Category: Uncategorized

Categories
creepy funny men who should not ever be with women ever pics Uncategorized

>(Surreal) Dolls on holiday

>

I really have nothing to say about this discussion on The Doll Forum: A Meeting Place for Adult Doll Owners & Admirers. So I’ll let “Zara’s” boyfriend/owner/creepy dude explain: 

Our first holiday away, just Zara, myself, the van and the open road. We’re off to to visit some friends of Zara and I, spend some alone time and see some sights up and down the east coast. I’ll add photos every week or so of what we got up to and who we met.

Packing the van for the trip invovled more issues than I had first thought. Packing for Zara meant packing for two and she needed more room for her gear than I did. 

 More creepy photos at the link.

Categories
Uncategorized

>Consent. It’s so … American.

>

Hey ladies!

Sex is so confusing. Take the whole notion of “consent.” How are you, as a dude,  supposed to keep track of whether or not, say, a woman has actually consented to sex with you? I mean, are you supposed to ask? If she says “no,” how do we know she’s really saying “no?” Maybe she’s saying “know,” as in, why don’t you “know me” in the Biblical sense? Like I said, it’s very confusing. 

Apparently things are a lot simpler in France, at least according to this dude on Jezebel. In France, apparently, if you happen to espy a comely mademoiselle, you can just start groping her:

At the clubs in the 8ème, off the Champs-Élysées, and all along Rue de Rivoli, it is fairly common to watch men literally grab and touch the girls who weave through the crowd. Men often draw a finger down an unknown girl’s cheek or under her chin like a doting Uncle; they can be seen pinching girls’ noses, throwing arms around shoulders and even stealing kisses.

And according to this dude, whom no one’s ever heard of, the French ladies love it, just love it!

Parisian women deny or accept these advances with a decisiveness many American women lack. Naturally, some girls in Paris walk away and reject these strong come-ons. But one can observe many of them reacting with knowing laughter; these women understand the game. …

Parisian women seem to derive a feminist power from this chauvinism that makes them come across as strong, self-determining, and completely aware of themselves as permanent objects of desire. And drunk or sober, it seems Parisian women get exactly what they want while their men, if rejected, are left to hammer doggedly away at other targets.

That sounds about right. I mean, what woman doesn’t want strange men hammering doggedly away at them all hours of the day every time they step outside?

It’s all very sophisticated. Very Continental. Heck, it’s very The Continental.

Anyway, so apparently some feminist bloggers are, you know, griping away, like the ladies do, that Jezebel, ostensibly a feminist-ish blog, would run such a thing. Ladies, come on! What are you, prudes? Americans? Men who read this dude’s piece may lighten up a bit and start acting a lot more French. Who are you to deny the women of America the chance to have strange men, with questionable personal hygiene and an extensive knowledge of cheeses, running their fingers down their cheeks?

Note: This post contains sarcasm.

Categories
discussion of the day evil women men who should not ever be with women ever MGTOW sex Uncategorized women are...

>What Women Think of Men, Apparently

>

She’s thinking unkind things about your penis.

Yesterday we met Christopher in Oregon, a fellow who feels that other fellows might want to avoid all contact with women, who are all, as he put it, “whores … walking cesspools of filth … DIRTY creatures, pure and simple.”

Christopher was such an articulate spokesman for his cause that I thought I’d bring him back for an encore. Today, we learn that the hatred doesn’t only flow one way. In fact, he suggests in another epic comment on Marky Mark’s blog, women think as poorly of men as he thinks of women. Not just some of them, but every single one of them:

ALL women hate ALL men ALL of the time! (most of them can keep it hidden for some time.)

This is a CARDINAL RULE! If you can’t accept it, you’ve already lost the game. You’re rat-fucked! You might as well just give up and go hang yourself by getting married!

In case we forgot that women aren’t too be trusted, he gives us a little refresher course in the Evil That is Woman:

You can’t deal with women safely because we aren’t playing by the same rules. One must keep in mind that the three primary characteristics of All women are as follows:

1) Immoral (or amoral, if you prefer)

2) Dishonest

3) Selfish

Many other adjectives would apply, but these three are the main attributes of women. Since this is true, and the laws are on their side, a man can’t hope to break even in any dealings with women. It’s impossible.

