or threatening or exposing the personal information of those who promulgate them. The “war of ideas” isn’t an actual war. The bad ideas we highlight here are as silly as they are reprehensible; they will ultimately vanish from the world on their own — though hopefully our mockery of them will help to speed that process a little bit.

EDITED TO ADD: Thanks to scarlettpipistrelle for pointing me to this lovely comment.

Categories
antifeminism disgusting women douchebaggery evil fat fatties irony alert men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny MRA oppressed men shaming tactics the spearhead

Spearheader: The existence of fat women “constitutes nothing less than a full-scale loathing of male sexuality.”

W.F. Price, the man behind The Spearhead and a tireless champion of Men’s Rights, has in his latest post taken on one of the gravest injustices facing American men today. I speak, of course, of fat ladies.

Traveling in Europe, Price has noticed that people tend to be skinnier there than in the US, which naturally has led him to think some deep thoughts about fat ladies in America and how disgusting he finds them.

So-called BBWs in the US are not really curvy — they are rotund.

I really can’t stress enough the extent to which obesity has ruined American women’s attractiveness. Feminists blather on and on about how women should be “comfortable” with their bodies, but the truth is that many American women would be viewed as abominations in most of the world.

Those damn feminists, making ladies fat!

If you were to try to come up with a parallel for men, I suppose it would be something like having toothless, homeless alcoholic men say that they should be proud of themselves and feel attractive.

Actually, if you were to find a parallel for men, it would also be, er, fatness. Obesity rates for men and women in the US are roughly the same, with women having only a slight lead: according to a recent CDC survey, 35.5 percent of adult women and 32.2 percent of adult men are “obese,” by current standards. Never mind that these standards are a bit, well, off, in that they classify the overwhelming majority of Americans as overweight or obese. Never mind that more than half of Europeans are also classified as overweight or obese according to these standards. And never mind that the fat shaming shit we hear every day in the media and on the internet is basically a bunch of bull.

Because Price thinks that fat ladies are gross:

Feminists are really that far out there. They are literally delusional by global standards. No normal man in the rest of the world finds obese American women attractive. Sure, they may be able to find some skinny guy from a third world country who will pretend to love them to get a green card, but any self-respecting man will give them a very wide berth.

Ho ho! Wide berth! I get it.

Naturally Price was hailed in the comments for his brave stance. According to dragnet,

The abomination that is the average American woman in flyover country constitutes nothing less than a full-scale loathing of male sexuality.

Andrew S., for his part, admits that

I always had a thing for cute heavy girls.

But he still thinks they’re stuck-up bitches:

Being in the midwest they are a dime a dozen. But since there aren’t a lot of attractive in shape or thin women in this part of the country, and most of the decent looking women have some meat on there bones, well, it was hard to stomach how women who pretty much anywhere else in the world would have been ignored acted like such perfect bitches.

Seriously, the “cute heavy girls” that Andrew prefers need to learn to properly hate themselves for being fat fatties. Maybe that way they’ll be more willing to put up with all this MRA bullshit.

–

Yes, this post contains

 

 

and high fat content. Because I’m fat, get it?

Categories
$MONEY$ antifeminism douchebaggery dozens of upvotes evil women girl germs I'm totally being sarcastic kitties men who should not ever be with women ever MGTOW misogyny MRA oppressed men pedophiles oh sorry ephebophiles precious bodily fluids reactionary bullshit sex sluts the spearhead whores

All Women Are Whores, Part XIV: Cat on a Roomba Edition

Cats and Roombas unite in service to the forces of whoredom.

Men of America! You face a grave threat today: Evil feminist slutwalkers are working tirelessly to enslave men by conning them into marrying secret porn-star whores! Over on The Spearhead, an unnamed “Featured Guest” explains the whole dastardly scheme in a post with the intriguing title “Whore is just a label.” 

