NOTE: This page is in desperate need of revision and expansion. In the meantime, I suggest you use Rationalwiki’s Manosphere Glossary.
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: The Men’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. I think the Man Going His Own Way acronym MGHOW adds another layer of confusion to an already awkward acronym, so I use MGTOWer instead.
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. A term, and identity, adopted by some dateless guys (as well as some women, but it’s the men we’ll focus on here). While there is nothing shameful about being dateless, or a virgin, or having a really long dry spell sexually — most of us have been there at some point — the term “involuntarily celibate” seems to suggest that the world owes incels sex, and that women who turn down incel men for dates or sex are somehow oppressing them. For those (male, straight) incels who are genuinely socially awkward or phobic, this can be a self-defeating stance that can lead to bitterness towards women. And often does.
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 (insofar as it is not complete bullshit) is at its essence simply a male version of the age-old 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’m just honestly waiting for him to come back to defend his Freudian slip.
That was me, I think.
Thanks for the correction! It might take me a while to internalize it, but I’ll do my best to remember, and feel free to call me out again if I mess up! :3
Aw, no worries, they is always a good fallback!
Also, ARGENTI’S BACK!
*glomps Katz* hi Katz!
So I was honestly for realz gonna read that link our ever so wise visitor deigned to share with us on transphobia in feminism. And then I saw everyone’s favorite asshole — Brennan. So now I have to read it, because fuck her. But if he thinks anything siding with her represents all of feminism… well, pull the other one, it has bells on it.
So that was actually an interesting read. Kinda 101/201 stuff, but hey, a radfem saying TERfs are hurting their own cause? Always refreshing.
In other words, Dar didn’t read his link. Cuz he wouldn’t have tried to claim I didn’t know about feminism’s transphobia by linking an article ending with:
So, I know being a feeble woman I’m not very good with science. But all the same, I enjoyed the super lunar eclipse tonight. Maybe it’s just because red is pretty and pleases my artistic lady brain. Did anyone else check it out?
@WWTH
My father told me about it, but the rain didn’t let us see it here 🙁
@WWTH
I would have loved I too IF THERE WEREN’T FUCKING CLOUDS
FUCKING CLOUDS
IN THE SKY
FUCK YOU TOO SKY
FUCK ALL OF YOU
@Pandapool
You have sumrised my feelings perfectly.
Lots of people, tonight.
?crop=0.7453125xw:1xh;center,top&output-quality=75
@Dar
Ah, so you are indeed operating only on the faulty logic of things that “everyone” knows and ignoring the actual facts that have been determined by people who actually know what the fuck they are talking about. Just like you are with male and female roles in society. I suspected as such, but thank you for confirming.
I’m bored now, this troll only has two talking points.
For days and days it was all rain all the time in the Twin Cities, but somehow the skies were cloud free all day and night today. I’m sorry it was all cloudy so many other places tonight 🙁
Eh, it was clear here, but I think I missed it because I wasn’t sure what time it was supposed to be. ; n ;
@WWTH:
Was PZ Myers observed on a rooftop, cackling with laughter whilst assembling some ominous looking device? If so, that could explain it.
@WWTH
Ah, I see how this works. You asswipes are just going to spam me to death. Instead of replying in one
full post each, you’re going to reply one-line-per-post, right?
Fuck you all, 130 replies and still nothing but feminist bullshit.
weirwoodtreehugger:
“Actually, traditionally medicine was women’s work.”
Bullshit. Galen was a woman? Avicenna too?
—-
“I also think it’s funny that Dar only counts work as work when men are doing that work.”
YOu think men were breast-feeding the babies while the women plowed the fields!?
—-
“So, I know being a feeble woman I’m not very good with science. But all the same, I enjoyed the super
lunar eclipse tonight. Maybe it’s just because red is pretty and pleases my artistic lady brain. Did
anyone else check it out?”
No, but it means that on average you are less interest in science than men.