Now we come to the crux of his argument. More sensitive men may wish to sit down at this point, and perhaps move to protect their testicles. For what Christopher has somehow figured out about what goes on inside the dirty, filthy, selfish, dishonest, immoral, whorish minds of women while they’re having sex with you will shock you to your core.

Every time you are humping and grinding and snorting like a rutting pig on top of a woman thinking you are SUCH a stud (in all fairness, you probably are NOT) she is:

1) Bored

2) Faking it

3) Disgusted

4) Glad she took her valium first

5) Fantasizing about a black man

6) Fantasizing about a new car

7) Fantasizing about the butch lesbian that drilled her last week with a ten-inch strap-on for six hours

8) Laughing inside about your pitifully small penis

9) Comparing you unfavorably to any one of her previous two-hundred partners

10) Wishing you would go even faster and trigger … a massive coronary

11) Fantasizing about the neighbor’s German Shepherd

12) Thinking about how your deodorant just ain’t making it

Sorry to burst your bubble. I’ve heard this from women. It’s all a sick joke. You are NOT Don Juan, and they don’t view you as such. In her mind, you are a disgusting, smelly pig, and you are invading her body with that…..thing.

Well, if that’s what he thinks women think of men, no wonder he wants to have nothing to do with them.

It’s kind of sad, really.

On a not-entirely-unrelated note, if you scroll up to the top of the page on Marky Mark’s blog on which this comment from Christopher is posted, you will note that Mr. Mark has worked himself into a lather over a story in The Onion. I can’t quite tell if he thinks it’s real — I mean, how could he? — but he acts as though he does. He even writes up a point-by-point rebuttal and everything. It’s so cute! As he puts it, unaware of the irony, “I can’t make this stuff up. … I can’t! No matter how hard I tried, I could not make this up.” Well, no. That’s why the folks at The Onion make it up for you.

Categories
antifeminism evil women homophobia hypocrisy men who should not ever be with women ever MGTOW misogyny Uncategorized western women suck

>Anglo-haters gonna Anglo-hate

>

Bill O’Reilly secretly spreading Feminazi man-hate.

The fellow behind the charmingly named Anglobitch blog — devoted to the notion that “Anglo-American Women Suck!” — has delivered up a rambling, loopy rant about hate crime legislation, which essentially suggests that the very existence of such legislation reflects an “inherent, all-pervasive hatred of men” in the “Anglosphere.”

For while Hate Crime is prohibited by each Anglo-American national state, pan-anglosphere misandry is actively promoted by each state against its male citizens.

His first example of this is … Rupert Murdoch’s media empire. I’m not sure exactly when Murdoch was promoted from media mogul to head of state, but never mind. Our Anglo-blogger is off and running: 

The Murdochratic media ceaseless vilifies men as outcasts, misfits and sexual deviants while exalting women as paragons of virtue, beauty and intellect. This anti-male propaganda is at least as relentless as the Nazi media campaign against the Jews –– but even more insidious, since its agendas are covert and unstated. … And, as in the Third Reich, hatred of the outcast group (in this case, men) has been fully normalized since the rise of gender-feminism in the late sixties.

Uh, yeah, that agenda is pretty … covert. I don’t remember there being a lot of Jews at the top of the Nazi party. But it seems like every time I turn on Fox News I see someone from “the outcast group (in this case, men)” spewing what to the untrained ear sounds like reactionary nonsense. (I mean, there’s Gretchen Carlson, but she’s got to share the set with Steve Doocy and that other dude.) But apparently I can’t see Bill O’Reilly, Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck for what they are: footsoldiers of our feminazi overlords. Er, overladies? Overwomyn?

Our Anglobitcher then moves from the anti-male evils of Murdoch to the anti-male evils of the law. Apparently divorce law is so biased towards women that

many Anglo-American women consciously plan for a ‘starter marriage’ to fleece some unsuspecting male [which] proves that malicious misandry is rapidly becoming a female lifestyle-choice.

After a brief denunciation of the welfare state — men pay the taxes and women benefit! — Anglobitcher comes to the US military draft, for which only males have to register “despite them being tacitly viewed as Untermenschen by law, government and the media.” Hey, I didn’t like having to register, and I don’t think any one of either sex should have to, but, uh, no one has been drafted in the US since the Vietnam war. 