With slutwalkers working hard to remove the stigma of sex for women, you see,

young women in porn face far less stigma than they ever have. So much so that for that young women the leap from wanton behavior at a drunken college party to getting double teamed followed by a full facial in a porn shoot may not be a far leap at all.

Exactly. Because if you’re going to be having sex anyway, why not do it on camera with strangers?

The dollars and cents is that you have a huge growth porn industry demanding a huge number of sex workers who blend invisibly into the population because there is no longer any stigma attached to the world’s oldest profession.

Wait, I thought that prostitution was the world’s oldest profession. I guess porn and prostitution are the same thing now?

Not that it matters, because if you’re a man the evil ladies will keep their sordid whoring from you:

Unlike men women know how to keep a secret. Women don’t brag to their girlfriends, in fact they’ll lie even to themselves. You really have NO IDEA where even that conservative and very virginal girl you’ve proposed to has been until the night she thought she forgot shows up on Youtube.com. Where does that leave an increasing number of American men?

So YouTube is a porn distribution hub now? Or is he suggesting that any woman who has sex is by definition a whore?

Evidently he is, as Mr. Featured Guest then goes on to warn of the dangers of those who are:

Trying to turn a whore into a housewife.

Yes, there are terrific women out there. But single women are angling for a man to pay for their lives, and given that incentive there’s a huge temptation for a woman to present herself falsely, to tell a lot of lies and to make a lot of “stay at home, cook and raise kids” promises she has no intention of keeping. Under US and ESPECIALLY Canadian divorce laws, women are almost never accountable for bad behavior or broken promises. For all the men who thought their betrothed was only slutty the night she met you and who are steaming mad that you’ve been sold a bill of goods, does the marriage contract needs a “false advertisement” clause?

Or do women who have sex with men other than their betrothed – possibly on video, possibly on YouTube — simply need to have the word “whore” tattooed on their foreheads?

The regulars at The Spearhead respond to this sophisticated analysis of contemporary marriage with their usual good sense.

Quentin, in a comment that got 50 upvotes, notes with some alarm that

A lot of women don’t feel bad abut their sexual escapades. In fact, they take pride in them. “Ladies” are an endangered species, and are on the verge of going extinct. All this slutty behavior has really made me lose interest in women. I don’t want to be with a woman who has had sex with a lot of men. If she is easy to get into the sack, then she is a liability in a relationship. I have lost a lot of respect for women over the past several years. Sex, along with marriage, is something most women view as a get-rich-quick scheme. It is disheartening to think I live in a world where being a whore is considered empowering, while being a supportive wife is frowned upon. This world is upside down. …  If you act like a whore, then you are going to get treated like a whore. If women were pleasant to be around and were loyal, more men would probably stick around. You reap what you sow, women.

Napoleon (24 upvotes) urges his fellow men to be cautious when dealing with the wily female:

Women these days are increasingly trying to have the best of both worlds and present themselves as wholesome nice girls to the public while hiding a lot of whoring that goes on behind the scenes. There is really no way to know whether a woman is a part-time prostitute or not but a good rule of thumb is to assume that she is until proven otherwise due to the prevalence of such antics.

Silent warns men to be especially suspicious of any woman who seems to know what she’s doing in bed:

Just be careful about the super-sweet girlfriend who knows a little too much about how to do that thing you like, without you having taught her. She may have had a mouthful. But hey, maybe it’s all “in the past”.

YoungMan shares his tale of woe:

Back in my plugged in days I dated a girl for over a year before I found out she used to play with herself on camera for money. I was incensed I had been taken advantage of like that.

Keyster, a bastion of morality who once boasted about dating a 14-year-old (when he was 25), warns men to stay away with women who don’t keep silent about their sexual pasts:

Any woman who feels compelled to reveal her debaucherous past has no intention of having a serious relationship with you.

It’s not a shit test.

 It’s meant to show a certian amount of disdain and disrespect for you as a man who doesn’t quite measure up to her standards. Don’t ever forget that.

