WTF is a MGTOW? A Glossary

On this blog, MRA does not stand for Magnetic Resonance Angiography

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.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

2.8K Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
RosaDeLava
RosaDeLava
5 years ago

@dhag85
I get the feeling that he thinks women don’t actually need to be physically forced into those roles because that’s totally what they want, but if we pointed out women who didn’t and wouldn’t fill those traditional roles willignly, he’d say they are “abnormal” or “brainwashed by feminists” (though who brainwashed those feminists who brainwashed the other feminists? The world wants to know).

dhag85
5 years ago

@RosaDeLava

Agreed, but I think advocating physical force is the unavoidable conclusion for MRAs and MRA-adjacent misogynists. What they oppose is, after all, women’s freedom and equal opportunity. They do argue that women should be made to obey the men in their lives and act according to imaginary natural laws – all against their will, in other words by force.

dhag85
5 years ago

It takes a special kind of troll to say “feminists hate motherhood” and in the next breath accuse others of resorting to strawmen. 😛

RosaDeLava
RosaDeLava
5 years ago

@dhag85
Oh, yes, absolutely! The reasoning must be something like this “all women want to fill those traditional roles -> The ones who claim they don’t secretely do, or are abnormal -> The natural order must prevail -> We must use our natural talents (brute force) to make them fit into this mold”.

isidore13
isidore13
5 years ago

By Dar’s logic, men should have no desire to interfere in any way with the production or raising of children at all. It’s against (what he says) is the natural order for men to have any interest in children because women bear children, men don’t, and therefore only women have connections to children or feel the need to take care of them. Basically zie is saying men can’t love children. Or am I misinterpreting?

PictonLibrary
PictonLibrary
5 years ago

MGTOW is getting a bit of a reputation. I want to suggest a new acronym that more accurately reflects these people’s philosophy:

SomeMenGoingTheirOwnWayEnjoyingLife

SMEGTOWEL

katz
katz
5 years ago

It’s no use for men to have bigger musklces without being more aggressive and more likely to fight.

You know who else has no use for bigger muscles? People who are dead because they picked fights for no reason.

Come on dude, try harder. Even if we’re going by a stupid biological-determinist model, animals go to huge lengths to avoid fights whenever possible. A needless fight is a big risk and a waste of resources for everyone involved. That’s why we developed this whole “communication” thing: So we didn’t need to throw each other through plate glass windows whenever we wanted something.

Zeb Berryman
Zeb Berryman
5 years ago

Dar: Oh quit this ridiculous essentialist argument about gender. If it were true that women were naturally submissive and incapable of hard work they’d also be incapable of wanting to do those things. They wouldn’t need you to enforce these ideals they’d just cling to them naturally.

Also there were plenty of older societies were sexual acts between the same sex were common such as Ancient Greece, Ancient Rome, Ancient Egypt and Ancient China so by your own logic yes homosexuality is natural.

Catalpa
5 years ago

@Dar

the natural order is where […] rock is hard

It says something that you can’t even pick a correct example of “things that are clearly true and need no proof to be believed”. Rock isn’t hard, or at least not all rock is hard. Talc is a rock and you can flake huge pieces of it off with just your fingernails. Same with gypsum, and mica.

It’s called the Moh’s hardness scale, you insufferable twit, and it exists because rock and minerals have varying properties and aren’t a monolithic, heterogeneous whole. Considering that you’re supposedly a super smart science dude, I’d expect you’d know something that is elementary-grade geology. But then again, nothing that you’ve been spouting on this thread has been anything approaching correct, so maybe it’s not that big of a surprise.

Pandapool -- The Species that Endangers YOU (aka Banana Jackie Cake, for those who still want to call me "Banana", "Jackie" or whatever)
Pandapool -- The Species that Endangers YOU (aka Banana Jackie Cake, for those who still want to call me "Banana", "Jackie" or whatever)
5 years ago
Moocow
Moocow
5 years ago

Bullshit!