RosaDeLava:
“@Dar
You assume all feminists are atheists; You assume most feminists are jewish (you anti-semitic
scumbag); You assume feminists think men who are attracted to non-feminist women have been
brainwashed; You assume feminists are against motherhood.”
-Yes, the real ones.
-Many of the major ones, yes. Oh, also most Jews are not semitic, so there goes that accusation.
-Never asserted such a thing. Feminists hate men, period.
-Yes, because they see motherhood as oppression and taking women aay from their “rightful job” of
being just like the men.
—-
“And yet, you’re upset when we assume you’re a MRA.”
Because I’m not. because I don’t believe in “gender equality”, so am neither feminist nor MRA. You
both do, ecept you whine about how the system/history is/was unfair to your sex only.
MRA’s are against traditional roles, and for abortion. Check out “JudgyBitch”, who is openly for
abortion even after happily admitting it’s murder.
—-
“You know nothing of history, you know nothing of science, you know nothing of anthropology, you know
nothing of reasoning, and you know nothing of consistency – and you should stop acting like you do.”
None of your vermin have yet to disprove anything I wrot,e because you can’t disprove history or what
our own eyes show.
Go ahead, disprove to me the assertion that men are generally bigger and stronger than women.
Afterall, isn’t that a “sexist” thing to write?
Ofcourse, I wouldn;t be surprised if your idea of “disproof” is some female body-builder.
Scented Fucking Hard Chairs:
“Can I just point out that this tiny paragraph shows us four different things:
1. A classic example of a right-wing reactionary misappropriating SJ language because they flat-out
don’t understand that these are real words with real meanings. ABRA KADABRA it ain’t, bro.”
I don’t know what you’re talking about. More circle-jerking language?
And who told you I was right-wing? Woudl a right-winger condemn war?
But to idiots like you, there can only ever be “left wing” and “right wing”, and everyone must fall
within them. Such is the limit of your world-view.
And I wish you assholes would actually writ the quote you’re replying to.
—-
“2. A fundamental misunderstanding of LGBT+ stuff. Sexual orientation and gender identity are not the
same thing. Not even close.”
A-I do know the difference, which is why this “non-binary” line is bullshit. We are male or female.
Genetic men or genetic women. Transmen or transwomen. Everything else is bullshit.
B-LGBT is a bullshit term. YOu accuse me of mixing sexual orientation and identity, yet that acronym
does exactly that, mising transpeople with those of sexual orientation identities.
—-
“4. And finally, my favourite and the reason why I decided to make this post, the accidental shedding
of the “Religious” facade. A fundamentalist Christian would have complemented #2 with an angry slur-
dripping rant about ‘NOT NATURAL. DON’T REAL.’ Dude’s just a stock-standard MRA who’s even more
ashamed to admit it than most.”
Again, more moronic limited world-view. You assume I am MRA, conservative, religious, etc…, because in your limited insane asylum brain, you can’t comprehend anyone disagreeing with you with being “MRA/conservative/right-wing/religious/etc…”.
Not my problem you’re an idiot.
dhag85:
“Lol. Yeah, dude, I spotted your contradiction the first time. That was the entire point of my reply.
Did you even read it? You claim that behavior X is “natural” for women, yet at the same time you think
they need to be coerced into acting in accordance with their natural behavior. That’s a perfect
contradiction. You’re hilarious.”
More straw-man bullshit. It IS natural, and no one needs to be forced into it. Women and men naturally gravitated towards that manner of behavious. You might as well bitch that we need to be “forced” into being attratced to the opposite sex.
You keep repeating the same line despite my refuting it, simply because it makes you feel better, AND because you’re a dishonest asshole.
Paradoxical Intention:
“I actually did read it, but I wasn’t trying to make the point that this was common, only that it’s
natural, as it occurs in nature, which is what your argument is hinging on. You said it’s “natural”
for women to want to be mothers and homemakers, because something something nature, so I presented to
you an example in which that’s not true.”
No, that’s irrelevant. Ants live in a manner different than us, are you going to cite them too?
It IS natural, for the bonobo, just as it is natural for us.