Yes, because if a woman has had sex with anyone other than you, it’s all about disrespecting you.

And then he adds:

If she says she can’t even remember how many guys she’s f*cked in a rather “matter-of-fact” tone, you’ve entered the Futrelle Zone. Go home and video tape your cat on a Roomba and post it on YouTube. It would be time better spent.

I guess I should be flattered? But alas it was not my cat on the Roomba. I wish I had a Roomba. (Also, I wish I had my cat back, but that’s a whole other and much sadder story.)

Alan Vaughn writes an impassioned defense of pedophiles – sorry, “pedophiles,” in scare quotes – that I’m frankly too tired to bother to cut and paste in here. Check it out yourself if you dare.

Eric has a sad about the poor quality of American women:

Women are presumed to ‘have all the power in relationships’. Really, it’s her choices alone that matter. Women choose to be with thugs and idiots when there are numerous better and more responsible options open to them. The fact that women overwhelmingly terminate relationships with good men and pursue worthless ones is proof in itself that the responsibility lies with them and not with us.

Men, on the other hand, are very limited in their field of choices (unless they expat out). The abysmal quality of American women; women’s complete lack of interest in responsible men; and the ever-impending consequences of acting contrary to misandryist legal and social norms considerably constrict men’s options. Most men, if they were honest about it, would admit that their choices are pretty much limited to the least objectionable—not the most desirable—of available women.

Life is apparently very tough for American men who hate the very idea of women ever having sex with anyone but them. And doubly tough for those who don’t see the inherent hilariousness of cats on Roombas.

Categories
$MONEY$ antifeminism dozens of upvotes evil women grandiosity homophobia hypocrisy men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny MRA oppressed men patriarchy reactionary bullshit sluts the enigma that is ladies the spearhead vaginas we hunted the mammoth western women suck

All you need is love. Also, misogyny, and a side order of homophobia.

Love is in the air! On The Spearhead, WF Price has penned a piece with the intriguing title: “What’s Wrong with Wanting to be Loved?” To that I would answer: nothing.

Let’s see what lovely sorts of things Price has to say about the subject:

[S]till we have people whining about “misogyny.” Young feminists whose most important concern is the ability to have sex entirely free of consequences, and who shamelessly raise their voices for the right to kill their children in the womb. Lesbian gender feminists who wreck families for profit and sex. Male feminists who boast about fathering children and shuffling their responsibilities onto some duped cuckold, and who malign their fellow men for a crack at college girls.

Huh. Not sure how exactly this bit of nastiness is supposed to advance the cause of love.

(Also, I think that last bit – the line about those “who malign their fellow men for a crack at college girls” – is supposed to be a reference to … me, and the talk I gave on Monday at Northwestern, to which he has added his own little fantasies, like he did in his original, highly fictionalized, post on the subject. The man is obsessed.)

In the comments, Spearhead readers offered their own thoughts on the topic of love.

Revver started things off with this lovely thought:

Having seen and heard a great majority of women, being “unloved” becomes lighter and lighter a burden with each passing year.

 How easily they make themselves look like fools.

Opus spat forth an opus; here’s an edited version:

Women judge men by pre-selection.

If you have been dumped, then a member of Team Vagina has deemed you unworthy, so as in Snakes and Ladders you start from the bottom again. There is simply no point seeking female solace, because the woman will see that you do not seek her, and thus, offended, accuse you of unsolicited attention, or alternatively act offended that you are not interested in her. (I speak from experience). …

Women as we know are programmed to get over even the worst relationship in no more than three months, whereas for a man (even when in hindsight it was Xmas come early) we are often talking decades, for to be ditched is to take away all that it means to be a man (provider, nurturer). …  Now, why am I betting that Futrelle did not mention these things last night – and why am I also betting he has not got one single phone number from any female at Northwestern Univeristy?