And the proof are all those non-agricultrual hunter-gatherer societies that continued (and continue) to exist, where men and women play different rles as well.

http://blogs.loc.gov/digitalpreservation/files/2011/09/citation_needed.jpg

That “It takes a village” nonsense you can peddle somewhere else. Where is the written sources for that mythical feminist societiy of your of 10,000 years ago?

Unless you have some sort of background in anthropology, please give some goddamn sources to back up the bullshit you say. I have and I will continue to do so. It’s easy for me, after all, because (unlike you) the things I’m describing have actually occurred:

http://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/may/14/early-men-women-equal-scientists

Again, more of the usual feminist assualt on parenting.

What? The historic fact that a whole village helps to raise the children is ‘a feminist assault on parenting’? I didn’t realize Katie was alive during ancient times!

But thank you for showing us the marxist roots of feminism.

This isn’t even about feminism. This is just basic history.

So what? When did I write women don’t enjoy sex?

You and your circle-jerk friends here keep resorting to straw-man arguments.

Funny you should accuse me of making a straw man argument when YOU are the one who brought up primates. You said that we should “look at primates” to see examples of traditional gender roles.

Yet, what I provided was an example of a primate (who happens to be a VERY close relative) where the female can be continuously sexually active.

What are the traditional (and toxic) gender roles of femininity? “Be pure, ‘ladylike’, chaste, non-sexually active, submissive”

What were the female bonobos like? Continuously sexually active.

THEREFORE, no, the primates did NOT show any evidence that would suggest that gender roles are inherent in nature.

Doesn’t prove anything except that the reviewer if the one who’s biased. Her very langauge proves her to be a whiny feminist who can’t think straight.

Give an example of a passage that is biased and explain why it is biased. Or do you just dismiss anything that doesn’t fit your worldview?

She accuses tor authors of being “against equality” and trying to show women as “inferior”, when ALL they do is show how different the sexes are. If YOU read the book you’d know that.

And do tell, what are the ‘differences’ between the sexes according to that book? I’m curious, as I live in this place called “real life”, where men and women and non-gender-binary people are all individuals with their own unique likes/dislikes and their own unique aptitudes/flaws.

But to a feminist, that’s enough to be “sexist”.

Um yes, someone who thinks that women are ‘inferior to men’ is being sexist. Just like someone who considers blacks to be ‘inferior to whites’ is being racist. I know, this might be shocking to you but that’s how things work in “real life”.

Paradoxical Intention
5 years ago

Y’know, if our dear little troll wants to pull the “gender roles are inherent in nature!” bullshit, I’d like to present the following:

Spotted Hyenas have a matrilineal social structure, where even the lowest ranked female is above the highest ranked male.

Here’s an article.

Unlike most mammalian societies, female spotted hyenas run the show and are significantly more muscular and aggressive than males. […]

Here’s another.

Amazons of the animal world: the complex matrilineal social structure of spotted hyenas. The spotted hyena, Crocuta crocuta¸ has evolved a matrilineal society in which the females are more dominant and aggressive than males within the clans. Female and male behaviors come together to form a complex societal structure that promotes variability and reproductive success.

So, maybe you should just submit to women because, y’know, because “natural gender roles” and all.

But of course, you’d never do that, because you see women as being inferior, but let’s just admit that your “because natural order of things” argument is bullshit.

katz
katz
5 years ago

THEREFORE, no, the primates did NOT show any evidence that would suggest that gender roles are inherent in nature.

Thank God, since chimpanzees practice infanticide.

Scented Fucking Hard Chairs
Scented Fucking Hard Chairs
5 years ago

Religious idiocy wrapped in bad spelling – is Darsehole just Chaucer Conspiracy Dumbass again?

Scented Fucking Hard Chairs
Scented Fucking Hard Chairs
5 years ago

(Err, bad wording, sorry – idiocy that happens to be religious.)

Argenti Aertheri
Argenti Aertheri
5 years ago

Did I manage to pop my head in just in time for yet another glossary troll? Guess it’s Doctor Who and then whack-a-troll for me! (Hi guys!)

weirwoodtreehugger
5 years ago

Hey, Argenti! Welcome back!