Hwo did the scientists olearn about the bonobo? By observing them and the pattern of social
bnehavious. Do the same with humans and you get the idea that mern and women are different and
fullfill different roles.
—-
“If I were to say “The sky is green”, it would be my job to provide a citation on that (in general, it
would be polite to do so without having to be asked). However, someone can post an opposing citation
to prove me wrong, but that’s optional.”
YES EXACTLY! And YOU ARE claiming the sky is green. Feminist is a claim that the sky is green. It is a claim that how we’ve lives and behaved for all our history was “oppression” and “patriarchy” and a grand conspiracy to keep women down, and that there is no difference bwteen men and women abnd that both were meant to do the exact same thing. Regardless of what history, science, and basic human observation and common sense, tells them.
THAT is claiming the sky is green
—-
“Wow, not only do you assume you know more about Argenti than Argenti does in terms of their gender,
you’re apparently biphobic and transphobic as well!”
“biphobic”? More made-up bullshit terms.
—-
“Oooh, moral proselytizing with nothing to back it up! Smells like Bible Thumping! Shan’t work on me though, I’m pagan and don’t give a fuck about your particular morality being shackled to your religion, and I give more of a fuck about the health and safety of already born people than I do the unborn.”
Oh, because ONLY Christian fundementalists are opposed to abortion, right worm?
—-
“I think this is my favorite bit out of all that nonsense though. Freudian slip, maybe?”
Oh I see, this is the game we’re going to play? I tell you what, you try to repsond to FIFTY messages in a row without misstyping, asshole.
What next, refute me for bad spelling?
San:
“@DAr
Natural instinct?!.
Boy my mom & Dad must be the freak of nature cause it was my dad who cooks most of the time while my mom went to work.P.S: they’re not atheists but buddhist”
Exceptions. most do not live that way.
Besides, hwo do you know they are doing this by choice? Better yet, you think that’s how they would have lives a 100 years ago before feminist brainwashing?
—-
“@Dar
Yet this guy claimed to be an observer of democrats and republicans similiarities but he sounds like a republicans.”
So only repuiblicans are against atheism?
And IF I was a republican, why would I group them with democrats?
Like your circle-jerking buddy above, you assume there are only democrats and republicans/ liberals and conservatives, and ALL must fall within those two camps.
—-
“@Dar
Take a look at early hawaiian societies then,or minang or the akans of Ghana..Dumbass”
I love that you can only cite a couple of so, while ignoring that remaining 99.99% of humanity.
So what, the beduins aren’t good enough for you, asshole?
—-
“Sorry dude,but you really have a jelly brain,in my society,a very primitive ones actually had both men and women fight against invaders in the past,and yes there are women rulers too and men who stayed home to tend to the children..More coy stupidity from you”
Oh really? I don’t recall 19th century Americans fighting Apache men AND women on horseback.
I don’t rceall half the Roman legions being women.
You lose, you shit-for-brain feminist idiot.
Also, no way in HELL would any sane society allow women to fight equally with men, because that is ruination for a tribe’s survival when women die in large numbers. Again, the beduins do’t. But I guess they’re not good enough for you. Not obscure enough to bullshit with, huh?
—-
“Well,I guess men from my earlier generations can’t considered as doing real work then because most of them had worked on the farm or home,in which case YOUR CASE more coy stupidity from you..”
Doesn’t matter, men still did the heavy work, and were called up for war, and women tended the children.
—-
“It used to be former until some creatures like you come and screwed everything.Thank god the mosuo and the minang still maintained their system.It seems they haven’t followed the natural pattern yet.”
WHO “screwed everything up”? The mythical grand “Patriarchy” conspiracy?
Please tell me wow the men from sub-Saharan Africa, the Middle East, Eruope, south Asia, east Asia, Australia, and north and south America, ALL got together a long time ago and conspired to “oppress” women. Please tell me how THAT worked.
—-
“We want women doing whatever that suits them.”