(You guys are really are obsessed. Aren’t you supposed to mention my weight as well?)

Greyghost managed to work the phrase “gina tingle” into his ramblings:

Men actually have the capacity to love. Only a man can write an article like that. Women just don’t have the capacity to love. Women gina tingle. …   

The big lie was and is that a woman can love. Romance is what men do women receive it. …

The MRM with women on board on not will never ever change the nature of women. No matter how much awareness of the pain men and even children are in, women will vote and demand what is in therir childish perception of their interest. ( It will always be uninhibitted status and hypergamy)

In a later comment, he added these creepy afterthoughts:

Women do not and can not love the way you do and can. The best a man can get is some good emotional gina tingle. Never ever forget it. It can be a very emotionally pleasing and soothing time for a man but a man can never forget he is a man and right or wrong is a keeper of civilization.

The emotional trauma brought down on men when the realization of the lie hits [is] off the charts. It is where murders and suicides come from.

Georice81 offered up a rather elaborate excuse for slut-shaming:

My observation is that when women have been sexually promiscous their ability to submit and be very loyal to a single man is very diminished. …  They can’t respect that one man that may actually love them since they are contemptous of a man that could love someone like them. Men in the 1950′s understood this and would not marry someone who was not a virgin since they did not trust those that were not.

We men can love and want to love. We also have a huge capacity to forgive. Modern western woman don’t seem to comprehend this because of their own hangups.

Binxton, for his part, seemed to be posting from an internet café on Gor:

Women are by nature emotional, self-centered creatures. Absent controls on their behavior, they lack both morals and objective principles. They are too easily manipulated by their environment to allow them to be free.

Ultimately, female emotional nature requires men to control women.

Women will love when they endure hardship and respect higher authority, i.e., patriarchy.

Western women must acknowledge a male-centered world where they can enjoy the labors of man only if, and when, they show due deference to male authority. Those who fail to do so must be disciplined and punished as examples.

Joe set forth some similarly, er, traditional notions:

Women are capable of love but there’s a reason St. Paul tells wives to “fear” their husbands. Because women are just much more like children in their moral reasoning and in their emotional “resilience” (or capacity for cruelty). So for a woman to love a husband is much like a child’s love for his parents. It is a love that is requires her to be in a dependent position. This is why marriage in a feminist society of independent and irreligious (I don’t mean women without superstition, but women without fear of moral judgment) women, cannot work.

I think I’ve had enough of The Spearhead’s notions of love. Let’s try ten hours of Haddaway instead:

Categories
I am making a joke kitties lying liars misogyny MRA self-promotion sex the spearhead

A quick preview of my Northwestern talk tonight on “How to hate women and have terrible sex.”

Here’s a preview of the talk I’ll be giving at Northwestern tonight.

Remember, the talk — on “How to hate women and have terrible sex: Misogynistic sex myths, and how they ruin sex for everyone” – will be at 8 PM in Room G02 of Annenberg Hall on the Northwestern Campus in Evanston.

(Here’s a map.)

See you there!

Oh, and also, The Spearhead has discovered that I will be giving a talk. W. F. Price writes about it with his usual objectivity, by which I mean that his piece is filled with lies and weird projection.

EDITED TO ADD: And now the Men’s Rights Subreddit gets in on the fun! Apparently they are also very concerned about my weight.

Categories
antifeminism crackpottery evil women false accusations I am making a joke I'm totally being sarcastic matriarchy men who should not ever be with women ever MGTOW misogyny MRA oppressed men patriarchy shit that never happened the spearhead

BREAKING EASTER NEWS: New evidence reveals Jesus was killed by feminists.

Over on The Spearhead, a fellow calling himself American offers a fascinating new theory on the death of Jesus: It was the evil ladies who did him in!