Paradoxical Intention
5 years ago

Hey Argenti! We (or at least I) missed you! 😀

Buttercup Q. Skullpants

“missteps” YOu all murdering tens of thousands of innocent people, a “misstep”? You call destroying two nations a “misstep”? how vile.

Tell me again how you democrats and liberals are just oh so superior to the right-wing.

Give me a break. You know what’s vile? Giving actual war criminals a free pass, then suddenly pretending to be oh-so-concerned about civilian casualties in a conflict THEY ASKED US TO INTERVENE IN so you can mimic left-wing rhetoric in a pathetic attempt to play gotcha. Too bad conservatives suck at passing ideological Turing tests.

You can’t compare Libya and Iraq. Unlike Iraq, with its fabricated WMD issue, the problem in Libya was always evident. It involved a pathologically murderous tyrant who clearly laid out his intention to reduce a city of 700,000 to rubble and hunt the “rats” who opposed him from door to door and eliminate them. Khaddafi was bombing and strafing his own people and ordered the summary murder of all his own troops who refused to kill their own people. The Libyans asked for, and received, outside help. Iraq, on the other hand, was sold to the American people through months of lies, manipulation, and misinformation.

Don’t tell me Obama = Bush because he intervened to stop a dead certain humanitarian catastrophe from unfolding. Don’t tell me Obama = Bush when the IMMEDIATE fate of tens of thousands of people was in his hands and only the US had the power to act. That’s bullshit, not to mention false equivalency. It’s intellectually and morally lazy thinking.

Oh, we’re going by that charlatan Margaret mead, now?

WTF does Margaret Mead have to do with anything? I listed three examples of “traditional” non-Samoan societies structured along egalitarian/matriarchal lines as counter-examples to your generalizations, and that’s your rebuttal?

You’re a feminist, and feminists hate motherhood.

(and yet we’re the ones who describe people using outlandish black-and-white stereotypes…)

This might come as a shock, Dar, and I hope you’re sitting down for this…..Some feminists have kids! And love them! And enjoy being parents! Which has fuck-all to do with biological wiring!

That’s a pretty convenient circle of reasoning you’ve got there. Any counter-examples we come up with, of loving men who nurture babies and strong independent women who fight fires and go off to war, you dismiss as outliers, aberrations who aren’t filling their “natural roles”. I’m no statistician, but it seems to me there’s an awful lot of standard deviations out there in the world that aren’t conforming to your biological determinism. At some point all that hand-waving is going to give you a repetitive motion injury.

Also it’s fascinating, the way reactionaries mischaracterize legitimate critiques of how society perceives thing X as “OH, SO YOU HATE X AND WANT TO BURN IT DOWN”. I guess it’s an attempt to distract people from uncomfortable dialogue that might change something. Goodness knows we can’t have that.

I’ve been banned from MRA’s discussions for “misandry” for praising men being men.

/r/thathappened

Buttercup Q. Skullpants

Hi Argenti! Good to see you!

Argenti Aertheri
Argenti Aertheri
5 years ago

Not caught up but RosaDeLava — “I don’t think men’s rights are a joke, but I think the Men’s Rights Movement is.” I know we can’t upvote comments, and I know why, and agree with that, but that’s? I want to upvote it.

Buttercup — “If you view human bodies as simply utilitarian tools best suited for only one function, like can openers and wrenches, that might make sense, but most of us find it a bit reductive to be thought of as objects.”

Epically, wrenches can make can openers in a pinch, might manage the inverse with the handle of a can opener. Cuz even things designed for one purpose can be used for other purposes, so really, I don’t know how anyone is still dumbfounded that things not designed can do multiple things (oh, right, intelligent creator designed humans so men and women are strict categories with divine roles… blah, blah, blah *sigh*)

I was just going to laugh and our new friend using “charlatan” in a sentence, since that seems like a rather big word to go with some very recycled views, but then this happened:

“Besides, as feminists you’ve no business brining up transsexuals as you feminists hate them for “reinforcing gender roles”.”