Bullshit! Because otherwise why the mass propaganda to get women to be like men. Why “encourage girls” to go into sports and science and so on? Why not let them choose freely?
Because if allowed a free choice, they DON’T want science or sports (as much as the boys), so you want to brainwash them.
—-
“So you’re saying that tibetan and the kinnauri polyandry comes from biological imperative as well?”
Oh yes here ios the very core of feminism logic: minor tiny obscure examples, as compared to the COUNTLESS opposing examples.
—-
“Abortion is not infanticide you dumbass.It involved foetus not infant,if it’s considered as an infanticide,then so should masturbation.”
It’s you who is a vile moron that you’d equate a sperm cell with a baby inside a mother.
—-
“I’m confused I am feminist but I am not a lesbian and I am a mother too.Does that make me unnatural for not going against my natural inclination.Apparently if I am supposed to be a feminist,i can’t be a mother.But if I am a mother,I can’t be feminist.Which one is it? Lemur brain?”
Your movement was heavily lesbian, which explains its anti-man, anti-family, anti-marriage, pro- abortion stances.
And no, you can never be a good mother while being a feminist, vecause then you’ll always hate your children when they (gasp!) act in typical natural fashion, boys agressively with trucks and guns, and girls more quietly with dolls.
You probably force your sons to play with dolls and wear dresses, and vice-versa for the girls.
Why not? Don’t you want “equality”?
—-
“Excuse me you IMBECILE!!!!
My mother and I support abortion,she had an abortion herself!!
Are you actually questioning whether or not she loves her children???
Fuck you”
No, your mother can never truly love you BECAUSE had things been slightly different SHE’D HAVE ABORTED YOU, YOU MORON!
You would not exist if she for whatever stupid reason decided to end her pregnancy. YOUR life was worth shit to her.
It’s like if your mother smoked and did pot during your pregnancy. what would that tell you about how she felt about you?
—-
“You’re either a closet misogynist or closet MRAs,don’t pretend to be some kind of neutral libertarian.We seen it through you!!”
IF I was a misogynist, I’d SUPPORT feminism because it is destroying womehood and feminity and turning women into men.
IF I was an MRA I’d suppoert feminism because it agree with me in hating traditional roles.
And I am NOT a libertarian.
Buttercup Q. Skullpants:
“TIL that exposing daughters to choices and opportunities, and allowing them to choose a life path of their own free will, is ‘brainwashing’.
And stifling alternative beliefs and options so that women are more easily coerced into the role of homemaker with threats of social ostracism and junk biology is totally not brainwashing.”
No one is “stiffling” or hiding anythijng. You think somehown women didn’t know abot the outside world and jobs until feminism came along?
Ther was NO brainwashing of women to stay with the children or men to go to war, it was just the natural instincts. It is feminism that rbainwashes them to go against those instincts.
Wetherby:
“What absolute codswallop. The people I know who’ve had abortions, without exception, did so either because they didn’t feel ready to become mothers or because something had been discovered during the scan that would drastically impact on the child’s quality of life – which in some cases may be all but nonexistent.
How on earth is that compatible with the claim that they “can’t truly love their children”? Surely this suggests the exact opposite?
My wife could hardly be more pro-choice (if there’s a pro-choice rally within a couple of hundred miles of where we live, the chances are she’ll be on it), and anyone who claims with a straight face that because of this she can’t truly love our children is worth taking about as seriously as someone who claims that the world is flat and the moon is made of green cheese. Because the evidence to the contrary in all three cases is overwhelming.”
Weren’t ready to be mothers? So that makes it okay to kill the child?
As for your wife, yes your wife, like any pro-abortion woman, can never truly love her children BECAUSE HAD THINGS GONE SLIGHTLY DIFFERENTLY SHE’D HAVE KILLED THEM! Then where would your “children” be?
Evbery damned time you look at your children,you should be aware that those children would not exist if your wife had just decided “Nah, I don’t feel like having a child right now”.
Here, only a very tiny minority of women have abortions for medical and other “serious” reasons, most are just as birth control or money:
http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/abreasons.html