Pierce brought up an important event in the life of jesus. He was falselly accused, and the violent masses and the heathen whordes wanted to see blood; so the pilate delivered.
Kinda like the American feminist whorde of barbarianism. Maybe womens justice is simply more primitive and barbarian (more heathen-esque) than patriarchal orderly justice.
whether its the klu-klux-klan “mob lynchings” of 100 years ago over false rape accusations, or the Duke lacrosse feminist mobs roaming the streats of durham looking for blood, there seems to be a common theme here. feminine matriarchal justice is lies , hysteria, mob/klan barbarism; while patriarchal justice is truth based, orderly, ect. ect.
Pontius pilate didn’t want to kill jesus, but the violent matriarchal whorde/klan wanted to see blood and forced his hand.

Happy Easter, if you’re into that sort of thing! Just remember, as you’re enjoying your chocolate eggs and microwaving your Peeps, that woman are all a bunch of lying, bloodthirsty whores.

Categories
$MONEY$ antifeminism block that metaphor misogyny MRA oppressed men the spearhead

Women and feminism: It’s all about the Benjamins.

Over on The Spearhead, W.F. Price explains why feminism appeals to the ladies: it’s all about the Benjamins.

Women still support feminism because it still pays off. But not for long — now that American men are tapped out the party’s just about over. Who knows what they’ll do next? Maybe they’ll all try to prostitute themselves to Chinese bankers like the fed.

Ironically, for the Chinese bankers, it’s also all about the Benjamins. Or at least about one specific Ben – Fed chief Ben Bernanke. In other words, ladies, you’re going to have to compete with this:

Categories
$MONEY$ antifeminism evil women I'm totally being sarcastic manginas men who should not ever be with women ever misogyny MRA oppressed white men paranoia racism rape rapey reactionary bullshit sluts the spearhead violence white knights

Skanks, Sharia, and Manginas in Shining Armor: Yet another rant from The Spearhead

ARGLEBARGLEBLLLAGGH

[TW for violence, rape apologism.]

On this lazy Sunday (why can’t every day be lazy?), I present to you without comment this lovely little rant I found over on The Spearhead, where it received more than two dozen upvotes for its lively mixture of misogyny, Islamophobia, and rape-as-comedy-fodder. (It got a decent number of downvotes too, I’m guessing less for its views on “femiskanks” or Islam than for its straightforward endorsement of White Nationalism;  I’ve edited out some of the Islamophobia for space reasons.) Take it away, Bryan the cracker-loving woman-hater:

Ah, american femiskanks, where would we be without them?

In a nasty way I almost look forward to the rise of Islam in the West/USA because it will be amusing to see feminism crushed under the boot of Sharia. There is no room for feminism, gay rights, etc, in a Sharia land. …

I think that being a man who is disgusted with western women, I’m going to spend a bit of time laughing at the thought of femiskanks being raped by Muslims for taking part in “slut walks” and having acid thrown in their faces for making their typical femiskank claims about how men are worthless. …

I look forward to the day when police stop responding to requests for protection orders, emergency protection orders, etc… If a woman is truly in danger from a man then she should be able to seek protection via her brothers, her male cousins, and stay in her father’s house. If her brothers don’t want anything to do with her that speaks to the sort of woman she is.

Along similar lines, I look forward to the day when police stop responding to domestic “violence” calls unless it has crossed into the realm of disturbing the peace or creating a disturbance for the neighborhood. When some femiskank calls 911 and tells them, “I see a man raising his voice with his wife and telling her it is time to leave the store they’re in, this isn’t right” said femiskank should be told, “why don’t you just drop dead, this line is for serious calls, get off the line or we’ll arrest you.”

There are too many mangina police out there who are all too ready to physically assault and even kill other men, at the behest of crazy power-tripping women, simply because they care more about making $50,000 dollars per year and gaining the approval of random femiskanks in the community, than about doing what is right and what is healthy for the nation.