And now I’m cranky. Cuz see, this non-binary trans person quite likes the folks around here, and is a feminist, despite thinking gender roles can fuck off. But I shouldn’t be surprised that the role of trans people in third wave feminism goes WAAAAAAY over Dar’s head.

But hey, caught up on this page!

Argenti Aertheri
Argenti Aertheri
5 years ago

I’m caught up! And hi everyone!

As for “feminists hate mothers”, or whatever version is being spouted today, one of my good friends just became an uncle to a teeny tiny preemie girl (she’s doing well), and as soon as that little ball of adorable gets out of the hospital this feminist is finding a onesie small enough to fit her! Because dude, kids are cute. Sticky, loud, but cute. I don’t intend to reproduce, but give me a kid to dote on and I totally will.

In things more interesting than the troll, we’ve accidentally adopted a calico stray who’s decided that since we keep putting out food, and toys, and my brother built her a kitty house, she’s going to plop in our yard and give no fucks about the dog (who got into a fight with a brick earlier, cuz he’s smart like that). What’s everyone been up to?

Dar
Dar
5 years ago

Scented Fucking Hard Chairs:
“You might need fifty posts to make your point, but I only need one GIF to make mine:”

Maybe if I didn’t get fifty morons spouting nonsense at me, then I wouldn’t need to write fifty replies.

Dar
Dar
5 years ago

RosaDeLava:
Ah, one monkley posts a dumb gif, another follows. Monkey see, monkey do.

“HEARTS PUMP BLOOD. STOP ACTING LIKE THEY ARE MORE RELEVANT THAN LIVERS. And souls or souls’ influences in the real world have never been observed. At least two of these things have fuck all to do with your argument.”

Ofcourse, a feminist AND a dirty atheist.

—-

“As for the whole utility of gender roles – Dude, you’re creating a dichotomy that has no bearing with the world we live in! We don’t behave like gorillas, and we don’t behave like bonobos. Our social structure is much more complex, and we we need people to have jobs other than “take care of children” and “beat the shit out of things”.”

Yes, but those other jobs are not natural, therefore we find men naturally gravitating towards one, and women the other.
best gender for doctors? generalyl men, because men are more interested in science.
Grocer? Probably women, though men are more organized.
Teacher? Dependes ont he subject.
Cleaner? Women.
Politician? Men, because men are the leaders.

See, the natural and undeniable differences between men and women cause them to naturally gravitate and be better at certain jobs than others.
—-
“And you’re not arguing with us – you’re arguing at us. You make assumptions about what we believe and we want us to argue for them, but that’s not how it works.”

No, actually, it is you and your circle jerk buddies who assume because I am anti-feminist I must be a closet MRA.
—-
“The reasoning must be something like this ‘all women want to fill those traditional roles -> The ones who claim they don’t secretely do, or are abnormal -> The natural order must prevail -> We must use our natural talents (brute force) to make them fit into this mold’.”

No, it is you feminist who want to use government programs and brainwashing to force women to abandone their natural instincts. Thus that silly “Take your daughter to work day”.

Dar
Dar
5 years ago

weirwoodtreehugger:
“What? I thought feminism was incompatible with religion. Now feminists are all Jewish. Which is it?”

more coy stupidity.
—-
“Women have always worked. Please stop getting your history from old TV shows. The Flintstones is not a documentary about Paleolithic people. Leave It To Beaver does not reflect what life was like for the vast majority of people.”

Some women have, but most no. Unless you’re refering to working on the home or family farm, in which case it is yet more coy stupidity.
—-
“I’m being coyly stupid? You’re the one who’s declaring your opinion to be the truth with nothing to back it up. You’re all circular logic and no facts. We’ve already explained to you that your idea of natural gender roles are neither on display in every culture or present in every other animal. So stop trying to use that as evidence. ”

You’re explained nothing, lemur brain.
Only in a feminist world does logic and realioty not exist. Let us all live in a fantasy world in which most socities has “equality” and women were soldiers and rulers as often as men, and men stayed home to tend the children as opften as women.
That’s the version of history according to feminists.
—-
“What we do know is that very few of them had stable enough settlements that would have allowed for women or anyone else to stay home a lot. Most of life would have been consisted of obtaining food. They didn’t have grocery stores 100,000 years ago.”