So the first of his examples of state oppression is based on the idea that Rupert Murdoch is The State, not to mention some sort of feminazi. And his last is based on guys having to sign what is for all practical purposes a meaningless scrap of paper. The Anglobitcher nevertheless concludes “that males represent the primary victims of ‘hate crime’ across the Anglosphere.”

Oh, but he’s not quite done. For what angry denunciation of hate crime laws is complete without, you know, some good old-fashioned homophobia, served with a side order of transsexual-bashing:

It is also telling that the only male groups effectively protected by pan-Anglosphere hate-crime laws are gays and transsexuals. This is entirely to be expected: such males simulate the female role which, as we have endlessly observed, is routinely and blindly exalted by Anglo-Saxon culture. When the only way for men to achieve protection from ‘hate crime’ is to adopt homosexuality (or female genitalia) the true nature of Anglo ‘patriarchy’ reveals itself. Only women and their mincing mimics can enter that charmed circle; the healthy, potent male never can.

Dude, you’re an Anglodouche.

EDIT: Mr. Anglobitch has responded to this post. His response is actually a bit more coherent than the original post, though, admittedly, that’s not much of an accomplishment.
 

Categories
Uncategorized

>Top Ten Dumb Things to Assume About Me and This Blog

>

Actually, there’s no “me” in “assumption.”

This is a note mainly intended for my MRA readers, mostly so I won’t have to deal with all this crap in comments again and again.

1) That I am anti-male, or against rights for men. Nope! I’m a man. I like having rights. The same rights as women. I am opposed to the retrograde, self-described “Men’s Rights Movement,” which I think is a bad thing for men and women both.

2) That every post I make about an individual Men’s Rights Activist or antifeminist is intended as a critique of the Men’s Rights Movement as a whole. Nope! Not all feminists agree on everything; not all MRAs agree on everything. When I critique an individual, you should take that as a critique of that individual. Though sometimes the things these individuals think are things that lots of MRAs think, which brings us to to our next item in the list.

3) That every post I make that critiques ideas and attitudes that pervade the MRM is an attack on each and every MRA. Nope! However widespread these ideas and attitudes are, there are invariably MRAs who don’t believe these things, and my critique obviously does not apply to them.

4) That because I am a feminist, I am somehow responsible for everything ever said or done by every other feminist. Nope! I am one dude. I am responsible for the things I say and do. I am not responsible for the things I do not say or do. The fact that some feminist thinks some thing does not necessarily mean that I think that thing. I might, I might not. (This applies more broadly: The fact that some feminist thinks some thing does not necessarily mean that all other feminists, or even most, or even many, think that thing.)

5) That I think women are pure as the driven snow and that men are all evil. Nope! I am aware, as every other human being I’ve ever meet is aware, that both men and women can do horrible, horrible things. Individual women abuse children, kill people, and screw over men and other women alike. They basically do every bad thing in the world that men do. You want to see how horrible some women can be? Watch the documentary Dear Zachary. It’s on Netflix instant watch. It’s really depressing. Still, there are areas in which men, on average, behave worse than women, on average. Men, for example, commit the overwhelming majority of violent crimes; they are responsible for the overwhelming majority of rapes. Acknowledging these facts is not the same as saying that all women are angels. They’re not.

6) That I think every bad thing in the world is all the fault of men. See above.

7) That everything I post on this blog is a deadly serious indictment of the MRM. Nope! Sometimes I post stuff that relates more broadly to men’s issues. Sometimes I make jokes. Sometimes I post odd pictures.

8) That I should immediately write a giant policy statement/rebuttal/manifesto on any given subject that any commenter brings up at any time. Nope! I have my own agenda, and I’m doing things on my own schedule. I may not think your pet issue is all that important. And even if I do, I may not get around to posting about it right away. There are a lot of important issues, and I’m one dude. If any of this makes you unhappy, well, you don’t have to read this blog.

9) That I am interested in having unending discussions with people who misrepresent things I’ve said, or things other feminists have said, or who simply dismiss research conducted by feminists without even reading it. Nope!

10) That I really care what MRAs think of this blog. Nope! Put bluntly, this blog isn’t for you. It’s for all the people in the world who aren’t you. Actually, that’s not 100% true: If this blog convinces an MRA or two to stop being an MRA, that would be cool. I don’t really expect that to happen, but, hey, I won’t complain if it does. You’re free to post comments here, like everyone else, but I’m not trying to win your approval.