Women realize the incredible power they have, be it political, social, economic, judicial, or extra-judicial. If a woman makes a false rape claim she can ruin a man financially, socially, politically, legally, and often she can have him attacked, perhaps killed, by an outraged mob of manginas in shining armor. …

A Roman father had the legal authority/power to have any of his daughters PUT TO DEATH, yet … I cannot cite a single example of the law being applied in practice.

Can you imagine how terrible things would be if women had the codified and unquestioned legal power to put a male relative to death merely by word/command? The male population in the USA would easily be less than half of what it presently is. The only reason women might refrain from engaging in mass purges against men is because on some level they realize they need men for economic reasons. Even still, that realization might not stop them as they are incredibly short-sighted to the point of being so hateful and bitter that they cut off their nose to spite their face.

Yes, we have seen it time and time again, they have restraining orders taken out to keep their ex-husband away from his children, thinking, “ha, that will show him who is boss, let him cry about it!” and they give no thought to the fact that their children are almost certain to grow up with tremendous problems. Either they do not realize it or they just do not care. I tend to lean towards the latter being the case, they just don’t care whether or not their own children suffer, as long as they can “make that jerk (ex-husband) suffer” and make him realize “I am woman, hear me roar!” that’s all that matters.

Yes, I’m sure that’s the reason. I’m pretty sure that if I lived in the same town as you, I’d try to get a restraining order against you just for this comment alone.

Categories
antifeminism antifeminst women evil women hypocrisy men who should not ever be with women ever misandry misogyny MRA oppressed men rape reactionary bullshit sex the enigma that is ladies the spearhead

Your penis, your choice — not your responsibility!

Ladies use these to extract money from helpless men.

When men and women have consensual sex, who is responsible? If you said “both, because they both agreed to and participated in it,” you might be some sort of misandrist feminazi. Because, as W.F. Price explains in a recent Spearhead post, it’s really women who are responsible for consensual heterosexual sex.

If you’re wondering how that could be, well, keep reading. Price starts off by considering what he calls “the feminist claims of mass rape throughout society.”

If as many rapes happen as they claim, chances are someone on your street has been raped recently. There must be multiple simultaneous rapes occurring at any given time within your zip code. Can you hear the silence screaming around you? (this is probably what goes through the minds of feminists).

Why yes, Mr. Price, chances are that someone on my street has been raped recently. Indeed, I know numerous women who have been raped. I’m guessing most women don’t share the intensely personal fact that they’ve been raped with you, Mr. Price, because you’re the sort of person who likes to go around talking dismissively about “the feminist claims of mass rape throughout society.”

Let’s continue:

Anyway, the point is that if men are so irrepressibly prone to rape and so sexually voracious, and women so prone to being unwilling, then who really is most responsible when consensual sex does happen?

Well, that’s an interesting approach to logic: snidely dismiss the fact that rape is common, then go ahead and assume it’s true for the sake of the rest of your argument:

One of the most sacred and cherished rights of feminists is the right to say “no” — that is, the right to deny sex. Do men value the ability to deny sex as much as women? Perhaps when it comes to forced sodomy, but that isn’t a common issue. One rarely sees men marching down the street with placards declaring that “NO MEANS NO,” and when they do, they are generally just holding signs for women. So, if women actually like denying sex, and are more likely to exercise that power, who has more choice when it comes to whether or not a given sex act will occur?

I cannot help but marvel at the twisted logic here. Women want the right to say no to sex they do not want to have. But getting this “no” to be taken seriously is such a problem that some women organize actual protests in the streets to declare that “no means no,” and this means that … they are the ones responsible for sex.

And if women are more responsible for sex than the men they have sex with, just who should bear the responsibility for the pregnancies that sometimes follow? I think you see where Price is going here, but let’s let him spell it out:

Let’s break it down:

    Men have a higher sex drive than women

    Men have less control over their sexual impulses

    Women value the ability to deny sex

    Women are far more likely and able to deny sex than men

If the above are true, then barring outright rape, surely women are more to blame for pregnancy than men. So why does the law treat males and females as equal participants in the sex act, and why does policy hold the man to be more responsible? Clearly, the female has more control.