Means nothing. Even in non-agriculutral cultures, women are still the primary child-rearers, and women the fighters and leaders. That is so among the beduins, for example. The presence or absense of a “building called “house” makes no difference.

Which begs the question: Why can’t you moron feminists make up your mind. has history been one long patriarchal oppressij of women? Or has it been an egalitarian equal society whence you can draw inspiration? Which is it?

If the latter, then you have nothing to bitch about. If the former, then I prove my point that history shows a cler pattern os sex roles differences that point to a natural biological basis.
—-
Finally, as for your silly Etruscan news story, Note that you ignored the expert opinion, and decided to go with the moron feminist interpretation.

There is ZERO proof of Etruscans being an “equalist” society.

Dar
Dar
5 years ago

dhag85:
“Funny how misogynists like Dar like to claim that women being submissive homemakers is just “natural law”, yet they believe women need to be physically forced to act in a way that is consistent with their nature. It’s like words don’t mean a fucking thing to them.”

Ah yes, I was waiting for the “M”-word to pop. When feminists lose an argument, resort to “sexist!” and “misogynist!”.

If you had basic reading comprehension uncloded by bullshit feminism, you’d know that my whole damned point is that women were NOT forced to be “submissive” (your bullshit wapred feminist term) homemakers, but rather were natuirally inclined towards that role.

The fact is that it is YOU feminist who are the misogynists, since you hate traditional feminine roles and behaviours and attitudes. You see them as weak and “submissive” (again, YOUR word), and believe a “strong” woman, is oe who is like a man. Fights, is aggressive, wants careers, doesn’t give a shit about children and even aborts them if they get in her way, etc… “Penis envy” is what it is.

No surprise given that your whole accursed movement was heavily made up of lesbians.

—-
“It takes a special kind of troll to say ‘feminists hate motherhood’ and in the next breath accuse others of resorting to strawmen. :P”
Yes, because your fellow travellers see it has holding back women from their true call in life: being just like the men.
What do you think abortion is then, if not the violent assault on motherhood?

Here, a fellow traveller:
http://www.babble.com/mom/motherhood-just-another-form-of-oppression/

Dar
Dar
5 years ago

isidore13:
“By Dar’s logic, men should have no desire to interfere in any way with the production or raising of children at all. It’s against (what he says) is the natural order for men to have any interest in children because women bear children, men don’t, and therefore only women have connections to children or feel the need to take care of them. Basically zie is saying men can’t love children. Or am I misinterpreting?”

That’s silly. It’s a question of degrees. It’s like saying because men are the fighters, therefore women are 100% incapable of defending themselves physically.

Dar
Dar
5 years ago

katz:
“You know who else has no use for bigger muscles? People who are dead because they picked fights for no reason.
Come on dude, try harder. Even if we’re going by a stupid biological-determinist model, animals go to huge lengths to avoid fights whenever possible. A needless fight is a big risk and a waste of resources for everyone involved. That’s why we developed this whole ‘communication’ thing: So we didn’t need to throw each other through plate glass windows whenever we wanted something.”

That’s not the point. the idea isbn;’t that all men must go out and kill someone somewhere. The idea is that IF there is physical danger, men handle it. IF something needs to be hunted, men handle it. Etc…

Why is this so difficult to understand?
—-
“Thank God, since chimpanzees practice infanticide.”

Yes, so do humans,. It’s called abortion, which you feminists love.

Dar
Dar
5 years ago

Zeb Berryman:
“Dar: Oh quit this ridiculous essentialist argument about gender. If it were true that women were naturally submissive and incapable of hard work they’d also be incapable of wanting to do those things. They wouldn’t need you to enforce these ideals they’d just cling to them naturally. ”

Again that feminist propaganda word “submissive”.

There is NO need to enforce these, because most women want that role naturally. Which is why YOU feminist need to engage in such massive brain-washing and propaganda and government-programs to get them to do otherwise.