Categories
antifeminism feminism hypocrisy misogyny reactionary bullshit sex Uncategorized

>Conned by a young rake? It’s all feminism’s fault.

>

Oops. Wrong picture.

A fiftysomething British woman is seduced and abandoned (and ripped off to the tune of £40,000) by a twentysomething con man, and it’s all the fault of … feminism? The Elusive Wapiti, a right-wing Men’s-Rightsy blog, writes about the case of one British woman let herself be charmed by a sweet-talking young fellow on Match.com and, despite an endless stream of obvious lies from him which should have kept the alarm bells in her head ringing continuously, agreed to meet him in South Africa, and ultimately hand over a huge chunk of her life’s savings to him. Her actions were incredibly stupid; the story is pathetic and sad.

And according to The Elusive Wapiti, feminism is to blame. And it actually kind of is. But not for the reason Wapiti thinks: 

Today’s exhibit is a Brit named Caroline Gates-Fleming, a twice-divorced middle-aged woman desperate to maintain her relevance in a culture that, thank you feminism, shackles feminine worth to her ability to attract a man.

Huh? Apparently I’m not up-to-date on the latest anti-feminist stereotypes. I thought feminists were all supposed to be man-hating lesbians, living alone with their cats and their “a woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle” posters. But apparently it’s feminism — not, say, our sexist society — that makes women feel like they’re nothing without a man. Wapiti continues:

Hilarity ensues when a being that is accustomed to easy-come-easy-go male attention since the age of 15 experiences the shock of watching her attractiveness slowly die, after decades of taking it for granted and kicking perfectly good men to the curb.

The “perfectly good men” are her ex-husbands, though I’m not sure how Wapiti has determined that she cast them off for no good reason. No matter, Wapiti is just warming up. He returns to his main theme: Feminism bad!

[T]hanks to feminism, the old morality that once protected women from the siren song of their gonads has been stripped away. Used to be that women in their late 40s / early 50s were respectable housewives and grandmothers in stable if somewhat less than satisfying marriages, and slut-shaming and other social conventions kept them there, safely ensconced.

Ah, the good old days, when women stayed married, no matter how miserable they were, and gave up their sexual desires once they hit, say, the age of 47.

Now we discover that supposedly mature women instantly morph into priapic young boys–subbing vulvas for penises of course–given the right stimulation to their egos and hopes of emotional intimacy long since gone.

Damn you, evil feminism, for convincing women they might possibly have sex in their late 40s or — gasp! — older! Quite possibly with younger men! I mean, it’s not like men in their late 40s ever want to have sex with women younger than they are. I have never, ever heard of that happening, ever.

EDIT: Added a sentence in the second paragraph to make my point clearer. 

Categories
antifeminism crackpottery feminism funny Uncategorized

>Could it be … Satanists?

>

Feminist witches have captured Jack Nicholson!

Today’s tasty helping of antifeminist crackpottery comes from Len Hummel, courtesy of henrymakow.com. In an article titled, for reals, “Satanists Seduce Women With Wicca,” Hummel asks:

Are you aware of the close connection between feminism, lesbianism, wicca, and goddess-worship? It is rampant and getting worse by the minute.

Vast numbers of women today have been seduced into the occult, satanism, and various forms of witchcraft and wicca by the evil spirits behind those movements and feminism. …

Consider these insights from a Christian researcher who has investigated these very disturbing developments among modern-day feminists: …

“Much of what is currently published under the guise of New Age “enlightenment”, is nothing less than Old Age doctrines of nefarious invisible hosts. As in antiquity, so in modern times, those who practice paganism are guilty of worshipping “devils”…

Categories
funny MRA pics Uncategorized

>Is Autocorrect a Men’s Rights Activist?

>

This pic is from my new favorite site ever (today), Damn You Auto Correct!

Categories
evil women feminism homophobia misogyny MRA reactionary bullshit Uncategorized

>Around the world in a Google-Translated daze

>

No girls allowed.

So yesterday I asked the MRA masses to post the names of blogs, websites, online manifestos, etc. that in their opinion represent the best that the Men’s Rights Movement has to offer.