Since women sometimes say no to sex, they should bear all the costs of raising children?

It’s the strangest evo-psych argument I’ve seen so far: Since men are hardwired to be horndog sex-havers, they shouldn’t have to take responsibility for the consequences of this sexual activity, at least when it comes to contributing something to support the children that sometimes show up about nine months later. Ladies: think of the poor men, at the mercy of their boners! How dare you expect that they pay their share of the costs of raising a child?

In Price’s mind, child support is not only unfair to poor horndog men, it’s  a cancer destroying civilization as we know it:

There’s been a lot of hand-wringing over the disintegration of the American family and marriage, but few people dare to point out the obvious reason America is fast becoming a nation of bastards. It’s actually fairly clear: women are not being held to the appropriate level of responsibility where their sexual choices are concerned. In the old days, it was understood that, barring rape, women were more responsible for who they slept with than men, and if they screwed up they had to deal with it. This is why the rate of illegitimacy was so low for so long. However, today, women can get pregnant and receive guaranteed support from not only the government, but whatever random man they permitted to have sex with them.

Raising a child as a single mom is apparently the easiest thing in the world. But making men pay for a portion of the costs for this child is tyranny!

Holding men more responsible than women for sex has been an abysmal failure, yet the policy remains in place despite thousands of years of received wisdom that lets us know it is a bad idea. Holding men and women equally responsible would be inappropriate as well, but we’ve gone past even that. Without some change in policy soon, the majority of all births in the United States will be illegitimate in a decade or so. The current system, which absolves women of responsibility for a choice that is largely in their hands, and for which they have even more options and tools at their disposal to deal with the consequences than ever, is unsustainable.

Despite his own handwringing about the state of The Family, Price doesn’t’ spell out how married men fit into his sex-responsibility equation. Are married men considered as responsible for babies as their wives? Is this responsibility retroactively nullified if they get divorced? It’s all very complicated. Which is, I guess, inevitable, once you arbitrarily decide that two consenting adults who have sex with one another are somehow not equally responsible for this sex.

Naturally, the Spearhead peanut gallery provided many more nuggets of wisdom. WGMOW – apparently a woman herself – gave Price’s bizarre argument a big ditto:

I don’t even see anthing debatable here. It is entirely the females who make the decision when and where to get knocked up, and then get child support from a man with the means to provide her with a bank account and credit cards seemingly for life. It there is no such man available she gets handouts from Big Daddy Government in the form of welfare, Sec 8 housing, free utilities, food stamps, free health care, free college education, and in some states, even a car.

These are the females that feminists say are “strong, powerful, and smart.” Bullshit. They are just as dependant as the females of the Victorian age. Then, they went from the care of their fathers into the care of their husbands. Now, they go from the care of their welfare mothers into the care of the government. All courtesy of our tax dollars.

AfOR put it even more bluntly:

The law fucks men over because they can be made to bleed more than a wimminz, they make better hosts for the parasites of society than wimminz.

Who exactly are the parasites here? The babies?

Hf seemed annoyed that women are allowed any autonomy at all:

Women typically struggle with knowing what exactly it is that they want. The “No Means No” movement is just as much trying to convince themselves and each other as it is trying to convince men. Deception is very much a part of a woman’s autonomy.

Nehalem provided a new slogan for the no-male-responsibility-for-sex-or-babies movement:

To get the point across more easily I suggest we modify a common liberal slogan and say:

Her body, her choice, her responsibility.

This being The Spearhead, it sort of goes without saying that each of these comments got dozens of upvotes.

Apparently, then, the only responsible course of action for unmarried women today is to never ever have sex with men. No sex, no consequences, no responsibilities to share with force upon men! But somehow I suspect that the MRAs of the world wouldn’t be happy with this solution.