Girls not naturally interested in science? No problem, launch a program to get them to go into science! Sports? Title 9! Fighting? More movies with obligatory “kick-butt chick”!
—-
“Also there were plenty of older societies were sexual acts between the same sex were common such as Ancient Greece, Ancient Rome, Ancient Egypt and Ancient China so by your own logic yes homosexuality is natural.”

What part of exceptions do not make the rule, don’t you feminists understand? yes homosexuality is naturally occuring among humans, just as being born with 9 finger, but it is rare. If it was the norm, we wouldn’t be here today.

Dar
Dar
5 years ago

Catalpa:
“@Dar
the natural order is where […] rock is hard
It says something that you can’t even pick a correct example of “things that are clearly true and need no proof to be believed”. Rock isn’t hard, or at least not all rock is hard. Talc is a rock and you can flake huge pieces of it off with just your fingernails. Same with gypsum, and mica.
It’s called the Moh’s hardness scale, you insufferable twit, and it exists because rock and minerals have varying properties and aren’t a monolithic, heterogeneous whole. Considering that you’re supposedly a super smart science dude, I’d expect you’d know something that is elementary-grade geology. But then again, nothing that you’ve been spouting on this thread has been anything approaching correct, so maybe it’s not that big of a surprise.”

That’s just too stupid for words.

You know what I meant, and so does every damned human o this planet. You might as well bitch about how unscientific the phrase”rock hard” is.

Dar
Dar
5 years ago

Moocow:
“citation needed”?

No you dumb feminist fool, that’s not how it work! The one who natural accepted wisdom and canon is the one who gives citation.
If I say men are generally taller than women, I don’t need a God-damned citation, it is YOU who challenge such an assetion who needs a citation.

You deny that most societies through-out world history were “patriarchal”? If so, how dio THAT come about, if not from biological impreatives.

As for the bonobos, again 100% irrelevant! I never claimed that women don’t enjoy sex, therefore that female bonobos have sex year-round means zilch.
—-
“And do tell, what are the ‘differences’ between the sexes according to that book? I’m curious, as I live in this place called ‘real life’, where men and women and non-gender-binary people are all individuals with their own unique likes/dislikes and their own unique aptitudes/flaws.”

Read the book, you idiot. And no, you don’t live in the “real world”, you live in a feminist circle-jerk bubble where your idiocy is re-inforced by fellow travellers.
—-
“Um yes, someone who thinks that women are ‘inferior to men’ is being sexist. Just like someone who considers blacks to be ‘inferior to whites’ is being racist.”

Ah yes, another feminist tactic, analogize your bullshit with racism.

I never said women were inferior. YOU, as a moron feminist thinkgs that being a woman doing womanly things is “inferior”. You want women doing man things.

As for blacks and racism. Bzzzzz! Sorry, doesn’t wiork that way. There is hardly any difference between a black man and a white man, but there IS a difference between a man and a woman.

Dar
Dar
5 years ago

Paradoxical Intention:
Maybe you should read YOUR OWN article quote!:

“Unlike most mammalian societies…”

End of story.

Dar
Dar
5 years ago

Buttercup Q. Skullpants:
“Give me a break. You know what’s vile? Giving actual war criminals a free pass, then suddenly pretending to be oh-so-concerned about civilian casualties in a conflict THEY ASKED US TO INTERVENE IN so you can mimic left-wing rhetoric in a pathetic attempt to play gotcha. Too bad conservatives suck at passing ideological Turing tests.”
Who asked, you brainwashed fool? WHO?! The Western-bcked,-funded, and -armed “rebels” (thugs)?

And when did I give “War crminlas” a pass? bring up Bush and I will gladly condemn him as well.

Iraq was based on lies, and SO WAS LIBYA. You hypocrites who always condemn the other party’s wars but defend your own.

There was ZERO proof of Qadhhafi p[lanniny on doing any such crimes, seeing as how you didn’t do it with other rebel cities he seized. You might as well spout that bullshit “viagra to raping soldiers” lie.
—-
“Don’t tell me Obama = Bush because he intervened to stop a dead certain humanitarian catastrophe from unfolding. Don’t tell me Obama = Bush when the IMMEDIATE fate of tens of thousands of people was in his hands and only the US had the power to act. That’s bullshit, not to mention false equivalency. It’s intellectually and morally lazy thinking.”