I got a lot of comments, but, er, I didn’t exactly get a ton of suggestions. The first commenter to come through with actual URLs was Yohan, a non-native English speaker who mainly reads non-American sites. He posted three URLs, all to sites not in English.

But hey, we live in a global village, and I’m not going to let a little thing like language get in the way. So I pasted his URLs into Google Translate and took a look.

The first site he mentioned, a German Men’s Rights hub called MANNdat, looked, sadly, almost completely identical to any number of American Men’s Rights sites, from its page on “Feminist Myths” right on down to the obligatory “Woman Behaving Badly” post on its front page. 

The second URL led to an Austrian site with the translated title “Executioner,” which looked too dour and creepy to me, so I didn’t even bother poking around.

I approached the third site he mentioned with a little bit more optimism. It was Japanese, so I figured the combination of vast cultural differences, gross translation errors, and the natural hilarity of internet antifeminists would lead to pure win, as they say on the internet.

And at first, I did indeed seem to have struck internet gold. I found myself utterly charmed by the site, which is apparently called “Feminist Fantasy,” and which through the magic of Google Translate seemed to be a virtual repository of fantastic Dadaist poetry:

Identity of feminist leadership

America seems to be the queen of quibble.
Around in a thoughtful but very good at sophistry,
In the United States to refrain from the country so fast lady,
I argue that it is no longer anyone to organize a quibble

I can even sort of agree with that. America really is the “queen of quibble.”‘

But, alas, my euphoria was short-lived. As I kept looking around the site I found some things that even Google Translate couldn’t render charming. Like the articles “Sodom, Gomorrah, and the Netherlands” and “Gay marriage is a human misery,” which explains, in Google-translate-speak:

In order to destroy the institution of marriage, the idea of same-sex marriage are pushing a plan to destroy the sanctity of marriage.

So God does not bless same-sex marriage in the Bible the same shape as opposite sex marriage.

Yeah, I don’t need a perfect translation to get the gist of that article. Or this one, which I reproduce in its Google-translated entirety:

American abomination

Abomination ever played the glorious U.S. military in Iraq. Why such a moral collapse happened. Between men and women of loose morals are the leading cause of it. That gender equality and women soldiers of the United States, the relationship between men and women, who had loose sexual relations, she was weakening resistance to an immoral abuse.

Also, female sumo wrestlers? They aren’t having any of that either.

So much for my foray into international antifeminism.

Categories
Uncategorized

>Hit me with your best shot

>

Like this guy, only fighting feminism.

One of the running complaints from Men’s Rights Activists who frequent this blog is that I pick on “nobodies” or “fringe elements” in the Men’s Rights movement, with some suggesting erroneously that all I do is pick on individual commenters on MRA blogs who might, for all we know, be evil feminists out to make MRAs looks bad (as if MRAs really need any help in that department).

It’s a silly criticism, given that most of my posts so far have dealt not with anonymous commenters, but with MRA bloggers and others with a history in the MRM, including some fairly prominent names. And the posts I make based on comments on MRA sites? They show what is considered acceptable discourse in the MRM, demonstrating the casual misogyny of all too many MRAs, which all too often goes unchallenged by other MRAs.

But let’s, for a second, pretend all the critiques are true. I ask you, all the MRAs who read this blog: if I’m unfairly picking on nobodies, who are the somebodies I should be focusing on? If I’m focusing on “fringe elements,” websites or forums that don’t really represent the MRM, where are the websites and forums I should be looking at?

This isn’t a rhetorical question. It’s a challenge: I’m inviting you to post the names of blogs, websites, online manifestos, etc. that in your opinion represent the best that the MRM has to offer. Heck, even individual blog posts are fair game here. Books too. Post them in the comments below, with links if possible, and with a short statement explaining why you like that blog, forum, book, whatever.

Note: I feel compelled to add one further point, because I know what will happen if I don’t. I’m not asking this question because I don’t actually know of any MRA “somebodies.” I’m asking because, again, I want to know who you guys think are important. I have several dozen blogs and websites in my “enemies list”; I’ve examined all of them. I’m familiar with Warren Farrell, Christina Hoff Sommers, Paul Nathanson and Katherine Young, Erin Pizzey, and so on and so on. I’ve read The Misandry Bubble and the “Don’t Marry” post. I’m just asking: If I’m focusing on sites and people that misrepresent the MRM, what sites/people do you think represent you best?