Same pukeful logic that the right used to justify their crimes. “Well, look Saddam is a brutal dictator who’s used chemical weapons and abuses his own people, we MUST help lberate them”.

Here is YOUR hero Obama’s work:
http://tribune.com.pk/story/229844/the-day-69-children-died/
And on Libya:
http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/08/12/the-planned-destruction-of-libya/
http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/11/21/libya-creative-destruction/

You feminists truly are wicked.
—-
“This might come as a shock, Dar, and I hope you’re sitting down for this…..Some feminists have kids! And love them! And enjoy being parents! Which has fuck-all to do with biological wiring!”

That’s in SPITE of feminism, not BECAUSE of it. Anyone who suports abortion (as feminists do) can never truly love their children.
—-
“Any counter-examples we come up with, of loving men who nurture babies and strong independent women who fight fires and go off to war, you dismiss as outliers, aberrations who aren’t filling their “natural roles”. I’m no statistician, but it seems to me there’s an awful lot of standard deviations out there in the world that aren’t conforming to your biological determinism.”

No there isn’t except where feminism has infected and brainwashed people.

Dar
Dar
5 years ago

Argenti Aertheri :
“And now I’m cranky. Cuz see, this non-binary trans person quite likes the folks around here, and is a feminist, despite thinking gender roles can fuck off. But I shouldn’t be surprised that the role of trans people in third wave feminism goes WAAAAAAY over Dar’s head.”

A “non-binary trans person”? Bullshit! You’re either a transwoman or transman. Anything else and you’re some bisexual asshole.

And here, for your enjoyment:
http://www.transadvocate.com/unpacking-transphobia-in-feminism_n_9964.htm

Scented Fucking Hard Chairs
Scented Fucking Hard Chairs
5 years ago
Ellesar
Ellesar
5 years ago

This one is more interesting.

weirwoodtreehugger
5 years ago

best gender for doctors? generalyl men, because men are more interested in science.

Actually, traditionally medicine was women’s work.

I’m not putting anymore work into refuting bullshit since you still refuse to back up your claims and any facts that you don’t like are some sort of feminist conspiracy.

weirwoodtreehugger
5 years ago

I don’t know what gender Dar is, but if they’re a man, that makes this exchange all the more hilarious because zie has shown a complete lack of knowledge as to how science works and a lot of the commenters very effectively smacking zir down are women.

I also think it’s funny that Dar only counts work as work when men are doing that work.

Some women have, but most no. Unless you’re refering to working on the home or family farm, in which case it is yet more coy stupidity.

So, farming isn’t work? But it probably is work now because farmers use manly machines like tractors and combines.

Of course, before the industrial revolution, a whole lot of people made their living farming and making crafts. Going to a job outside the home, having an employer. Those became a thing during the industrial revolution. What does Dar think men were doing before that? Does zie think they were all knights or something?

RosaDeLava
RosaDeLava
5 years ago

@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.

And yet, you’re upset when we assume you’re a MRA.

If you stop assuming our positions for us, then we might extend the same courtesy to you.

And, meanwhile, you could watch “The Real Downton Abbey” Servants: The True Story Of Life Below Stairs and learn one thing or two about housework and physical strenght.

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.

Scented Fucking Hard Chairs
Scented Fucking Hard Chairs
5 years ago

Okay, serious non-GIF post for a few seconds, then back to the GIFs:

A “non-binary trans person”? Bullshit! You’re either a transwoman or transman. Anything else and you’re some bisexual asshole.

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.

2. A fundamental misunderstanding of LGBT+ stuff. Sexual orientation and gender identity are not the same thing. Not even close.

3. Ironically, transphobia! Hooray!

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.

RosaDeLava
RosaDeLava
5 years ago

@Argenti Aertheri
Thank you ;^;

dhag85
5 years ago

If you had basic reading comprehension uncloded by bullshit feminism, you’d know that my whole damned point is that women were NOT forced to be “submissive” (your bullshit wapred feminist term) homemakers, but rather were natuirally inclined towards that role.

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.

dhag85
5 years ago

Honestly though, this is probably my least favorite kind of troll – the type that has spent so much time in his own bubble that he thinks using accurate terminology is some sort of gotcha. He thinks he’s scored points by accurately calling people “feminists”. Yeah dude, we already know we’re feminists. You have to actually make some form of argument. This line of “reasoning” is the same one used by conservatives who think they win the argument by accurately calling the opposition “socialist” or “progressive” or “liberal”. They’re so used to such words having negative connotations that they don’t even realize other people don’t necessarily think there’s anything wrong with women having rights, for example.

dhag85
5 years ago

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.

100% agree.

Paradoxical Intention
5 years ago

Dar | September 27, 2015 at 11:56 am
Paradoxical Intention:
Maybe you should read YOUR OWN article quote!:

“Unlike most mammalian societies…”

End of story.

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.

Sounds like even you don’t understand where the fuck you’re going with this.

No, actually, it is you and your circle jerk buddies who assume because I am anti-feminist I must be a closet MRA.

Birds of a feather…

No you dumb feminist fool, that’s not how it work! The one who natural accepted wisdom and canon is the one who gives citation.
If I say men are generally taller than women, I don’t need a God-damned citation, it is YOU who challenge such an assetion who needs a citation.

http://lovelace-media.imgix.net/uploads/125/9a7583a0-bf25-0131-ce82-5a44f49f902e.gif

Oh my god. You really don’t know how this shit works, do you?

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.

It’s not their job to prove you wrong, it’s your job to prove that you’re right! Literally first sentence under Holder of the Burden:

When two parties are in a discussion and one affirms a claim that the other disputes, the one who affirms has a burden of proof to justify or substantiate that claim.

For fuck’s sake, Dar! Learn to Internet Debate before you come in here and shove both feet in your mouth in a display of sheer fuckery.

A “non-binary trans person”? Bullshit! You’re either a transwoman or transman. Anything else and you’re some bisexual asshole.

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!

You wouldn’t like me then, I’m pansexual.

That’s in SPITE of feminism, not BECAUSE of it. Anyone who suports abortion (as feminists do) can never truly love their children.

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.

Even in non-agriculutral cultures, women are still the primary child-rearers, and women the fighters and leaders.

I think this is my favorite bit out of all that nonsense though. Freudian slip, maybe?

San
San
5 years ago

@Dar

“Maybe if I didn’t get fifty morons spouting nonsense at me, then I wouldn’t need to write fifty replies”

If you give fifty replies of nonsense,you will get more ‘morons’ replying to you

San
San
5 years ago

@Dar

“Ofcourse, a feminist AND a dirty atheist.”

Yet this guy claimed to be an observer of democrats and republicans similiarities but he sounds like a republicans.

San
San
5 years ago

@DAr

“No, it is you feminist who want to use government programs and brainwashing to force women to abandone their natural instincts. Thus that silly “Take your daughter to work day”

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

San
San
5 years ago

@Dar

“Some women have, but most no. Unless you’re refering to working on the home or family farm, in which case it is yet more coy stupidity.”

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..

Buttercup Q. Skullpants

Now Dar’s just disintegrating into “feminist brainwashed argle bargle feminist hypocrite fool feminist.” Boring.

@dhag – Spot on. I can’t stand the way conservatives sling accurate identifying terminology at their opponents, as if labeling their opponents is some kind of huge, terminal zinger that should end the debate right then and there. “Typical liberal….typical female…” They take it as axiomatic that everyone thinks exactly like them, therefore everyone knows “feminist” is another word for “uninformed” and “evil” and can be used as shorthand for such. The idea is if you repeat the label enough times in the vicinity of unflattering adjectives like “brainwashed” and “degenerate”, it will stick in the minds of the public as an interchangeable synonym (see: Karl Rove). They never bother to show that feminists are uninformed and evil, of course. We’re just supposed to take their word for it.

1 51 52 53 54 55 57